A Ruger 1911 at last....

[Solus]

Bill,

You make ssome great points but I see it in a slightly different way.

As price becomes important, the only way to be competative is to lower quality to keep the same margins. Maybe Ruger has lower margins than Reminington, but I doubt they do over smaller business.

Me too marketing in business may make sense if a portion of your loyal customer basis is looking to purchase something you do not make. It also takes less engineering to reproduce someone elses work than to be inovative.

However, Me Too marketers are always late to the dance. Somebody else has pioneered the idea and in the case of both 1911 and AR15 reduced it to a standard. How many more people will buy 1911? How many are not happy with who the bought a pistol from the last time? Why would Ruger build a better 1911 than Kimber, STI, Colt, Springfield after all these years?

I will give Ruger management credit for offering new products. It does show they want to be a big player in the industry.
Just not a leader for my $0.02.

That might be true in the shoe business, but "Gun Nuts" don't think that way.  No firearm enthusiast is gonna head to the Big Box Store and buy whatever gun is on Buy One, Get One Free that week.  

It takes a LONG time for a manufacture with a poor reputation for quality to climb back up no matter how good they have become.  I've never owned a Taurus but, from what I gather, they have had their quality control problems in the past and seem to have overcome them in recent products.   But still, I'd bet over 50% of "Gun Nuts" give them a thumbs down due to remembering past  history.  

Making it low quality to make it cheap won't cut it.  Making good quality at the best price will win out is this market.

[ratcatcher55]

It is my contention that most 1911 owners own more than one.  Many own several and are willing to bring another into the fold if it piques their interest.  I think people that look at the market and assume that it is a "one gun per buyer" market are way off base, especially where 1911s are concerned.  If they make a decent gun at a decent price they will do well.  A lot of people wont drop the big bucks on a custom gun like Wilson, Baer, Nighthawk, etc., but will eventually spend several times that on multiple guns over the years.  1911 are very addictive.

"Hi.  My name is Ichiban and I'm a 1911-aholic."

I have two and would like a nice officer size model. Being a lefty it won't be a Ruger.

That might be true in the shoe business, but "Gun Nuts" don't think that way.  No firearm enthusiast is gonna head to the Big Box Store and buy whatever gun is on Buy One, Get One Free that week. 

It takes a LONG time for a manufacture with a poor reputation for quality to climb back up no matter how good they have become.  I've never owned a Taurus but, from what I gather, they have had their quality control problems in the past and seem to have overcome them in recent products.   But still, I'd bet over 50% of "Gun Nuts" give them a thumbs down due to remembering past  history. 

Making it low quality to make it cheap won't cut it.  Making good quality at the best price will win out is this market.

I'm with you but that what drives lots of folks purchases. They buy cheap, not quality

[billt]

It is my contention that most 1911 owners own more than one.  Many own several and are willing to bring another into the fold if it piques their interest.  I think people that look at the market and assume that it is a "one gun per buyer" market are way off base, especially where 1911s are concerned.  If they make a decent gun at a decent price they will do well.  A lot of people wont drop the big bucks on a custom gun like Wilson, Baer, Nighthawk, etc., but will eventually spend several times that on multiple guns over the years.  1911 are very addictive.

"Hi.  My name is Ichiban and I'm a 1911-aholic."

Bingo. This is it exactly. While I do not consider myself a "1911 Aholic", I do own 4 of them. I don't think I'm any different than most other 1911 owners and shooters. I can also say the exact same thing about AR-15 owners and shooters. A great many of them own more than 1. I think this is the market Ruger is going after. I certainly would consider one if and when I'm ready to purchase another.

Ruger has a huge market following, and many will select their 1911 over others based on the Ruger name alone. Much the same as a Smith & Wesson lover will gravitate to their line of 1911's. Ruger has sold a lot of guns over the years. One of the main reasons they have is careful market research. They seem to make guns people want to buy, and they keep them affordable. Ruger is a gun for the masses. This new 1911 falls into that category very well.   Bill T.

[alfsauve]

I'm with you but that what drives lots of folks purchases. They buy cheap, not quality

I think that might be true of a carry gun or a bed side gun at least by non-gun aficionados.  The "only own 1 gun" set.  It would be interesting to know the percentage of  "gun aficionados" (like us) over total gun ownership.  It would also be interesting to know the breakdown of # of guns owned between classifications.

By "1 gun only" I don't mean literally one gun, I mean they more interested in hunting or self defense than in the guns themselves.   They've got a 12 gauge pump for birds and a 30/30 for deer and they need something for around the house or in the pick-up.  They don't read gun magazines and they aren't a member of any on-line gun forums.

Now true Ruger fans and 1911 fans will want this gun, just because it is.  

And it "is" made by a known entity, Ruger and will fill the 1911 desire without breaking the bank.  Not a carry gun (at least not small) and not a bulls-eye competition gun.

[Michael Bane]

The 1911 market is, to me, amazing. If you had asked me in, say 1979, whether I thought the 1911 would be one of the best-selling guns in the world in 2011, I would have laughed hysterically and said absolutely not. Yet here we are. In any market this large, there are multiple drivers — 1911-based guns continue to own the competition market; the fact that high level law enforcement and the military continue to demand and use 1911s is clearly a factor; Kimber's brilliant marketing strategy, which basically sold 1911s the way a clothing retailer would sell this year's fashion hits, changed the baseline; again, Kimber's relentless selling to their own base market (essentially following Glock's lead on that) made other manufacturers follow suit...the result is a much more manufacturer-centric market than back in the early days of 1911s, where we pretty much didn't distinguish between models since we were having them all rebuilt anyway...it was a Wilson gun or a Swenson gun or a Plaxco gun, built on something or other; NOT a Colt, Springfield or Nornico.

Finally, the gun is damn near perfect, especially in its ergonomics. When I was running the NSSF media program, we used to do a sneaky thing with our students. We'd start them on 9mm Glocks. Halfway through the day we'd shift them to 1911s, and — as if by hand of the occult! — their scores suddenly soared!

Like the 10/22 and the AR platform, 1911s are adult male Barbies, capable of being dressed up any way the customer wants. Look at how much of the Midway USA and Brownell's catalogs are devoted to 1911 parts.

I continue to find the gun fascinating...a good 1911 is more than the sum of its parts. As much as I love cowboy guns, if I just open the safe and pick a gun to go shoot, it will always be a 1911. If indeed Quinn the Eskimo descends from the skies with phasers blazing and I have to run out of my bunker with only one pistol, it'll be a 1911 .45ACP. The 2 guns that mean the most to me in the world, guns that I believe I will take with me to the grave, are my father's 1911A1 Remington Rand and my aging Wilson/Colt 1911 competition gun with its hundreds of thousands of rounds through it. Not many guns inspire those kinds of feelings...

Michael B

[Sponsor]

[Michael Bane]

PS: Lowering quality isn't the only, and certainly not the best, way of increasing margin. Changing/modernizing manufacturing processes accomplishes the same thing while actually increasing quality. That's why I spend today's podcast talking about the line at Ruger. Think about that EDM'ed breech face as an example. Using a draw tool, for example, to cut the breech face means that each breech face must be examined, then "cleaned up" by hand or an additional tool...not a lot of time, but still time, and time is always money. If the breech face comes out to the EDM machine 100% ready to go, the manufacturer has saved money.

That's why small parts are such an issue...John Browning designed the gun to have the small parts fitted by hand by experts, because at that time expert hand-fitters and gunsmiths were cheap and machines expensive (and limited in what they could machine). If the small parts can be made to very high tolerances and the frame and slide machined appropriately, then final assembly is actually a matter of assembly rather than fitting. And you increase the margin. The control of the small parts has always been one of STI International's secrets of their super high quality guns (IMHO, the highest quality out-of-the-box guns in America) and I was impressed to see Ruger go down the same path.

Michael B

[PegLeg45]

The 1911 market is, to me, amazing. If you had asked me in, say 1979, whether I thought the 1911 would be one of the best-selling guns in the world in 2011, I would have laughed hysterically and said absolutely not. Yet here we are. In any market this large, there are multiple drivers — 1911-based guns continue to own the competition market; the fact that high level law enforcement and the military continue to demand and use 1911s is clearly a factor; Kimber's brilliant marketing strategy, which basically sold 1911s the way a clothing retailer would sell this year's fashion hits, changed the baseline; again, Kimber's relentless selling to their own base market (essentially following Glock's lead on that) made other manufacturers follow suit...the result is a much more manufacturer-centric market than back in the early days of 1911s, where we pretty much didn't distinguish between models since we were having them all rebuilt anyway...it was a Wilson gun or a Swenson gun or a Plaxco gun, built on something or other; NOT a Colt, Springfield or Nornico.

Finally, the gun is damn near perfect, especially in its ergonomics. When I was running the NSSF media program, we used to do a sneaky thing with our students. We'd start them on 9mm Glocks. Halfway through the day we'd shift them to 1911s, and — as if by hand of the occult! — their scores suddenly soared!

Like the 10/22 and the AR platform, 1911s are adult male Barbies, capable of being dressed up any way the customer wants. Look at how much of the Midway USA and Brownell's catalogs are devoted to 1911 parts.

I continue to find the gun fascinating...a good 1911 is more than the sum of its parts. As much as I love cowboy guns, if I just open the safe and pick a gun to go shoot, it will always be a 1911. If indeed Quinn the Eskimo descends from the skies with phasers blazing and I have to run out of my bunker with only one pistol, it'll be a 1911 .45ACP. The 2 guns that mean the most to me in the world, guns that I believe I will take with me to the grave, are my father's 1911A1 Remington Rand and my aging Wilson/Colt 1911 competition gun with its hundreds of thousands of rounds through it. Not many guns inspire those kinds of feelings...

Michael B

Amen....could not have said it any better, MB.   

As I said in another thread, as far as the 1911 is concerned, "Here endeth the lesson."   

[billt]

PS: Lowering quality isn't the only, and certainly not the best, way of increasing margin. Changing/modernizing manufacturing processes accomplishes the same thing while actually increasing quality. That's why I spend today's podcast talking about the line at Ruger. Think about that EDM'ed breech face as an example. Using a draw tool, for example, to cut the breech face means that each breech face must be examined, then "cleaned up" by hand or an additional tool...not a lot of time, but still time, and time is always money. If the breech face comes out to the EDM machine 100% ready to go, the manufacturer has saved money.     Michael B

Being a machinist over the last 40 years, this has impressed me the most. If you look at the tangent rear sight on a Mauser 98 for example. That tangent surface the rear sight rides on had to be exact, and right on the money for every single rifle produced. If it wasn't a soldier couldn't hit a thing with it over 100 yards because of the exemplification of error. Today it would be a relatively simple task to produce, but back then? It required tremendous skill to maintain that level of consistency. They did it. How, I have no idea, except for sheer skill.

Fast forward to today and use the example you mentioned on Rugers EDM applied method, along with their advanced vacuum Investment Casting technology. The quality is simply amazing for the price they charge. I think what keeps me buying guns, is after I buy and examine them in detail at home, away from the gun counter, I never cease to be amazed at how they are able to manufacture them for the cost they charge, and still turn a profit. We has firearm owners have a lot to be thankful for today.   Bill T. 

[PegLeg45]

Being a machinist over the last 40 years, this has impressed me the most. If you look at the tangent rear sight on a Mauser 98 for example. That tangent surface the rear sight rides on had to be exact, and right on the money for every single rifle produced. If it wasn't a soldier couldn't hit a thing with it over 100 yards because of the exemplification of error. Today it would be a relatively simple task to produce, but back then? It required tremendous skill to maintain that level of consistency. They did it. How, I have no idea, except for sheer skill.

Fast forward to today and use the example you mentioned on Rugers EDM applied method, along with their advanced vacuum Investment Casting technology. The quality is simply amazing for the price they charge. I think what keeps me buying guns, is after I buy and examine them in detail at home, away from the gun counter, I never cease to be amazed at how they are able to manufacture them for the cost they charge, and still turn a profit. We has firearm owners have a lot to be thankful for today.   Bill T. 

+1

You guys are preaching a down-right sermon on the 1911.......... and I like sittin' in the choir.    

[MikeBjerum]

I submit that the 1911 is to the handgun world what the .22lr is to the rifle world.

I have read it in many magazines and books, and heard many top shooters say that you can tell the type of person by the .22 in his rack (or in the case of Red and M'ette - The rack on her .22  let me finish this thought and I'll head for the corner).

When I am at matches, gun shows, gun shops with real gun people behind the counter, and ranges sooner or later every handgun conversation will come around to either a single action or the 1911.  The generic benchmark for all pistols is the John Browning's 1911.  It wasn't the first, but it is the longest lived and best known, and that explains why it is hard to be a handgun manufacturer and not have one in the stable.