Shotgun Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
I just bought a RRL Sporting Clays engraved. Before you tell me I'm on crack and they don't make such a thing, call Ruger.

It was a limited time, special something or another. Basically it's just the engraved receiver version with the 30" sporting clays barrel set, a combination which normally isn't offered.

My first impression of it and IMHO the gun splits the difference between what one might describe as the Mossberg 500's of the O/U world and the more expensive snob-appeal guns.

That is what I expected for the price and is by all appearances what I received.

It is worth noting that at the published retail price the gun would be overpriced, but at typical www or shipped-to-your-favorite-FFL-from-a-warehouse-outfit prices, it seems to fit well in the market at that price point.

That is to say it's about what I expected at the price point it is realistically and universally available for.

My first impression of the gun is that it is uncharacteristically thin, both horizontally (across the receiver) and vertically.

That, with the nice (but not snob price/class) gold+engraving, the long barrels, the relatively low-volume (in my estimation) stock and forearm, and the separate barrels the gun has an overall lean and (to my eyes) attractive lines.

The gun fits me better than most guns do out of the crate, which is Ok but not great. But I'm also not an experienced enough clays shooter to know exactly what a great fit is, and at 6'1" and 270, built like an offensive lineman and with longish arms, most guns simply don't fit me well right out of the box anyway. I can't fault the gun for the fit, and in fact it does fit me better than most guns (even the snob-class guns) do.

My initial impressions are that the controls/break were a little stiff right out of the box, but with some gun oil and manipulation they are starting to loosen up. The stock and forearm appear to have not been hand-fitted to the metal before being removed and finished, but again in this price range I wasn't expecting that. And although (and obviously) not hand-fit, the fit is nonetheless better than the current offerings of field/hunting grade guns I've been exposed to. And certainly the wood, checkering, fit, and finish are better than the Spartans/Baikals/Khans/Mossberg SR's/etc that I've handled and looked over.

I am concerned about the reported issues, most of which appear to be the same rumors being reported over and over ad nauseum along the lines of "Well, I know someone who knows someone who saw a post on a board in Europe about some guy who's sister shoots with a guy whose friend's cousin saw one at some shoots..."

That's not to dismiss or diminish the real experiences of some as posted herein and elsewhere. But balanced against the number of guns sold and the positive estimations, I decided it was worth taking the chance...

Is this thing hand-milled with toothpicks out of a single block of ancient super-high-grade mystical off-shore steel that was slowly heat-treated for over two centuries by remaining in the always-burning dung stove of Tibetian monks who prayed over it every day, later to be cooled during new-moon ceremonies in milk taken only from virgin yaks, then hand-carried to Belgium/Japan/Italy by 13 yo blind monk acolytes in bags made only from the skins of albino yetis born under full moons on the slopes of Annapurna, complete with signed affadavits testifying to all those facts (with appropriate notorized translations and a sample of the dung thrown in for authenticity)?

No.

But by all appearances, according to Ruger's reputation, and according to my rather thorough all night exam last night, it appears to be very well and solidly made + fitted and of appropriate high-grade alloys.

Were the parts hand-milled (see above), hand-finished, and then polished so highly that I can see my own rugged, dashing, "I've killed a continent's worth of critters and shot over a bazillion rounds of super-duper-they-only-sell-it-to-good-ole-boys-who-know-the-secret-handshake-and-wear-only-$10,000-handmade-Belgium-shooters-vests-special-target-loads" mug in it?

Again, no. And my mug isn't dashing or rugged anyway.

Does it come anywhere close to the fit-n-finish of a Beretta or Citori or... ____________ (fill in the blank with the name of your favorite snob-class-only-the-best-can-afford-it-handcarved-inlayed-engraved-handlapped-barreled-Briley-choked-ancient-old-growth-stocked-handrubbed-forever-my-butt-plate-alone-costs-more-than-your-car) gun??

Well, no.

But I also paid no where close to what that type of gun costs, and again I wasn't expecting that.

What the heck then was I thinking and what do I expect, you might ask?

Well, first off I can't afford a Beretta or Citori, at least right now (I'm recovering from a divorce and some career nonsense.) To get much more gun, either in terms of fit/finish/etc and in terms of actual functionality or quality or what not, I'd have had to spend roughly twice the price (and on up from there.)

Do I expect the gun to last FOREVER and NEVER need maintenance or repairs or replacement parts or what not?

No.

Then again, I have a half-dozen friends whom all bought USED Berettas or Citoris, who paid two or more times what I did, and one by one they've each had problems with their own guns.

They've not had big problems (firing pin or misfire issues, that sort of thing), and perhaps only very infrequently but problems nonetheless.

So, in my own estimation paying two to three times as much for a gun that is alledged to never ever EVER EVER FOREVER have ANY problems at all, when I know from personal experience (perhaps anecdotal, but personal and real nonetheless) that such thoughts are not true anyway, just didn't make sense.

How does the gun shoot? I don't know, it'll be this weekend before I can put a box or two through it. And frankly I've never owned an o/u before. I've put some rounds through Beretta's, Citoris, and Baikals, and on rare occasion was allowed to shoot a full round of trap with a sampling of each. But I've never owned one.

I'll come back here and post my experiences and thoughts as time goes by. The one thing I am disappointed in already is that I have to send the gun back to have the safety converted from field configuration to target configuration, but in fairness I knew that going in and can't fault either the gun or Ruger for that.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Burnt Powder said:
LSelo;

I can see why you have gone through a divorce and a career thing.

If you think anybody who has something that costs more than yours does is a snob, then I see who really is the snob here.

[ snip ]

BP
First, my post was meant to be primarily tongue-in-cheek as much as anything else, though that appears to have been lost on most you folks. I thought the whole monks-with-the-two-century-dung-stove-annealing thing or the part about albino yetis were dead giveaways.

Beyond that, I was going to work up a big response and all, but the fact that you either intentionally or out of sloppyness mis-spelled my name, and then immediately launch into a petty ad hominem attack, pretty much says it all.

For the record I didn't say people who own nice things are snobs, I refered to certain classes of guns as snob-appeal guns.

That's a bad choice of words on my part, the word carries perhaps more negativity than I intended. Perhaps elite (elistist, elitism) is a better term.

And while it is not a given that folks with nice things are elitists, it is also true that folks who can afford nice things and then spend their time attacking and belittling anything and anyone else (for whatever reason) and who can't seem to get past that, are elitists or just plain snobs.

Interestingly, you and I actually agree on a number of points, but I'm not in the mood to work up a detailed post just now.

BTW, I went out Saturday and shot six rounds with the new gun and having only shot a couple rounds in the last few decades and never having shot much or all that well for that matter.

Discounting one round where I got flustered, I shot well into the 20's with my new gun. It was probably beginners/returnees luck and all, and I certainly wouldn't want to claim I could repeat the performance or anything. Heck, I can't even say what it was I was[n't] doing per se.

But it raised more than a few eyebrows, even with the guys with the real expensive "we'd all recognize the make and model" guns, to the point where at times there was quite a crowd around the gun rack saying things like "Hmmm... what kinda' gun is that, it sure seems to shoot nice...", then asking to check it out. Go figure...
 

· Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
j beede said:
LDelo said:
I just bought a RRL Sporting Clays engraved. Before you tell me I'm on crack and they don't make such a thing, call Ruger. [...] My first impression of it and IMHO the gun splits the difference between what one might describe as the Mossberg 500's of the O/U world and the more expensive snob-appeal guns. [...] That, with the nice (but not snob price/class) gold+engraving [...] I can't fault the gun for the fit, and in fact it does fit me better than most guns (even the snob-class guns) do.
I am surprised that you have any interest in clay sports at all given the number of snobs (your word) that will surely be sniffing at you and your off-brand gun each you pass by.

LDelo said:
Is this thing hand-milled with toothpicks out of a single block of ancient super-high-grade mystical off-shore steel that was slowly heat-treated for over two centuries by remaining in the always-burning dung stove of Tibetian monks who prayed over it every day, later to be cooled during new-moon ceremonies in milk taken only from virgin yaks, then hand-carried to Belgium/Japan/Italy by 13 yo blind monk acolytes in bags made only from the skins of albino yetis born under full moons on the slopes of Annapurna, complete with signed affadavits testifying to all those facts (with appropriate notorized translations and a sample of the dung thrown in for authenticity)? [...] Were the parts hand-milled (see above), hand-finished, and then polished so highly that I can see my own rugged, dashing, "I've killed a continent's worth of critters and shot over a bazillion rounds of super-duper-they-only-sell-it-to-good-ole-boys-who-know-the-secret-handshake-and-wear-only-$10,000-handmade-Belgium-shooters-vests-special-target-loads" mug in it? [...] Does it come anywhere close to the fit-n-finish of a Beretta or Citori or... ____________ (fill in the blank with the name of your favorite snob-class-only-the-best-can-afford-it-handcarved-inlayed-engraved-handlapped-barreled-Briley-choked-ancient-old-growth-stocked-handrubbed-forever-my-butt-plate-alone-costs-more-than-your-car) gun??
I wouldn't know about crack, but is that Hoppes #9 I smell on your breath?
...j
WRT the interest thing, some of the guys and I were chatting about that at the range yesterday. They all had a good laugh when I refered to shotgunning as ******* golf. Then one of them started waxing philosophical about boys and things that go boom! and bang! and breaking things and all that. Call me a sucker for punishment, but apparently such is the price I will have to pay for playing with things that go bang! and boom! and break things. Guess it's a guy thing.

As to Hoppe's, is that stuff still on the market?? I couldn't seem to find any, most the places around here sell pressure cans (rattle cans) of stuff, even the better shops. Crap, I remember my dad (WW II vet, no longer with us) showing us the proper and safe way to clean guns with that stuff when I was knee-high to a grasshopper. Anyway, yes it would be gun cleaner and lube you're smelling...
 

· Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
KT13 said:
Actually, the stock is pretty much hand fit on the RRL. I saw a special on these shotguns on OLN (I think) and it showed the fitting that was done with the stock. I think that there is a great deal of care that goes in to putting these guns together. I do not own one but have shot a friend's several hundred times (when I was first trying to decide about sporting clays and o/u's). All of his grandchildren have learned on the gun, my daughter learned on the gun, he himslef has shot it a great deal...thousands upon thousands of rounds...and it has never once failed. He has his own sporting clays course and reloads every gauge and we would literally take a small wagon filled with shells for this gun and shoot until they were all gone. He would have them reloaded in a couple of days and we would be back out there putting shells through it. That gun has never, never failed.
The stock being hand fit is interesting. I was led to believe the RRL's were pretty much mass produced and that was that.

However, the stocks are cut out of pretty nice pieces of wood and are pretty well fit for a gun in this price class, so it wouldn't surprise me if they were hand fit at some point along the way. In fact the forestock is kinda' pesky to get back on, like it was almost too well fit. But now that it's been off and on a number of times, the release is working in a little and it's starting to fit very well, not loose and in fact a little tight but overall very well.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
ShotgunT said:
LDelo - I think you've got the gun you deserve. :wink: Enjoy it. :roll:
Well, I shot better with this gun than I have with any of the B-guns that a half dozen friends own and that I've been allowed to shoot with over the years. In fact, excepting the one Baikal I borrowed for a weekend, I shot better with this gun than any other, period.

So, be snide all you want, but since in my (apparently simplistic and uninformed) mind breaking clays is the whole point, I'll take it, thank you very much!
 

· Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
bridgeburner said:
Since breaking clays is the whole point.... and you shot a Baikal better than the Ruger....then why (in your simplistic and uninformed view) :wink:, do you choose the Ruger? Just trying to understand the logic. :?
I did NOT say I shot better with the Baikal.

I said the Baikal was the only other gun I'd shot AS WELL with.

I shot essentially the same scores.

As to why I bought the RRL, I believe that's been beat to death, and if folks don't want to accept it that's on them.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
j beede said:
LDelo said:
So, be snide all you want, but since in my (apparently simplistic and uninformed) mind breaking clays is the whole point, I'll take it, thank you very much!
Usage of the words "snob" and "elitist" are good indicators for identifying ad hominen attacks.

Visiting a range for the first time in decades, upsetting the rhythm of the squad and then referring to clay sports as "******* golf" is an interesting way to impress your new friends--bringing along a Ruger O/U only adds to the atmosphere.

If breaking clays is the whole point then why not buy a gun optimized for clay breaking? Perhaps you could have spent the same or less on a competition grade pump or semi-auto?

Is it your habit to introduce yourself to strangers by referring to them as "snobs", "elitists" or "********"? I sense that your notion of humor is a bit off-center, and turned up a few notches. As you know humor and cynicism are not always effectively communicated in print.

...j
Except that I was refering to behavior, not specific persons. It is explicitly and logically impossible to mount an AD HOMINEM attack (which literally from the Latin means "at the human" or "after the human") when one is refering to behaviors (and classes of people - not specific individuals - who may or might exhibit those behaviors.)

On the other hand, there has been no shortage of very blunt insults and etc leveled directly and specifically AT ME herein ("stupid", etc ad nausem at point), and those most definitely ARE ad hominem attacks. No ifs, ands, or buts. Period. QED.

You are right that things come off differently on boards and in email, and perhaps that's how things get spun up like they have.

As to the rest...

I did not go into the local club calling people names, and would never do that.

I didn't do that in here either, but that's not the specific point you were making.

I went into the club and shot, and made friends with those who were friendly at all.

And judging by the reception I received I was very successful, as everyone was clearly glad to see a newbie taking up the sport and were clearly glad to make my acquiantance and chat about things.

The reference to ******* golf was made in good natured fun, it was very well received and caused everyone who heard to have a good chuckle/laugh. In point of fact, by the end of the day it was being heard off and on around the club from a number of mouths.

As to disrupting the squad or line (whichever the right term is), since I am a newbie and at times get flustered or my timing is off, that is not something myself (or others) should be getting bent out of shape about, and if they do that us solely on them.

Finally, about the gun, I have a pump and was tired of dealing with a pump or auto on the trap line. In at least a couple clubs I've shot at over the years they are much stricter about etiquette with pumps and autos, etc. In one club and with one trapper, they never wanted to see a round in the magazine (you might forget...) In another club or with another trapper, they didn't want to see rounds dropped directly into the chamber (the action could get closed accidentally if you drop the gun, etc.) It seemed to be an issue far more often than it ought to have, and it was inconsistent.

The ou is the standard of the sport, at least as far as I can tell from my exposure to it, so that's what I went with.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top