Ruger Named Firearms Manufacturer of the Year

The National Association of Sporting Goods Wholesalers has named Ruger their Firearms Manufacturer of the Year at their 35th annual meeting.

We continue to work on new product development, customer communication, product support and an expanded website that provides Ruger distributors, retailers and consumers with value-added products, new business tools and user-friendly information,” said Chris Killoy, Vice President of Sales and Marketing for Ruger. “Our new product offerings are the result of listening to consumers needs and their success is benefitting all segments of the distribution system.”

You know, I will definitely agree that of late, Ruger has been very, very good at giving the shooting public the kind of guns that they want.  Ruger introduced the LCP at last year’s SHOT SHOW, and it took off and sold like hotcakes.  Despite issues with the trigger on the new SR9, it’s been selling very well; and recently Ruger also ran their Innagural Special on 20 round magazines for the ever popular Mini-14 rifle.

Now if they would only make a GP100 with a titanium cylinder…

5 thoughts on “Ruger Named Firearms Manufacturer of the Year”

  1. I’m torn on this. I really like the SP101 I just bought and their “Inaugural Special” on 20-rd mags amuses me a lot, but I also feel like the LCP is almost a straight rip-off of the P-3AT. Kel-Tec occupies a fairly unique niche as it is not only one of the most innovative manufacturers but also tries to keep their products inexpensive. Unlike companies like Intratec, they also seem to be making a good-faith effort to keep their products on the right side of the intent of the law. Ruger’s LCP dips into P-3AT sales and so Kel-Tec winds up with less money to use on innovation.

  2. Heck, I’d be happy if they made a version of the Mini-30 chambered for 0.311″ projectile ammo. And if they’d consider it “out-of-spec” if it shot 12 MOA groups.

  3. “LCP is almost a straight rip-off of the P-3AT.”

    From what I understand, the P-3AT itself was a rip-off of an earlier firearm. Just scaled down a bit. So it’s like complaining that the Taurus 1911 is a rip-off of the Springfield Armory 1911.

    “Recalls”
    The SR-9 I call a “free advertising recall”, in that it was still safer than a great many guns out there. They could have gotten away with never recalling the SR-9. The LCP I think has more validity. I am of the opinion that Ruger is playing a lawyer’s poker game. They are establishing a history of going above and beyond the call of duty so as to have strong arguments in court against being held liable – by being able to retort that they are extremely mindful of safety. Heck, they still advertise what’s essentially a recall of their 60 yr old single-action revolvers. *lol*

    Lastly, Ruger had a “Share your thoughts with the CEO” and I must say Ruger greatly impressed me afterwards. As a few days later I received a handwritten letter in the mail from Michael Fifer

    http://nugun.wordpress.com/2008/11/04/a-letter-from-michael-fifer-ceo-of-sturm-ruger-co/

  4. From what I understand, the P-3AT itself was a rip-off of an earlier firearm.

    If we’re thinking of the same gun, you probably mean the Grendel P-10. The thing is, the man behind Grendel was George Kellgren, who’s now owner and Chief Engineer of Kel-Tec (note portions of his last name in the names of the two companies), so I don’t think we can really call it a rip-off.

    The LCP may well be a better weapon, but part of me is offended that Ruger would do what looks to be a blatant copy.

Comments are closed.