This is continuing a response that I posted to a Ruger thread on revolvers. I know that the Department of Defense purchased Ruger's Security Sixes(38's?) back in the late seventies and early eighties. If my information is correct the revolvers were mostly for security personnel (MP's, DOD civilian security etc.). But as I look at my GP-100 it dawned on me that Ruger's engineering is perfect for soldiers - field soldiers. The engineering is rugged, but it's also simple to work with. As a former soldier (86-2000) I observed (and sometimes was also guilty of) firsthand the kind of abuse and neglect that is inflicted on the weaponry carried by soldiers. Rugers can absorb that abuse and still function. I've even read posts on this forum where folks have described the Ruger autos as being perfect for new handgun owners who don't know autos real well but want a quality auto for their first purchase. A forgiving reliable handgun. Well I can tell you that describes alot of folks in uniform. They don't know guns, but they use a guna nd it needs to be there for them whne the stuff hits the fan.
Does Ruger have any foreign military contracts? If the military ever decides to go out for a new handgun will Ruger compete? And why the heck did H&K get the Special Forces contract? Surely Ruger could have designed and built a massive 45 auto with all the bells and whistles that the snake eaters demand. these are the things that I think about when I should be working.
Does Ruger have any foreign military contracts? If the military ever decides to go out for a new handgun will Ruger compete? And why the heck did H&K get the Special Forces contract? Surely Ruger could have designed and built a massive 45 auto with all the bells and whistles that the snake eaters demand. these are the things that I think about when I should be working.