I understand your comment about ammunition expense vs original rifle cost. However, you are not considering the simple view that " if one wants a corvette...then a corvette is the only answer". I bought my wife a corvette convertible, fully understanding that I was also committing to a set of tires at ~ $1200 per set, once per year. I also understood that I would be buying premium gas instead of regular. What I didn't know was that it got 23 mpg average, and over 27 mpg on the highway at 80 mph! {:o) She drives that car everywhere, every day, under every condition except snow/ice covered roads. It has lots of hp, very wide tires, very little ground clearance, and is light weight to boot. Those 4 items make driving in snow and ice conditions a "no-go". On the other hand, if the car only used fuel I could buy at one or two locations in the USA, and that only by mail order...then the car wouldn't be worth having except as a "wall hanger". I don't buy wall hangers or cars as investments. I look at DRs the same way. If I can't feed it, the original cost is irrelevant. If I can feed it, then the original cost is only "how badly do I want it?" Lotsa diffrence in that view of the world.

As far as failure to eject with the Ruger, you found it, and could have had it fixed as it clearly is/was an anomaly. That problem had to have been quite rare or I would have heard more about it, so the basic design was OK. Implementation was lousy, but....Lousy accuracy wasn't an anomaly, and still isn't IMO. I figure one out every three #1's I buy will need a new "non-Ruger" barrel. Rugers accuracy requirement was (may still be for all I know) 2.5" at 100 yards. My .223 finally met that criteria after about 6 months and a few hundred dollars of rifle work (out of my pocket). Ruger wouldn't replace the barrel (eventually I did), even though the barrels only cost Ruger around $8 each at that time. Chambering it would have added a bit more, but a $600 rifle ought to shoot better than 2.5", and it for sure ought to have a better barrel than an $8.00 barrel IMO!

Whether one buys a DR, a bolt rifle, or a single shot, the individual should have "hundreds" of rounds thru that rifle before staring any "dangerous game" in the eyeball at spitting distance. Even the very best make mistakes upon occasion. Bad materials, bad installation, whatever...it happens. Blind trust/faith when you could do something else and eliminate that uncertainty seems to be foolish to me. Rimless cases in a DR seems to be in the category of testing the rifle (hundreds of shots during practice for example) and fixing problems found, or accepting the rifle as is based upon demonstrated performance. If it hasn't failed in hundreds of rounds, it is highly unlikely to fail when you most need it. On the other hand, strikers break, springs break, ejectors break, so what's the difference between an untested rimmed case DR and a rimless cased DR? If the rifle is designed and built properly, it will be functional. If not, well, no point in stating the obvious. Pilgrim