Silver Supporter
- Messages
- 6,072
- Reactions
- 15,023
• Franklin Armory Holdings, Inc., or its designated assignee, as the Successful Bidder with respect to the Bushmaster brand and certain related assets
Interesting.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
• Franklin Armory Holdings, Inc., or its designated assignee, as the Successful Bidder with respect to the Bushmaster brand and certain related assets
I'm with you. Fewer manufacturers generally lead to higher prices. Firearms manufacturers have seen that people seem to be willing to pay way over average retail for guns and ammo, especially if there's any kind of panic.Hope so too. I worry about so much of the rimfire rifle market, and separately the ammo, being controlled by fewer companies, could backfire for the consumer down the road. Initially though, it does seem good for Ruger, and I am a long time Ruger fan.
I'd be one of the first in line to buy a Ruger "made" lever gun. Wonder what they'll change?
I wouldn't hold my breath on this. My brother-in-law once bought a Savage 110 in 7 mag or 300 mag that had a tooling mark in the chamber that would keep the case in the chamber unless you struck the bolt rearward with your hand (brass would flow into the gouge in the chamber). I called Savage and guess what? It was made before the current "owners" and we were bubblegum out of luck. It wasn't "their" gun and they wouldn't repair it.I wonder how long before I can send in my Remlin for some excellent Ruger customer service? My POS 1894 Remlin sure could use a makeover Ruger-style as far as getting it to feed reliably and replacing screws that shatter when you remove them.
Yep they bought the name - not the previous issues.It wasn't "their" gun and they wouldn't repair it.
We need an 1894 in .327 mag. And I want a .22TCM while we're at it! Ought to be able to fit a 12-15 round mag tube on a 16-18" barrel.
Yes.. I would like a Marger 1895 in 460 S&W. That is all......
I owned a JM 1894 in .357 Mag that was a thing of beauty; well polished surfaces, deep bluing, smooth action, excellent wood-to-metal fit, sharp checkering, and just overall exuded quality. I bought it for $425 used in 2007. Got divorced a few years later and put it on Gunbroker and it sold for $1000. I was also working at Ruger in their Prescott plant as a temp at the time.The quality, finish, and smooth operation of a true Marlin I believe will never be seen again. The first Remlins were nothing short of an abomination and excrement in the face of the Marlin name.
In recent years gun writers have fallen all over themselves in an attempt to convince prospective buyers that such manufacturing errors as missing parts, chattered barrels (and even barrels with NO rifling) were remedied, while overlooking the sharp edges of finished surfaces, poor polishing/wood to metal fit, and checkering that was somehow even less functional and less aesthetic than the pressed checkering prevalent of the 60's-80's on many brands. Certainly an even farther cry from the machine-cut checkering that literally was a God-send to the industry with respect to manufacturing economy combined with functionality and appearance.
The newest Pseudo-Marlins' checkering more resembled a cursory photograph of checkering pasted on the guns.
I would wish that Ruger would make an attempt to approach the true Marlin quality, and that people would be willing to pay for it. I would expect neither to fulfill my wishes.
The article mentions Sportsmans Warehouse bought Tapco........why did they waste the money?