Proper caliber designation

Yanqui · Post by **Yanqui** » Sun May 18, 2008 1:49 am

I was a little surprised that Ruger does not state the name of the original designer of the ammuntion used on their firearm. I noticed that the Ruger New Vaquero simply states 45 Cal. not 45 Colt. Do other manufactures do the same or do they give credit where credit is do?

I do remember that Ruger at one time would not use the Smith & Wesson name on any of their firearms like S&W 357 Magnum just 357 Magnum/Mag. Does it simply state 357 Cal? I think they also just state 40 Cal on their semi-autos as well. Ruger had a hissy fit with S&W some time ago. I think that's where I acquired my distaste for Ruger products. I was really looking at the New Vaquero but I think I'll pass. I thought they had gotten over it. I'm going to see if US Firearms does the same thing. If they don't have the proper name I'll pass on them too. If I have to I'll buy one of the foreign one's.

Man' I thought Ruger had better class than that. I can remember back when I was a dealer I could order Ruger products from distributors. Then Ruger had a big hissy fit with S&W. Ruger set out an ultimatum to distributors that if you stocked S&W you could not stock Ruger. Ruger also stated you had to be a stocking dealer to sell their products. There were many dealers who stopped selling Ruger products back then. I don't know if that still holds true but I see that they won't acknowledge it on their firearm. NO CLASS!!!

Leverdude · Post by **Leverdude** » Sun May 18, 2008 6:55 am

Just me I guess but I think your being silly.

My rifles chambered for 44 & 357 mag just say 44 or 357 mag on them.
Most of the names arent truly correct anyway.
The name 30/30 was created by Marlin, Win called it 30WCF but Marlin didnt want to put Winchesters name on their guns. I believe thats where the names 44/40, 38/40, 32/20 & 25/20 came from as well
Many people say 38/55 Win but it was really first the 38/55 Ballard & then Marlin chambered it in their 1881 & 1893 before Winchester even had a long enough lever action to chamber it in. Most all the names have been switched & modified for 100+ years & it was usually to minimize the recognition of the other company.

As long as its clear what the chambering is I dont see an issue. Are there other 45 calibre revolver cartriges that arent compatible?

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Sun May 18, 2008 7:59 am

...... nope, nope .... I won't. Not this morning.

Joe

Yanqui · Post by **Yanqui** » Sun May 18, 2008 9:28 am

I guess it is rather silly or childish of me to think in this manner but don't you think it's rather silly for the Ruger organization to be just as childish? So the Lear Holdings Corp. decided to sell S&W to F.H. Hopkins (a british firm) and not to Bill Ruger back in 1987. Isn't Ruger big enough to get over it? What's it going to hurt to put S&W in front of the caliber or Colt behind 45? Pride and/or arrogance?

Pete44ru · Post by **Pete44ru** » Sun May 18, 2008 9:34 am

[nope, nope .... I won't. Not this morning]

You're right, Joe. It's Sunday, after all.

BruceB · Post by **BruceB** » Sun May 18, 2008 10:13 am

I've had a problem with Ruger ever since the old man wrote and pushed through the '94 Assault Weapons Ban. I believe his statement was that "No honest man needs more than a 10 round magazine". I guess he must have felt that LEO's weren't "honest" since his company restricted the sale of hi-caps to LEO's only!

Terry Murbach · Post by **Terry Murbach** » Sun May 18, 2008 11:12 am

OH LORDY.....[ NEVER MISS A CHANCE TO KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT, TERRY...]

runfiverun · Post by **runfiverun** » Sun May 18, 2008 11:40 am

think i will jus run around the edges of this one.

Jaguarundi · Post by **Jaguarundi** » Sun May 18, 2008 12:18 pm

I will not go there either

!

Jeeps · Post by **Jeeps** » Sun May 18, 2008 12:33 pm

Probably a little pride coming through, but never the less if you can get the
masses to stop identifying a cartridge with a competitors name it will pay
dividends down the road. Simple business also.

Yanqui · Post by **Yanqui** » Sun May 18, 2008 1:24 pm

BruceB wrote:I've had a problem with Ruger ever since the old man wrote and pushed through the '94 Assault Weapons Ban. I believe his statement was that "No honest man needs more than a 10 round magazine". I guess he must have felt that LEO's weren't "honest" since his company restricted the sale of hi-caps to LEO's only!

Wasn't it a little strange how the Mini 14 was never named in the Assault Weapons Ban? Strange bed fellows? I remember now why I sold off all my Blackhawks.

There's a gun show in town I guess I'll go and check out the SAA clones. Maybe I'll stop off at Legendary Guns on the way home. I may just have to put a Colt on lay-a-way.

A buddy from finally broke down a bought a Colt. Hah, he even got rid of his Vaquero. Come to think of it he even got rid of his Mini 14 and bought a Bushmaster.

You all have a nice day!!!

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Sun May 18, 2008 1:25 pm

OK, I didn't get to go to the gun show this weekend like I wanted to so I'm a bit upset. I'm gonna vent it here.

This bovine scat about Ruger's use of non correct caliber nomenclature isn't worth the effort to discuss it. It's something that's been going on since before the turn of the last century. Winchester, Marlin, Colt, S&W, and most other gun makers would change some part of the caliber name to avoid the use of the others names.
It's really a non issue that has and had nothing to do with S&W.

Over the years many gun makers have tried to coerce dealers into carrying their products to the exclusion of others. Before you condemn Ruger read the Smith & Wesson Settlement Agreement signed into effect by S&W and the Clinton Regime. READ IT and then READ IT again and then you know what kind of company S&W IS and why I will not purchase a product made by them until that agreement is legally done away with. IT IS STILL IN EFFECT PEOPLE, JUST CONVIENTLY SWEPT UNDER THE RUG TILL THE NEXT DEMOCRAT OR ANTI GUN ADMINISTRATION TAKES OFFICE.
The agreement can be found here: http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?ID=31
If you care to disagree with me on this, then show some legally verifiable documentation that it has been done away with.
Otherwise get off Rugers back on this.

NOW READ THE FOLLOWING QUOTE. Bill Ruger did not write or sponcer or ram through the AWB. The entire FIREARMS industry was involved and it bit them in the @$$!
[quote]Quoted from R.L. Wilsonâ€™s Ruger & His Guns Pages 217 and 218:

The proposed magazine capacity limitation substitute for so-called â€œassault weaponâ€

BruceB · Post by **BruceB** » Sun May 18, 2008 2:14 pm

Ruger still doesn 't sell hi-caps for Mini 14's to non LEO's, Joe.

Terry Murbach · Post by **Terry Murbach** » Sun May 18, 2008 2:27 pm

BruceB wrote:Ruger still doesn 't sell hi-caps for Mini 14's to non LEO's, Joe.

I BELIEVE RUGER IS SHIPPING TWO[2] 20 ROUND MAGAZINES WITH THE NEW MINI 14'S BEING SOLD THESE DAYS.

BruceB · Post by **BruceB** » Sun May 18, 2008 2:34 pm

Here you go Joe:

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Corporate ... 6-2003.pdf

Second paragraph.

And:

http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/papabill.html

BruceB · Post by **BruceB** » Sun May 18, 2008 2:36 pm

Terry Murbach wrote:
BruceB wrote:Ruger still doesn 't sell hi-caps for Mini 14's to non LEO's, Joe.
I BELIEVE RUGER IS SHIPPING TWO[2] 20 ROUND MAGAZINES WITH THE NEW MINI 14'S BEING SOLD THESE DAYS.

Terry, their specs for the Mini 14 Ranch Rifles say 5 rounds capacity.

centershot · Post by **centershot** » Sun May 18, 2008 3:06 pm

Joe,
I just finished reading the agreement between S&W and the "authorities", they truly sold their souls to the devil on that one!

I, for one, won't be buying any Smith's any time in the forseeable future! As Benjamin Franklin stated so succinctly "We must all hang together, or we will surely hang separately!" The upcoming SCOTUS decision and the elections this November could easily go against us (firearm owners). I hope all the members of this forum have the courage to stand up for our 2nd Amendment rights when the times turn hard.

centershot

adirondakjack · Post by **adirondakjack** » Sun May 18, 2008 3:22 pm

The argument is a red herring, straw man, whatever ya wanna call it.

Plain and simple, if you wanna use somebody else's TRADEMARK, ya gotta have a license agreement. Why in god's green earth would a GUN MAKER wanna PAY to put the competition's name on their stuff?

Do ya think for a minute if Ford bought seat belt buckles from GM they'd have the GM logo on em? NO WAY!

OTOH, if ya wanna shoot a .44 REMINGTON magum, yer gonna be buying a S&W, Ruger, or a taurus to do it. NONE of those use the full REMINGTON designation.

If ya buy a .44 special from other than S&W, they ain't gonna acknowledge it's parentage either.

I pay attention to this stuff because when ya create a cartridge and own the rights to the headstamp (name), yer a little protective of it. The big boys are no different.

505stevec · Post by **505stevec** » Sun May 18, 2008 3:36 pm

I like reading you alls arguments. Its very informative usually.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Sun May 18, 2008 3:52 pm

No Comment.

Leverdude · Post by **Leverdude** » Sun May 18, 2008 10:09 pm

I bought half a dozen Ruger factory mags a few months back.

I hadnt realized this was gonna be a bash Ruger thread. Jeepers dont we want any American gun makers around?

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Mon May 19, 2008 10:30 am

BruceB wrote:Here you go Joe:

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Corporate ... 6-2003.pdf

Second paragraph.

And:

http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/papabill.html

"In that agreement, since abrogated by the present administration, ... " A Ruger news release referring to the agreement of S&W and the Govt as being abrogated is second or third hand information. What I want to see is something detailed from the feds and or S&W. I'm not saying Ruger is wrong, but I've heard others say the word abrogated too, and yet still others who say it's still in effect with S&W waiting till they need it.

The second link led to what on the surface could be damming information, but it read to me like a personal vendetta / hatchet job.

One other thing you Ruger haters need to remember, there is NO Rugers left at Ruger. All of them died, retired, or sold out. Even Stephen L. Sanetti, who used to be President and General Counsel is gone.

I've also heard they are now selling the 20 round magazines too. Not that I'm interested, I never did like the Mini-14.

Joe