Consumer question

About two years ago I bought a used Ruger No. 1, stainless, from the local Cabela's store. As customary for Rugers, the rifle came with a set of stainless steel rings.

Recently, I tried to mount a scope, and discovered that the rings are of different height. One is medium and the other low. Which of course makes mounting the scope impossible. The rings aren't labeled--you can barely see the difference. Who the heck checks ring height when buying a rifle?

I'm asking for opinions on whether I should complain to Cabela's. Has it been too long? (At least two years since I bought the rifle.)

Should I not complain because it was a used gun?

What say ye?

Jim

You can certainly make them aware of the issue without complaining. Perhaps it was a simple error that they would be more than happy to correct.

I haven't googled this yet, but I believe some rifles are actually sold with such as you speak. I don't know if this No. 1 is that way, but I'd check around to make sure.

Jim I just googled and on the Ruger forum the No.1's use the same height front and rear. The 77's are 2 different heights.

what's the law say?

X2

I know it seems that cabelas has fallen off a little bit lately from what it used to be, but I would talk to them. I have had very good experiences with them in the past. Worst they can do is say no.

Yes, the rifles use the same height; but I was provided different heights.

Jim

If they are still in their original package perhaps you can return them. Sounds like they gave you a set needed for a 77.

Call a good attorney for advice.

Never hurts to try. If you’re a repeat customer of mine, I wouldn’t hesitate to make it right.

I'd call them or Ruger. Sounds like a Ruger mistake so if cabelas doesn't do anything to fix it, ruger should

Ruger’s known for their customer service. I’d contact them.

no need to complain
tell em what happened, they either fix it or they don't - I believe they should

and if they don't, you'll consider that before you buy from them next time
but then you gotta spend the 40 bucks to get the right ring

You bought it USED. Payed a discounted price. Probably inspected prior to paying. You could swallow your pride and ask.

Sounds like Ruger provided the wrong rings, Maybe why it was in the used rack, previous owner probably couldn't mount a scope either. Cabelas just moved it along.
I'd just call Ruger and explain the situation, I'd be surprised if they didn't send the right rings free.

Be sure and let them know you are a lawyer.

you have nothing but time to loose talking with Cabelas , with any luck you get a new set if rings , if not it was a used gun and it has been some time.

I'd give Cabelas a chance to make it right, BEFORE contacting Ruger.

You never told us if the rings were in orig pkg or loose.....where the local Cabelas may have just put some in, to help the sale.

If I was that Cabelas Mgr, I'd want to know you were unhappy, and why......so the same mistake is avoided in the future.

If you have the receipt from the original purchase, it can't hurt to see if they have a used ring that would work if nothing else.

That might not be a wise thing to do.

What happens when you find a bad apple in the 10 pound sack that was on sale?

Jeez....must be getting dark early in Anchorage.

I bet Cabelas will do something if you're pleasant when asking.

Pete

Just go ask cabelas to correct problem. I bet they will. If they refuse, take the rifle and throw it through the big window in front of cabelas. Show them who's the boss Jim!

How in the world is it Rugers fault? They had absolutely no involvement. If I buy a USED item and it takes TWO years to notice a small mistake, thats on me.
They may fix it, but they sure have to reason to other than to be nice.

I don't see how I can put the onus on Ruger. The original buyer could have mixed them up with the rings for a different rifle.

I suppose I could claim that Cabela's didn't notice the rings were different heights. Except I did the same thing when I bought the rifle from Cabela's. Who would closely inspect rings? They were stainless and looked like Ruger No. 1 rings.

I have trouble figuring out who is to blame, other than (probably) the original owner. But Cabela's did sell it to me, minus the correct rings. So I think I'll give them a call.

Jim

If this was a used rifle, I would say you bear some responsibility to look it over and see if everything is as you want it to be. If you found this out within a few days of your purchase, I might say something. Two years later, I would probably just buy a new set of rings.

Gotcha. Yeah give cabelas a call. Even though 2 years have passed it might not hurt to try.

A pig in a poke is a pig in a poke.
You bought a pig in a poke.
Eat it, and quit bothering us with inexpensive, thus insignificant nonsense.

The amount isn't significant, but I thought it was an interesting dilemma. Why bother replying if you think it's insignificant nonsense?

Jim

Seems to me, some of guys need to cut Jim some slack.

I've never been inside a Cabela's store, didn't know that they sold used stuff. Anyway, I'd give them a call, sounds like there's a very good chance that someone bought a M77 with the wrong set of rings. From 2 years ago, maybe they're laying around someplace?

If it was me, think I'd rather buy a new set of rings for the rifle. 2 years ago, who can say that the jig hasn't changed by 0.0001 inches?

and we have a winner

just put that set of rings in your I might use em some day box and go buy the right ones.

Oh, I don't know. Maybe to stop the madness of a penny pinching blame shifter.

Don't know what you got against me, Carl, to start calling names, but I have no interest in fighting with you. (My wife would get a big laugh at you calling me "penny pinching.")

Thanks to all who replied. I decided to forget about Cabela's and just ordered a new set of rings from Ruger.

Jim

I guess some of us find it ironic that you spent your entire career using the "letter of the law" to limit your clients' liabilities; even though [morally] they should have (at least in SOME cases) done more for the aggrieved party, than what the law demands.

and now, you want more consideration for yourself than what the law provides.