deputy125

well...........big deal or not, i figured i just use the "ask" feature on the ruger website aand ask them about mim.

so i inquired about the use of MIM on the sp's and gp's.........they promised an email response within three days............and i did get a response.

so.........right or wrong........superior or inferior, mim parts are used on rugers. Guess since this is straight from the factory, any claims made to the contrary are innacurate............so in effect, perhaps the "MIM" issue in comparisons between smith and ruger will become a non-issue as MIM is apparently here to stay and used by both..........

there also has been some recent questions about mim spreading to the triggers themselves........we shall see...............

hearing that ruger is using MIM parts is almost like being told obama won the election...........sure did take the wind out of my sails on some personal notions about ruger superiority.............

sheepdog

...at least those parts aren't super-stressed or torqued...unless one beats prisoners with one's revolver...they're still head-n-shoulders above everyone else...I would not be glad to hear of hammers and triggers, sears, etc being MIM...but I'm in the used market anyways...I just don't think the strength is there in MIM parts...kinda like cast in my mind...

XLCH

Don’t surprise me

gunman42782

Unfortunately, it doesn't me either. Not a big fan of MIM parts. Sold a guy a Rock Island 1911 once, brand new. He took it right out on the range and the safety broke off of it before he fired the first shot. They say if they are done right, they are as good as anything, but if they are done wrong, when they fail, they fail big time. Once again, it proves that now that Bill is gone, Ruger is just another gun company. Shame.

Bountyhunter

It's all about the almighty dolla, folks.

I hope that if they have many failures Ruger will reconsider.

JOHNNY WACKO

Whats that made in Mexico ?????

Tom W.

Metal injection molding....

Herr Mario

....when (what year) did Ruger start using MIM's....

deputy125

don't have a clue..................there has been some ramblings on the ruger board about some sp's being recently received with a "hollow back" instead of a solid trigger and speculation about that..........

some are saying this will create a demand and artifical price increase for older rugers without the mim................quite a few are defending the practice as "modern methods".........and some are not worried about such few parts...but smith also started small with the introduction and it eventually spread to additional parts.......i would guess ruger is going to folow suit and hopefully learn from smith's experiences......

what i am curious about is the MIM parts used by ruger in any gun of theirs.........are the mim parts made by ruger or by an outside vendor????????????????????????????????????

Snuffy

my my, and to think that I was given the guff over not liking the new bisley's that seemed to break so easy. Only cost me $341.92 per gun to make them right when they could have been made right at the factory. If I had wanted molded I could have gone with glock, maybe ruger will join up with glock and learn how to mold. sheepdog if I could have gotten use bisley 's that weren't completely worn out I would have them now. but those that have them are keeping them. I can well understand why.

stoble

But I like beating people with my revolver! lol

Bountyhunter

deputy125

well, lets hope we don't end up with MIM transfer bars...........

i think H&R had a bad run of such and they were snapping on the shotguns.