The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Tactical Rifle & Carbine => Topic started by: Ksail101 on September 24, 2009, 09:23:42 AM
-
Maybe this has been brought up or someone has already did a range report, but I would really like to know what someone who isnt paid by (No diss to you Mr. Bane I respect what you have to say) Ruger. I want an AR now that I have a new job and some money saved and really like the features that the SR 556 come with. Just want to hear how it is. Thanks- Kevin
-
Hey Kev, here is a good and fair review.
http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-SR556.htm
-
Go here for more info:
Massad Ayoob on the Ruger SR 556
This is the Title of the thread. I've posted range reports for my SR556.
I swear by mine. IHO Ruger has in fact re-defined the AR platform. As soon as Ruger begins to sell uppers, I'm replacing my Bushmaster upper with one. Of course that's if I don't buy another complete SR556 before that. A very good friend of my is going to buy one next week. FYI, here in SW Oregon, Flying Cloud Trading Co. is selling them for $1495. They're selling very well with Zero complaints.
Feel free to ask any questions, I just love mine.
-
Go here for more info:
Massad Ayoob on the Ruger SR 556
This is the Title of the thread. I've posted range reports for my SR556.
I swear by mine. IHO Ruger has in fact re-defined the AR platform. As soon as Ruger begins to sell uppers, I'm replacing my Bushmaster upper with one. Of course that's if I don't buy another complete SR556 before that. A very good friend of my is going to buy one next week. FYI, here in SW Oregon, Flying Cloud Trading Co. is selling them for $1495. They're selling very well with Zero complaints.
Feel free to ask any questions, I just love mine.
Buckwheat
When you want to sell your upper PM me. I bought a DPMS sportical because the price (less than six bills NIB) was to good to pass up. My only complaint is that as a lefty, I want the deflector and down the road, the non-chrome bore will catch up to me. If you want, or any one else wants, to sell an upper please PM me.
FQ13
-
Cool Guys thanks alot. I knew someone had to have put something up. I did a quick scan on here and didnt see much.
Its been a year now since I started all this job stuff and in that time I havent been on here as much as I used to or like. I have been looking for threads about the 556.
Is 1500-1700 the normal price point now??? Or should I look around to find it cheaper??? This has been one thing for me that I havent liked. The 2000 msrp. There is a gun shop down the road from me likes to charge MSRP and all the workers are not too friendly, but they are the ruger dealer that is close.
-
JMHO, but the Para TTR (Ar) seems like a better gun, a more expensive gun, but a better gun. They started shipping this week.
-
Hey Kev, here is a good and fair review.
http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-SR556.htm
Also questionable as far as who pays their rent (also, no offense)
*Eric C. -- Who is wondering if I really heard the podcast correctly when Michael Bane admitted to lurking around AR15.com ??? :o
-
BTW DoubleStar ARs are really cheap right now at Buds................... $650
http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=411537957
http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=411537958
-
you can get a piston driven from CMMG for under 900.00 regular ARs for 650.00
-
Cool Guys thanks alot. I knew someone had to have put something up. I did a quick scan on here and didnt see much.
Its been a year now since I started all this job stuff and in that time I havent been on here as much as I used to or like. I have been looking for threads about the 556.
Is 1500-1700 the normal price point now??? Or should I look around to find it cheaper??? This has been one thing for me that I havent liked. The 2000 msrp. There is a gun shop down the road from me likes to charge MSRP and all the workers are not too friendly, but they are the ruger dealer that is close.
Probably is the price point. I know my Sig 556 is almost $2g these days. Of course, other brands are cheaper for either a piston and especially non-piston rifles.
As for the gun shop, no reason to buy retail. Go find a good pawn shop, see what they charge for an FFL transfer, and buy the Ruger (if that's what you have your heart set on) from the cheapest mail order seller. At least around here, the gun shops charge $50-75 for a FFL transfer, the pawnshops about $20.
-
Probably is the price point. I know my Sig 556 is almost $2g these days. Of course, other brands are cheaper for either a piston and especially non-piston rifles.
As for the gun shop, no reason to buy retail. Go find a good pawn shop, see what they charge for an FFL transfer, and buy the Ruger (if that's what you have your heart set on) from the cheapest mail order seller. At least around here, the gun shops charge $50-75 for a FFL transfer, the pawnshops about $20.
I'm with Path here. I will pay about $50-$75 moreto buy from my local dealer as I want him to stay in business. Beyond that, I'll buy online. Just remember to tack on the shipping fee plus the FFL transfer fee to your total cost before making the call.
FQ13
PS Check out AR15.com One of their advertisers (I forget the name) has gas piston uppers that folks seem to like. This is NOT an endorsement, just something you might want to checkout before droping the green.
-
I'm with Path here. I will pay about $50-$75 moreto buy from my local dealer as I want him to stay in business. Beyond that, I'll buy online. Just remember to tack on the shipping fee plus the FFL transfer fee to your total cost before making the call.
FQ13
PS Check out AR15.com One of their advertisers (I forget the name) has gas piston uppers that folks seem to like. This is NOT an endorsement, just something you might want to checkout before droping the green.
[/quoteI have only found 1 dealer in my life that I would pay tribute to, and he died. Screw these obnoxious, condescending know it all local dealers.
-
[[/quoteI have only found 1 dealer in my life that I would pay tribute to, and he died. Screw these obnoxious, condescending know it all local dealers.
But where are you going go to for repairs, advice and and other stuff like ammo, targets, cleaning kits etc.? That's not even getting to the morality of buying local from small busines if it makes any sort of financial sense, in order to keep your money in the community. Plus there is the political value of having a store front gundealer there to remind folks the WE are the NRA (my personal favorite was "Just Guns" in Austin). Its just like a fly shop, you can get a better deal online, but are they there with the customer service when you just need a little tweak without shipping it off and waiting two weeks? I say buy local if you can and consider that $50 well spent IF they provide good service. Otherwise, buy on line.
FQ13
-
Gun stores do this? Most in our area don't do repairs, give poor advice, all the gear you mention is available elsewhere. Now, I agree with the buy local from small businesses part, but realize that gunnies move up the Inverted Pyramid of Need* faster than most hobbies, so it's hard for any local to carry it all, or even the majority. Still, I buy local whenever I can.
*Inverted Pyramid of Need'(I can't remember what it's ACTUALLY called): Business axiom showing that customers start at the same place at the tip of a inverted pyramid needing the same core items. As the customer gains experience, the stuff they need later is more and more specific and they branch out as they move up.
But where are you going go to for repairs, advice and and other stuff like ammo, targets, cleaning kits etc.? That's not even getting to the morality of buying local from small busines if it makes any sort of financial sense, in order to keep your money in the community. Plus there is the political value of having a store front gundealer there to remind folks the WE are the NRA (my personal favorite was "Just Guns" in Austin). Its just like a fly shop, you can get a better deal online, but are they there with the customer service when you just need a little tweak without shipping it off and waiting two weeks? I say buy local if you can and consider that $50 well spent IF they provide good service. Otherwise, buy on line.
FQ13
-
I like the idea of buying local, however not at the expense of being ripped off. Also can't buy local if they don't have the product. When a local tire dealer wanted over $600 for a set of tires for my truck and a place 50 miles down the road that I pass by several times a week wanted just under $400 for exactly the same set I feel the local dealer is ripping me off.
Service has a lot to do with it too. Asked local gun dealer about a rifle. I had to keep calling him back on it. Finally said he could get one but didn't know how much, but I had to put half down before he would order it. ??? Wasn't sure when he could get it. Called an out of town dealer that I get to maybe once a year when I'm in that area. He had one in stock, and said he would hold it for me. I was going to either give him CC number or send him a check and he said it wasn't neccessary he would hold it for me even though I couldn't get there for a week or two. When the local dealer eventually got back to me several months later with a price, he was about 25% higher.
-
Gun stores do this? Most in our area don't do repairs, give poor advice, all the gear you mention is available elsewhere. Now, I agree with the buy local from small businesses part, but realize that gunnies move up the Inverted Pyramid of Need* faster than most hobbies, so it's hard for any local to carry it all, or even the majority. Still, I buy local whenever I can.
*Inverted Pyramid of Need'(I can't remember what it's ACTUALLY called): Business axiom showing that customers start at the same place at the tip of a inverted pyramid needing the same core items. As the customer gains experience, the stuff they need later is more and more specific and they branch out as they move up.
For the record, I do shop all 4 stores - 3 chain and 1 Mom & Pop. Two of them have full-time gunsmiths (Mom & Pop) and Gander Mtn., and perhaps Scheel's does too, or they send it out, not sure. The old Sportsman's Warehouse (Warehouse Sports now IIRC) does not have a GS so far as I know.
But when they have as an example Lancer poly AR mags for $30, when I can buy them online somewhere for $17, I shop very carefully. OTOH, they tend to be competitive on Blackhawk gear, they just have very little of it. I paid retail for a Serpa holster locally just cuz I didn't want to wait. But it was $15 less on line.
Most of the counter guys know something, at least I have not caught them being blatantly wrong.
-
Major thread drift!
-
Major thread drift!
Have you not been paying attention? This is minor at best!! ;D
-
Can I ask a stupid question here?
Ruger is an advertiser on my shows and website, which makes me "paid by Ruger." My good friend Jeff Quinn's website, GUNBLAST, has as one of its top advertisers Ruger, but he's not paid by Ruger. Mas writes for magazines who take ads from...Ruger...but he's an objective source. If a show that is strictly "pay for play" — that is, unless you buy an ad your product doesn't exist, period — an objective source of information? You notice a gun magazine has 3 full page ads from the company that made the gun on the cover...how objective would you rate that information.
How exactly does this work?
Michael "PUZZLED" B
-
Can I ask a stupid question here?
Ruger is an advertiser on my shows and website, which makes me "paid by Ruger." My good friend Jeff Quinn's website, GUNBLAST, has as one of its top advertisers Ruger, but he's not paid by Ruger. Mas writes for magazines who take ads from...Ruger...but he's an objective source. If a show that is strictly "pay for play" — that is, unless you buy an ad your product doesn't exist, period — an objective source of information? You notice a gun magazine has 3 full page ads from the company that made the gun on the cover...how objective would you rate that information.
How exactly does this work?
Michael "PUZZLED" B
MB,
You are asking the $60K question there! I like to get info from shows and magazines, but I filter it through the lens of commercialism. I'm seeing a lot of good stuff on BSA, and nothing personal, but I found myself asking last night "How much is Michael getting to say that?"
-
Can I ask a stupid question here?
Ruger is an advertiser on my shows and website, which makes me "paid by Ruger." My good friend Jeff Quinn's website, GUNBLAST, has as one of its top advertisers Ruger, but he's not paid by Ruger. Mas writes for magazines who take ads from...Ruger...but he's an objective source. If a show that is strictly "pay for play" — that is, unless you buy an ad your product doesn't exist, period — an objective source of information? You notice a gun magazine has 3 full page ads from the company that made the gun on the cover...how objective would you rate that information.
How exactly does this work?
Michael "PUZZLED" B
In 40+ years of reading Gun Magazines I have seen a total of 1 write up that said (in effect ) this POS is a waste of metal working. That was a Soldier of Fortune evaluation of the HK VP7 back in the 80's. When I read a review of a gun or hear some one like Tom Gresham or MB talk about one I listen to what words they use, If they say "I liked MY gun " (or some other indication that the reviewer bought the sample ) it holds more weight than "I liked the gun they sent me to try".
Several times people have used the caveat that MB is paid by Ruger ( insert other sponsors here ) but I found that his comments in the last podcast were quite in line with the comments others had made in comparing the "new" .22 to the AR.
To paraphrase, he said this IS NOT a TACTICAL TRAINING gun, it is a plinker , that replicates the styling, and features that younger shooters associate with the word "RIFLE". He also said that if you want a TACTICAL TRAINING RIFLE, get a dedicated 22 upper for your real AR.
-
MB,
You are asking the $60K question there! I like to get info from shows and magazines, but I filter it through the lens of commercialism. I'm seeing a lot of good stuff on BSA, and nothing personal, but I found myself asking last night "How much is Michael getting to say that?"
Well the answer to that is simple. You have two choices.Option one is a free site like this and Gun Blast that are underwritten by sponsors, caveat emptor (no offence MB but its the truth). Option two is to go with pubs like Cooks Illustrated or Consumer Reports which take no advertisingand make their money through subscritions (which means YOU pay to play). Personally I prefer this site and Gun Blast. I do not expect to hear MB or Jeff Quinn review a Ruger product as a POS, but I also don't expect Ruger to produce one either. These guys get their money from quality companies that have produced quality products for decades. You know (if you are at all gun literate) what the pros and cons of Ruger are. I know, and I've got three in the room where I am typing this. So what if the reviews accentuate the positive? So long as I'm not lied to (false claims or hiding a major flaw), I'm happy. I don't think either MB or Quinn would do that. All I would expect to hear from either gentleman would be either a deafening silence, or a rote recitation of the catalog followed by "I haven't had a chance to test it yet" if Ruger were to put out a real dog. Neither of those things has happened yet, and Ruger has yet to produce a dog. So I'm happy with MB's ethics.
FQ13 who understands that money, and comprises, need to be made, and long as its honest, I have zero problem with either
FQ13
-
Hey guys, I don't get paid by Ruger or MB or Moos, or anybody around here. I just live in this small SW Oregon town (1100 souls) in a double wide manufactured home. Feel free to PM me or contact me by phone. I own a SR556 and I would go to war with this carbine. I'm gonna get me another one as soon as I can afford it. I'm not known by anyone on the this forum and I'm certainly no expert, but if you want a piston AR, I strongly believe that the SR556 is the way to go. Yes, I could have purchased a standard AR for less than $900, but decided on the Ruger. I do firmly believe that it was money well spent and strongly believe that no one will be unhappy with the SR556. It's a personal thing with me, I just plain like the SR556 better than my Bushy M4. I can't explain it better than that; I just do.
Now, having said all that from my soapbox, if Ruger, MB, Moos, or anyone else wants to send me a check for my trailer-trash small-town-dewelling god-fearing bitterly-clinging endorsement of the SR556, I certainly won't refuse it...
-
I posted this, it turned up in my previous posts but not in this thread, beats me how that works but here it is again
In 40+ years of reading Gun Magazines I have seen a total of 1 write up that said (in effect ) this POS is a waste of metal working. That was a Soldier of Fortune evaluation of the HK VP7 back in the 80's. When I read a review of a gun or hear some one like Tom Gresham or MB talk about one I listen to what words they use, If they say "I liked MY gun " (or some other indication that the reviewer bought the sample ) it holds more weight than "I liked the gun they sent me to try".
Several times people have used the caveat that MB is paid by Ruger ( insert other sponsors here ) but I found that his comments in the last podcast were quite in line with the comments others had made in comparing the "new" .22 to the AR.
To paraphrase, he said this IS NOT a TACTICAL TRAINING gun, it is a plinker , that replicates the styling, and features that younger shooters associate with the word "RIFLE". He also said that if you want a TACTICAL TRAINING RIFLE, get a dedicated 22 upper for your real AR.
Another thing to bear in mind when reading ALL modern gun reviews, the technology has pretty much matured, there are only so many operating systems, materials, etc. that can be used, modern design is mostly trying to mix and match them in salable fashion. On top of that current manufacturing techniques assure us of fairly decent quality across the board, fit and finish may vary but when some one tries to sell a "turd" like the Sig Mosquito, (which may be an outstanding pistol but has a universal reputation as a "jamomatic" ) the allows users to warn each other. it may not be fool proof but if a bad customer review on a website like this doesn't get any argument then you can consider yourself warned, I will point out that comments here have changed my opinion of High Point.
But returning to my topic, the primary reason that all gun reviews are favorable is that no one can get away with making crap.
To take the SR 556 as an example, maybe it IS "just another AR" but Ruger has a good reputation, and I have heard no complaints about it. It may not matter to most of us, but to some one with serious brand loyalty it could be very important.
-
Can I ask a stupid question here?
Ruger is an advertiser on my shows and website, which makes me "paid by Ruger." My good friend Jeff Quinn's website, GUNBLAST, has as one of its top advertisers Ruger, but he's not paid by Ruger. Mas writes for magazines who take ads from...Ruger...but he's an objective source. If a show that is strictly "pay for play" — that is, unless you buy an ad your product doesn't exist, period — an objective source of information? You notice a gun magazine has 3 full page ads from the company that made the gun on the cover...how objective would you rate that information.
How exactly does this work?
Michael "PUZZLED" B
MB, I consider the source. If I trust the reviewer then I don't care where he gets his money. For example you I trust but a certain deep voice, pompadour haired TV host is just a paid talking head that I would never consider a source.
-
Buckwheat, never let your relative newness here slow you down. Doesn't look like you did. Thanks for the Ruger vote, Ruger took an interesting approach, and I may go for one - if and when I find another job.
In other words, Buckwheat - O'Tay!!! ;D
Hey, somebody had to say it!
-
Can I ask a stupid question here?
Ruger is an advertiser on my shows and website, which makes me "paid by Ruger." My good friend Jeff Quinn's website, GUNBLAST, has as one of its top advertisers Ruger, but he's not paid by Ruger. Mas writes for magazines who take ads from...Ruger...but he's an objective source. If a show that is strictly "pay for play" — that is, unless you buy an ad your product doesn't exist, period — an objective source of information? You notice a gun magazine has 3 full page ads from the company that made the gun on the cover...how objective would you rate that information.
How exactly does this work?
Michael "PUZZLED" B
I think that it is just a general cynicism that carries over because there are so many gun magazines (The periodicals, not the "Clips") out there that are so obviously in the tank for their advertisers. They run so many stories and reviews that are nothing more then advertisements for their sponsors' products and it just raises some red flags with gun guys.
****It is important to note, that IMO this is not the case with DRTV and I have seen nothing to lead me to believe that it is the case with GunBlast. I was just suggesting that perhaps opinions should sometimes be taken with a grain of salt... and perhaps when insiders post reviews of a product the very second a company announces the product to the public... well.... maybe an extra grain of salt might be needed****
I also dont really think that it is necessarily a bad thing that magazine's pander to their advertisers..... It is a business after all, and if readers want to keep reading their magazines and thumbing through the beautiful pictures that they put out..... well.... maybe they just need to be a little more understanding of the real world and realize that it takes the big money of those advertisers to keep things running.
*Sometimes you really have to roll your eyes though......
We all saw obvious examples of this a while back when there were several high profile gun recalls...... and I would be willing to bet that you will see the SR-22 on the cover of atleast several major gun rags in the up coming months. Will the Remington 597 VTR get the same coverage? I bet not! Has it been covered at all since it was announced back in June? Nope. Is it essentially the same gun for $175 less? Yep.
http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=8855.msg116106#msg116106
I was also reading a gun rag that I have a subscription to just the other day -- which shall remain nameless -- and saw a very blatant example of this. They did a very flattering write up on a WWII surplus rifle which is sold through a company -- which shall also remain nameless -- who regularly advertises their surplus rifles and pistols in various gun rags. I happened to notice their advertisements in the aforementioned magazine each of the several months leading up to this out-of-the-blue article on their most popular seller..... their ad was also in the current issue.
The article started off by the author noting that the magazine's editor caught him by surprise when he came to him one day and simply told him to contact the company, get a rifle and then go have some fun with it. The article of course made several mentions to the company where one could buy such a rifle if one wanted to and all the extra goodies that came with the rifle purchase..... the whole thing really made me chuckle
But hey, like I said..... you got to pay the bills and you got to keep the lights on!
-
Eric, Was it by any chance Mitchel's Mausers, who have drawn a lot of fire for restamping numbers and other such deceptive practices ?
http://shootersforum.com/showthread.htm?t=20832
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090914210341AAKKPXG
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=361836
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=271&topic_id=1811&mesg_id=1820
http://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?p=64075
(Spotted a familiar Avatar in that last one ;D )
-
Eric, Was it by any chance Mitchel's Mausers, who have drawn a lot of fire for restamping numbers and other such deceptive practices ?
:-X
;)
-
the SR 556 IS on the cover of this months American Rifleman! That is why I did not think of it for the "new gun" thread. I had this magazine a week before the 'official' announcement.
-
Car, boat, gun... you name it rags. Are pretty much all the same.
I remember a time when you could pick up any of these rags and actaully get good info, how to, decent product reviews,...
now days, they are just advertisements. I understand that the advertisers pay the bills, but if you sell your creditablity...
-
the SR 556 IS on the cover of this months American Rifleman! That is why I did not think of it for the "new gun" thread. I had this magazine a week before the 'official' announcement.
Haz,
The gun announced this week was the Ruger SR-22, a variant of the Ruger 10/22. The SR-556 was announced back at SHOT, I believe.
-
Michael, being in the media for so long, you know the answers to this. However, since you asked...
1) If possible, keep editorial and advertising separate.
2) We understand that advertisers keep a show on the air. Further, we understand that having that relationship has also opened doors with the companies. Therefore, it's reasonable that it's easier to acquire product from those companies. Easy is good when it comes to production.
3) Inversely, you may not be on the press list for some companies who don't advertise with you, making it harder to receive product from them, ergo less appearances in your mediums.
4) Some companies are hungrier, and/or more willing to work with press. (e.g. Masterpiece Arms recent contact) Others, less so.
If a show is strictly pay for play, hopefully people notice and filter their information. I hope even these sources don't lie, and that objective information they present is true. They're a source of information, but not objective.
There's more I want to say, but I need to think on it.
Can I ask a stupid question here?
Ruger is an advertiser on my shows and website, which makes me "paid by Ruger." My good friend Jeff Quinn's website, GUNBLAST, has as one of its top advertisers Ruger, but he's not paid by Ruger. Mas writes for magazines who take ads from...Ruger...but he's an objective source. If a show that is strictly "pay for play" — that is, unless you buy an ad your product doesn't exist, period — an objective source of information? You notice a gun magazine has 3 full page ads from the company that made the gun on the cover...how objective would you rate that information.
How exactly does this work?
Michael "PUZZLED" B
-
I don't think any of the reviewers "lie". What they have to do is spin "just as good as" in to "NEW and IMPROVED ! ".
For an example lets say Remington brings out a new bolt action rifle. Lets stipulate that it is just as good as any other bolt gun on the market (safe enough with Remington ). A professional writer, regardless of his particular expertise can't just say, " There's only so much you can do with bolt action rifles but this is as good as any other. " For one thing they have word count requirements, or space requirements so that Editors can allot space for articles and know how much they need to fill.
Besides, would you want to read that ?
So instead they have to focus on the fascinating camo (A fancy decal ) and the "Tactical" features.
A lot of the gun reviews that you read in run of the mill gun magazines have more interest in filling column inches than in selling an advertisers product.
Bare in mind that I have absolutely NO experience in this field, but I DO know that I have not been coming up with new posts for my blog because I don't want to keep saying the same things my few readers are seeing everywhere else.
-
tombogan03884,
what I ment by lie, is if there are numbers, stats, shooting results, etc, that's they're accurate. I don't want a gun listed smaller than it actually is, or how many shots it holds. I want accurate chrono info, and even range report numbers; it's hard to fudge those as you do them every issue/article/show, so they can be compared to each other.
The only gun mags I get currently is Gun Reports, Front Sight (USPSA member) and American Rifleman (as an NRA member). Gun Report has no advertizing, and they regularly give failing and poor reports to guns. A R does have advertising, but I think they're big enough (backed by the NRA) not to be swayed by advertiser bias. Front Sight has few product reports.
-
Just a quick heads up on the SSR556 sale going on at http://www.galleryofguns.com/Genie/Default.aspx (http://www.galleryofguns.com/Genie/Default.aspx). Sold by your local participating dealer through Davidson's - and currently offered for over $500 off MSRP until the end of September, I believe.
-
This is a more of a response to MB's post-
Mr. Bane for the last 3 years I have listened to every podcast (multiple times), watched just about every show, and am a frequent visitor to things you are a part of. I trust what you say about firearms to the point that I have never given the .40 a fare shot as a defensive caliber cause you dislike it so much. So by no means do I think you are like some others in the biz that are sponsor whores (cough... L. Vickers...Cough,cough). But at the same time when you are introducing the SR 556 to the public I highly doubt you are going to tell everyone that you really disliked this or that about it. Or this or that doesnt work like they say it is supposed to. Your thoughts about the firearm when you were talking about shooting a case of Hornady Taps was great and I took alot away from that. But I was looking for something that maybe you didnt want to talk about as it would be bad for your sponsor if you pointed it out. Maybe the trigger is terrible and feels like pressing your finger into playdough. So that is all I was looking for. As for going to another site to try and find a better point of view is not really the case. I find better information right here on the forum from a guy who has the product and used it, cause I know I am like many of those on this site. An average guy. So if he\she is having some sort of issue I will most likely have the same issue. Even some times you just being a professional shooter makes your opinion very different to mine. You have skills and abilities that I am no where near. Like when I hear Patrick Sweeney do a review on a 1911 and he says that he shoots a 3 inch group with such and such gun, I know in reality my group is going to be closer to 5 or even 6 inches. Or when he talks about the 1911 being the best gun in certain situations, I have to think about the fact that the 1911 is an experts weapon that takes a higher level or maintenance and ability to shoot it in the those certain situations better than say a Glock will perform for me. So dont take anything personal. Your reviews are beyond outstanding and I take your advice over many others. And I also thank you for taking the time to speak about a firearm that you find good or bad. Also if Ruger made a bad product I know that you being you would not have them as a sponsor. So that alone makes me comfortable in buying any one of their products. I dont see you having High Point as a sponsor and telling everyone that their new firearm is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Well thanks again man. Also I have been dreaming and requesting photos of your SW Gunsite built by Wayne Novak so anytime... ;)