Do you think Bill Ruger was a “modern” John Browning?

I don’t consider him such. A brilliant man no doubt but he mainly worked to streamline manufacturing methods via the lost wax casting process. He brought out some great products at the right time but I don’t see any truly new and innovative designs that he was responsible for creating from scratch like Browning.

We have both to thank for their contributions no doubt but I don’t consider them equals.

There was no 45 cal semi auto pistols, so John Browning designed one. There were no bottom eject pump shot guns so he designed one. There was no semi automatic shotguns so Browning designed one. The military needed machine guns and Browning designed them including the 50BMG

John Moses Browning has no equal when it comes to designing firearms

^^^^^This^^^^^^^^^^ I don't think Ruger ever came up with any new, ground-breaking designs. The closest he came, probably, was with his original product, the Ruger Standard Pistol. It was somewhat different than anything (that I'm aware of) that was available at the time and designed to be cheap to manufacture. Everything else was just a new take on an old design that could be produced more affordably. More a Henry Ford than a John Browning.

When the industry was moving largely toward the California school of firearms design (think Weatherby and beyond) he brought it back down to earth with the classically designed 77. He brought us a latter-day falling block in the No.1 . Probably Ruger was responsible for a resurgence in interest in single-action revolvers as well, not to mention resurrecting a lot of classic calibers. Without Ruger we might not have modern versions of the .22 Hornet, .220 Swift, .257 Roberts, .250-300, 7X57 and others. The other gun companies (which is to say Winchester and Remington) wouldn't have gone anywhere near that stuff if he hadn't shown that it was viable. They were way too busy trying to outdo each other with more "latest and greatest" than the other guy. It might be interesting to see what the current US gun market might look like without Ruger's influence.

I feel very much the same way. Ruger had a way of tweaking a proven design and like The Kid said streamlining the manufacturing process.
Thank Bill for the 10-22 rotary magazine / uh…. Savage 99. Just one example that comes to mind. Arthur William Savage.

I don’t think that Ruger was a straight out copycat as Ruger has a lot of patents. But he did “update” a lot of designs it seems.

Just spit balling here because everyone with half a brain knows that a .220 Swift will kill a grizzly bear just as fast as a .458 Winchester mag as long as the bullet is in the right place.

Bill Ruger's genius was in manufacturing and ability to read the market well in producing firearms that sold well

I think an oft overlooked Ruger design is the Security Six line of revolvers. The one piece frame on the Security Six is an innovative approach that led to a stronger frame AND much less manufacturing cost compared to a Smith & Wesson. If you've ever tinkered with a Security Six vs a Smith with the side plate you know what I'm talking about. This design concept carried forward to the Ruger GP100 as well.

Yep. Bill Ruger did a lot to improve gun manufacturing and production costs. And upgraded some previous gun designs to be more robust and a little safer like the Colt SAA Peacemaker To his Ruger Blackhawk.
His best “ invention” was the Ruger Mk-I .22 semiauto pistol.
Most everything else he mfg was an update on previous designed guns.

John Browning has no peer or equal when it comes to new and innovative gun designs. Period. His genius will never be equaled or matched by another gunsmith / Firearms Inventor.

Ruger did a good job of making the new model Blackhawk less expensive to shoot by providing two cylinders with many offerings. Having two cylinders in these revolvers increases the fun factor too.

Eg.
I have a Blackhawk with both a 357 magnum cylinder and a 9mm cylinder.
I have a Blackhawk with both a 10mm cylinder and a 40 S&W cylinder.
I have a Blackhawk with both a 45 Colt cylinder and a 45 ACP cylinder.

Browning and Ruger are certainly not equals but both made significant contributions to the firearm industry.

Refreshing to read most all this. ^

WBR was unique in his own way, but not quite a JMB.

Glad both were in the industry.

Browning designed and built all kind of guns, many still relevant.
Best of my knowledge, he never said stupid Shït like,

Our guns are hunting guns, not target guns. They are accurate enough.
The triggers are good enough. (Paraphrased, and condensed)



Also don't think he refused to sell any models to civilians, or limited ammo
capacity to civilians.

I see Ruger as an arrogant was. He was at the helm for the years of using
substandard barrels. But he ran them out the door. Screwing customers.
He had some good designs, but sure wasn't very particular about his
products. He is gone, and I bet they still screw up 45Colt throats.

Ironically, there are more of his product in my safe than any other brand.

My 3 Ruger revolvers are not as good as my smiths and colts.

My 2 Ruger semi auto pistols, I have no complaints.

My 2 Ruger 10/22s are better than most of the old 22 semi autos I have bought at pawn shops over 30 years.

My 3 Ruger #1 rifles are so well designed, they astound me.

Ruger was a self serving putz;

Bill Ruger received criticism from some gun owners for suggesting that rather than ban guns, Congress should outlaw magazines holding more than 15 rounds. On March 30, 1989, Ruger sent a letter to every member of the United States Congress, stating:

The best way to address the firepower concern is therefore not to try to outlaw or license many millions of older and perfectly legitimate firearms (which would be a licensing effort of staggering proportions) but to prohibit the possession of high capacity magazines. By a simple, complete and unequivocal ban on large capacity magazines, all the difficulty of defining 'assault rifle' and 'semi-automatic rifles' is eliminated. The large capacity magazine itself, separate or attached to the firearm, becomes the prohibited item. A single amendment to Federal firearms laws could effectively implement these objectives.

William B. Ruger

Expanding on your last point, not many realize that the #1 includes an internal hammer block, such that when the safety is engaged the hammer is physically blocked as well as locking the trigger - the equivalent of an intercepting safety sear on a fine double gun.

When designing the rifle, I suppose he knew that a number of his customers would hunt with a round in the chamber and made the rifle safer for this condition. In any case, it is a superb design in its own right, not simply a modern copy of a Farquharson action.

A lot of good points made here!

Different Times for sure. Both innovators in their own right.

JMB, Made everything by Hand! Yeah back in the Day they ran Belts to power up more than one machine,
but He never wanted to own a production Gun Company either, Hence all the different Patents,
and selling them to the Different Fire Arms Manufactures. Pretty Smart Man! IMO

WBR, had the benefit of different Machines, and Such, and later, CNC, computerized Machinery, and such.
I'm not saying that he had it easy in any way at all! He was smart enough to study and learn from the past Manufacturer's,
and Capitalized on it.

IMO! I gotta give the edge to JMB!
He started from scratch ,creating Ideas in his own Mind!
Truly pure Genius!

HS58

Well one only has to pull the butt stock off a ruger red label and a browning citori, it takes maybe 2 seconds to figure out that the browning is the pick for real value. Ruger never spends a dime on how nice the inside is compared to the outside. No more machining inside than absolutely necessary. JMB didn't design the Citori but set it next to a Superposed and you know where it came from. Ruger has never made anything better than it has to be to work for awhile. That isn't genius it's cheap ass yet some rugers are ok. So many rugers were designed to minimize production costs but not last a lifetime like browning designs. It's hard for me to even compare the 2 men, the mold was broke when JMB died but he did give us Val. When ruger died he left a son who carried on business and people who pull guns off the end of the assembly line stuff them in a plastic bag and a box without any QC/QA . Then send them out to let the new owner end up sending them back. JMB lives forever thru his guns. Ruger is just dead. Way I feel...mb

No way I would compare the two, Browning was head and shoulders above Ruger.

Another way to look at it is, that over time Ruger is responsible in some ways for lowering the quality of firearms industry wide. His advancements were good for him, good for production, good for the profit margin, but over all were they good for us? Maybe not so much.
That's not to say that it may not have happened eventually anyway.

(and I own a whole lot of Rugers)

And the bastard, no friend to gun owners, managed to work a loophole around to keep his mini 14 from the expired assault weapons ban, while saying nothing about the AR ban itself. Pure and simple greed. NO spine to stand up for gun owners as a whole.

Due to that I still to this day won't buy a ruger as a first choice. I have a few. But I prefer to spend my money other places that have not stabbed gun owners in the back.

But most know my feelings about him. He is one that ticked me off so bad with that stunt I'd probably pee on....

To think my goal once was to have a 77 in every caliber made...

Funny too we all love the 10-22 it seems. Once I replaced the trigger, it was better. Thank GOD its designed to allow that. Replaced the barrel and it became more accurate. Again a great idea. Suppressed its even better. Really very few hiccups.

Yet move back to the mid 70s and a glennfield 60. That I put 100-300 rounds a weekend through often as a kid. For years. Its had more pieces fall out of it, IE time to replace the buffer I suspect, and I have one sitting here to replace it with, but its on the rack of the mule with a 6x leupold on it and its still running just fine as is. Trigger isnt' bad, but not great. Accuracy has always been there. I'd suspect likely its had 20-30,000 rounds through it.

OTOH I suspect the 10-22 as it was out of the box or as now a much updated rifle, will live past our lives also.

i would have to agree !

The 10/22 shoots well with a new barrel and a new trigger................that is like... you don't sweat much, for a fat girl.

Mine shoots extremely well just as it came from the factory.

+1 Ruger had cost in mind and was a "Value" designer. Except for the ruger no 1 and he copied designs from others.
Browning was design first and worry about what it costs later,

Ruger made accurate, very strong revolvers that were a value at the time. The transfer bar firing system for the single actions made them safer.

Sorry but Bill Ruger wouldn't have made a pimple of John Browning's azz....

Gotta disagree.
Ever have a 45 Colt?
There would no shame to have made them with bad throats in the 60's, even 70s. By the 80's people knew that they needed to be a bit bigger, but not
too big. Cottage industries sprung up fixing what Ruger kept fücking up.

But the one I bought in the 90's? No better.

The one from about 2012? Same.

WTF is up with an outfit that does this. Sure, an American can't be Tikka at
$300. But holy [bleep], just cut the dam reamers to the right size. And maybe try to use them
In permanent matched sets so that all 6 are close in size.

Agree, except only one Ruger in my safes, and that’s plenty. Have owned and sold many that were mediocre at best.

I certainly have owned a 45 colt in a Ruger Bisley. More than one in fact. About 3 or 4 times less money than a Colt. Undersized cylinder throats are a easy fix

Took a lot of game with mine, including the longest shot I've ever made on an animal

Like mine too.

But they sell them as working guns. Not kits.
Pretty sad they can't get something so easy, right.
No way in heck something like that would go out with my
name engraved on it. Not asking for pre war hand work, just
maintain decent dimensional tolerances.

Jist how fer a shot you make with that thar Bisley....

Poor quality, cheap barrels were used in Bill's day, Ruger barrels used today are far better than the Old ruger rifle barrels. Gorgeous wood on those first #1's and a $19 barrel. He should have been buying barrels from Savage at that time.

I have read that at least part of the Mark .22 pistol design was inspired by the Japanese Nambu.

jwp475:
Good morning to you sir, I hope the weekend was a good one for you and this finds you and those who you care about well.

Thanks for putting up that photo, it's a nice piece of wood they used on a unique stock!

Can I ask if it was a Lipsey's run or something similar? I've never seen one like that up across the medicine line that I can recall.

Thanks in advance and all the best in the week ahead.

Dwayne

Ruger sure put the ugly on a nice piece of wood.....

i have plenty Rugers and Brownings in my safe ,but i still prefer my Ruger #1 to hunt with for larger whitetail and mule deer bucks . if Ruger #1 `s have such poor wood why are they so high on resale ?

I have a 1986 Ruger Blackhawk 45 Colt I got used for $300 in 2004.
I have fired one shot in 18 years.
24 gr H110, 250 gr JHP... the same as for my other 45 Colt revolvers and rifle.

Recoil caused the sharp edges on the back of the hammer cut into the web of my hand.

So far I have not got around to taking the Ruger apart and finishing the machining.

I have a Ruger Red Label 20 ga that I got new around 1981. It did not take a case of shells and when you hit the release latch the barrels would hit you in the shin. I have a Browning O/U 20 ga that has seen way more action that the Ruger ever has and it is still tight as a drum.

Dwayne, I don't know if this was a Lipsey or not. I saw it in a LGS in Ohio and bought it

This is indicative of the Ruger business model. He made guns to sell, not to shoot. If you were lucky, you did get a shooter, but they never left the factory as a shooter.

jwp475:
Good afternoon sir, thanks for the reply and info.

I'm afraid I'd have done the exact same thing if I'd seen it in a local shop too!

I'll admit I'm not offended whatsoever by straight grips and Schnabel fore end tips - it's a square head heritage thing likely with me..

It would not be the first rifle I'd bought because it had pretty wood either now that I think about it.

Thanks again for sharing what I think is a really uniquely fine looking arm.

All the best.

Dwayne

I had a 28 gauge Ruger that I traded for, major POS down the road it went.

To answer the original question, IMHO, Bill Ruger is not a modern day JMB. That being said, JMB was a gun designer--he never manufactured firearms as he always had someone do that for him (Winchester, Colt, and FN immediately come to mind) and Bill Ruger was a firearms manufacturer that happened to design a few guns (or did someone design them for him?). Its and Apple vs Oranges comparison.

I ran into the younger Wisner family and their stuff on a gunshow table. They changed a Ruger red label 20 gauge into an over under big game rifle for a lady in the family.

Since then I have corresponded with old Leroy Wisner about a Savage 340. That guy is really smart. I would infer from this that the red label is a good design,

The Red Label is a very strong shotgun. Strength is like a trademark with Ruger

Bill Ruger used to brag about how little money he put into his barrels. Ever push a patch through a gorgeous Ruger #1 and feel incredible tight and loose spots, barrel that looked like it had Rail Road tracks in it...then you want to bed it, put an expensive trigger in it trying to get it to shoot? IDIOT I was!.

Later SS Ruger #1's are a fantastic shooting machine compared to the early ones, even though the early ones had amazing wood. I got sucked into 6 of the early ones, then tried to get them to shoot well....like trying to fix a bad girl friend.

Safe Queens in some cases should stay safe queens!!!

Dwayne, this is it here

https://www.impactguns.com/Semi-Aut...mited-Edition-of-1500-736676012978-1297/

Bill Ruger designed the early Ruger guns (not Winchester, Colt, etc.)which ended up in some interesting details that not many today understand. For one, the tang safety on the Ruger No. 1 doesn't just block the trigger, but the firing-pin fall--like the Model 70 3-position safety. There's plenty of documentation for all this--if you actually look it up instead of "guessing."

Winchester (and other manufacturers) simplified the designs of many John Browning guns for easier manufacturing--including the original "Winchester" single-shot.

So enlighten us....help us understand.

I thought the Ruger # 1 was a copy of another single shot ?

Would you call his safety design on the #1 as ground breaking or earth shattering ?

Or was it a slightly modified design that was also copied ?

Only a Marketing man can sell a gun "Designed to wear in, not out"

NAGW, but……
I have eight Rugers in my safe, three Smith & Wessons. I like them all. My Smiths have good triggers and are tight action-wise and are accurate. My Rugers likewise have very good triggers, are tight action-wise, and are accurate. The Rugers have had self performed action and trigger jobs (that’s what gun looney’s do). Only one Smith needed any action work. The Rugers will handle considerably more extreme use than will the Smiths. For that I am thankful for William B. Ruger. I have used firearms in the military designed by John Browning, but I have never owned one. I am aware however of his genius! My reason for posting this is…………comparing the two men is a venture into futility, as is comparing Ruger revolvers to Smith & Wesson’s. I don’t accept hatred for either man. Both had their place in the development of our firearms industry. Personally, I am quite fond of Ruger firearms as I am sure I would be if I owned anything designed by Browning.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, the first couple years of Ruger No. 1s used Douglas barrels--and shot very well. I know this partly from owning one in .300 Winchester Magnum for a while, which would consistently put 5 shots (not just 3) of good handloads into less than an inch.
Ruger then switched to a different barrel vendor, which usually made good barrels, but occasionally one sucked. This isn't unknown in "vendor" barrels, especially when the company has to provide tens of thousands of barrels for a very successful company.

The improvement in No. 1 accuracy isn't just in the SS models, but all of them. Ruger started hammer-forging their own barrels in the early 1990s, and there was an immediate improvement, both in overall accuracy but consistency. My first No. 1 with the Ruger-made barrels was a .300 Weatherby 1B, that could consistently put five shots into less than an inch. Another 1B in .22 Hornet would group 5 shots into less than 1/2", right out of the box.

I guess you're going to dance around this ....

LFC,
Why must you challenge Mule Deer in such a way? MD is probably the most knowledgeable and informative gun writer of our time who gives of his time to try to educate the rest of us, for which I for one am appreciative.

I don't see it as a challenge....any statement is open to question.

He said "not many people understand"....I just asked for help understanding.

Didn't you call it "education" ?

Sorry I didn't lick his nutt sack.

Sockpuppet ???
LFC, Llama Bob, MikeWerner… same, same

[quote=LFC]I don't see it as a challenge....any statement is open to question.

He said "not many people understand"....I just asked for help understanding.

Didn't you call it "education" ?

Sorry I didn't lick his nutt sack.



maybe try to be a little more positive ,like has been said Mule Deer has help many of us understand and learn a few things . thank Mule Deer for what you may have learned , try not to piss people off just because you can hide behind a keyboard..

Trust me I'm just the same in person.....just for you I'll try harder.

Should I drop a few bucks in the offering plate before I ask a question ?

why are there so many [bleep] form TN?

Your condescending posts are a sure fire way to get banned from certain forums, which would be no loss.

Talk about the pOt calling the kettle black.....lol



Would you like me to go find the post where you attacked me ?

I agree.. sort of like a John Browning / Henry Ford comparison instead...

I called you a moronic POS that is pointing out the obvious.

You're a condeseming little feller ain't ya...

Those early No.1 and M77 rifles had Douglas premium barrels on board and were known for there accuracy and high quality!

I think of Browning as an Inventor, which is undeniable when looking at his designs

I think of Ruger as an Innovator, he is the one who made cast firearms acceptable but most of his designs were his take on an existing product. He was also great at reading the market of what folks would buy.

We are better for having had both of them regardless of opinions about them.

drover

^^ This!

I thought LFC stood for “LIKES [bleep] COCK” so you should be licking everyone’s [bleep] nutt sack.

And you wouldn’t make a pimple on John’s Ass

Over 1600 posts in under 8 months should tell you what kind of [bleep] he is

I want to thank LFC (and others) or inspiring me to write an article for the upcoming issue of RIFLE LOONY NEWS, appearing on the 15th of next month. Decided to discuss the difference between designing rifles in the early years of self-contained cartridges, and more recently--as well as detail several details of the Ruger No. 1 that differ vastly from the Farquharson action Bill Ruger supposedly "copied."

While the No. 1 is styled to resembled the Farquharson, the internal mechanics are different in several ways--and NOT designed to make the No. 1 "cheap to manufacture."

Sho got that right.

This will be an excellent article.

myself i look forward to your next issue Mule Deer , i also will enjoy learning more about Ruger #1`s and Mr. Bill Ruger , i feel Bill Ruger did the blue collar workingman a great justice by inventing and manufacturing this great rifle the Ruger #1 for a workingman`s price so that he could afford to buy a Ruger #1 to own , too hunt with , shoot or collect . that to me is the American way ! Thank You much ,Pete53

I hope it's posted here so it will be open for debate.

Bill Ruger was a TRAITOR to all that enjoy firearms! PERIOD!

While he did have some innovating techniques, he also helped the Democrats in congress write the "Assault Weapons bill" back in the 90's!

Instead if fighting tooth and nail to protect the 2A, he gave in to the evil empire and decided wrongly if he made nice with them, they would reciprocate.

What Ruger failed to realize is the Left is a lying bunch of bottom feeders and will never be satisfied. They will never end until they get what they want which we all know is nothing short of total bans and confiscation.

I've owned Ruger firearms in the past, but have sold them off and have NO plans to ever own another!

Elk Country

Elkcountry,

I’m not disputing you or calling you out by any means, but could you cite some sources for your statement that Ruger helped the Dims write the Assault Weapons Ban bill? I never heard that before.

Happy Trails

Don’t forget Brownings brother......the machinist that made things work.
Just sayin