In the latest bout of potential safety concerns from gun makers, Ruger issued a safety bulletin on certain Ruger Precision Rifles due to possible interference between the aluminum bolt shroud and cocking piece.
Ruger says that though only a small percentage of rifles are affected, with no reported injuries thus far, the company is committed to safety and therefore offers replacement aluminum bolt shroud for affected rifles.
Ruger Precision Rifles, regardless of caliber, that feature an aluminum bolt shroud within the following serial number ranges fall under the safety bulletin: 1800-26274 to 1800-78345 or 1801-00506 to 1801-30461.Rifles equipped with a polymer bolt shroud or a serial number beginning with 1802, 1803 or higher are not affected.
The issue centers on the aluminum bolt shroud and cocking piece on Ruger’s Precision Rifle series. Some models may experience interference between the bolt shroud and firing pin back, or cocking piece. In some instances, the interference can disrupt the firing mechanism causing improper functioning of the rifle.
Ruger says possible results of the interference vary, with some only experience light primer strikes. However, in extreme cases, the rifle may not fire when the trigger is initially pulled but may fire later when the bolt handle is subsequently lifted.
The interference eventually resolves itself, as parts wear and the interference is reduced. Ruger says rifles that have fired more than 100 rounds with no issues are unlikely to be impacted by the issue and no action is necessary on the part of consumers.
The company has set up a special website to handle concerns and aid consumers in determining if their Precision Rifles are afflicted. If a rifle is determined to problematic, Ruger will send a free replacement bolt shroud after consumers fill out and file a form.
This latest safety issue is the second for Ruger this year, with the gun maker issuing a full recall in June on its Mark IV pistols after it was discovered the handguns could fire unintentionally if the safety was not used correctly.