Page 1 of 1
Ruger manuals need proof read?
Posted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 11:53 am
by ruger22
In looking over the parts list in the manual for the LCR, only three parts are marked for "must be fitted at the factory". The firing pin bushing, the pawl, and the ejector. That can't be right. The barrel, cylinder, and crane should surely be marked, and a few more. They aren't.
On the page for ammunition, the disclaimer for responsibility with the use of non-factory ammo specifies the GP-100, not the LCR.
I guess the tech writers are a little rushed, like everyone else at Ruger lately.
Posted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 5:50 pm
by greener
Possibly. I'm not knowledgeable enough to know what is required for these on the LCR. I will say they needed (still need?) to review their manuals for firearms like the Mark III. Mine seem to have been written for the MKII for getting the hammer forward. The poor manual was probably responsible for more than than half the "Rugers are impossible to field strip" legend. That critical part was clear only to someone who knew how to do it and was wrong. Maybe I'm more knowledgeable about firearms now, because manuals seem to be better.
The best instructions and tech support I've ever seen was from the Emperor Clock Company. Emperor made kit furniture. Tech support folks had to assemble the furniture from the instructions. If they couldn't, they had to rewrite the manual to cover what wasn't clear to them. TS knew their stuff and the instructions were outstanding.
Posted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 7:48 pm
by Bullseye
Over the years Ruger has updated their instruction books with better directions. Some as a direct result of available information available on the Internet. They do peruse the Net to see what owners are complaining about and have lately made changes to their procedures and policies. They know my stuff, and have often mentioned it to me when we are discussing issues related to their products.
R,
Bullseye