Early Red Eagle recoil spring Question

[06dilly]

I just picked up a Ruger Auto Red Eagle SN14xxx. Upon disassembly I see that the recoil spring is not retained. The rod is not staked and just pulls right through the moon end. Was this the way some were made back then?

First time I have seen this.
TomD

[06dilly]

Here is a picture of what I’m looking at. Just curious if this was the way they made some of the early recoil springs.

The arrow points to where the spring and moon end would normally be staked. The rod end is not broken, in fact it is very clearly machined this way. Thanks for any info!

TomD

[06dilly]

Well, with no reply from the experts, I’ve formed my own theory. Using info from Mr Dougan’s book and from Ruger’s patent:

The first Ruger's manufactured in 1949 started to get returned in January 1950 for broken firing pins. By March 1950 Ruger had developed the new bolt which addressed the firing pin issue and also redesigned the recoil spring. Patent 2624969, filed in June 1950, outlines the changes. In that they describe the recoil spring “follower” rod and the new “arcuate plate” (the half moon end) that the rod slides through. It does not describe staking the rod to form a single unit. Also, the drawings submitted show no reference to them being staked together.

So… My theory is that my pistol number 14xxx, made in late 1951, was installed with an unstaked recoil spring rod exactly as described in the patent. Somewhere along Ruger realized that staking the recoil rod, spring and plate into one unit made things simpler. But for a time, some Red Eagles came out with the redesigned bolt but having an unstaked recoil spring rod. No?

Now I guess I need to acquire more, and earlier Red Eagles to prove this out! At least that’s what I told my wife. So the search begins. Let me know if you are ready to sell your early Red Eagle.

TomD

[RoninPA]

"Now I guess I need to acquire more, and earlier Red Eagles to prove this out! At least that’s what I told my wife."

Hey, In my opinion that's as good of a reason as any to convince the wife why you need to acquire more guns.

[arcticruger]

"Now I guess I need to acquire more, and earlier Red Eagles to prove this out! At least that’s what I told my wife."

Hey, In my opinion that's as good of a reason as any to convince the wife why you need to acquire more guns.

Works for me

[Brass Frame]

Ron, good luck finding an early Red Eagle! The early ones are expensive?
Brass Frame/Lee

[06dilly]

Well, actually Ron was quoting me looking for early Red Eagles. But yes, thanks for the reminder, these are still going up. I’m almost two years past my heart attack and finally feeling like I’m ready to start collecting again. Now I just need a few guys to realize they’ve enjoyed their’s long enough!

TomD

[Rickkling]

Ok, firstly, I just saw this post, so don’t beat me up for a late comment!
I have several red eagles (14) and many standards, mk1’s etc… and I have never noticed the guide rod not being captured except for the few early ones I have without the support, so my curiosity was piqued!
First I looked in my 3 ruger books and don’t see a mention of it (admittedly I just scanned over them)
So I went to do some real world research, and found this:
The rod is not captured in all of mine up to sn. 48XXX (assuming they all have factory bolts)
My collection skips to 121XXX, and it, and the ones above it DO!
Maybe some of the real experts can chime in on the details.
Side note. After I took the one out at sn.14xxx, it took forever to get it back together.
(A wire tie did well)

[06dilly]

Yes, mine was a bit of a pain to put back together. Jokes aside… the rod didn’t want to go back in the hole.

Thanks for looking up yours! That’s a good sampling of them to know about.

Now I’m ready to own a real early one with the original bolt. Rod said it would cost me so let’s see…

TomD

[rugerguy]

all th e ones we've had (My wife mainly) and all the ones we;ve worked on since the 1960s were either the first ,early unsupported, or the next one supported,,have they overlapped?? or is there one in between?? Chad and all his numbering sequence may have to take note and we all gotta go LOOK again, proove it,,,,,,,,,as for it breaking?? coming apart?? polish off the staking?? who knows , if only they could talk ( except go bang) the one you picture look s "modified" to me ,cut and polished off at the end.