Ruger question


PDA






eastwood44mag
May 4, 2007, 01:52 AM
This may be an absolute novice question, but here goes anyways:

Why is it that the Super Redhawk has no lug, while the GP-100 has a full lug (current production models)? I would think the larger calibers would need the extra strength more than the .357.

Anyone know why they're the way they are?

Thanks.

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger question" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
szuppo
May 4, 2007, 02:05 AM
I believe the full lug was incorporated into designs for the added weight benefits to reduce recoil and for aesthetic reasons.
While I am sure it does add strength, it adds it where it is not necessarily needed.

ugaarguy
May 4, 2007, 02:19 AM
I believe it's a market generated thing. Do a search for Smythons. These were S&W K-frames (Mod 19 & 66 mostly) in 357 magnum which folks had gunsmiths fit Colt bbls to for the full underlug Colt look on a S&W gun. When S&W introduced the new L-frame 586/581/686/681 they featured the full underlug bbl. Ruger's first DA revolvers were the Speed/Service/Security Six which were very close to the K-frame in size, and also lacked full underlugs. The GP100 is an L-frame sized gun, and is the 686's chief competitor.

S&W has recently introduced the 620, an L-frame 357 mag without full underlug - presumably to meet consumer demand for such revolvers. If they take off Ruger may follow suit and supply what the market demands. On the other hand it took them quite a while to introduce a reasonably slim semi-auto pistol, the P345. They've also yet to introduce a lightweight alloy frame revolver, which is one of the hottest revolver market segments, though they have both the equipment and expertise to do so.

rkh
May 4, 2007, 02:31 AM
The full underlug is primarily cosmetic. It doesn't strengthen the gun in any meaningful way, although you can't blame Ruger for churning out flimsy revolvers--the GP100 is one stout firearm.

That said, its mass does dampen the recoil a bit and helps to reduce muzzle rise.

If I could open carry I might prefer a lighter 357. As is, however, I think the GP100's heft, balance and controllability are its principal selling points.

bakert
May 4, 2007, 08:23 AM
Just my on personal preference but I don't much care for full lugged barrels. All of my S&Ws are older K frame guns and the newer ones look funny and kinda blocky to me and all the full lug does is add weight but many people like them . Don't have a Ruger D/A revolver (yet) but I've been kinda looking for an older GP100 with the half lug at a decent price.

rem1187a
May 4, 2007, 05:55 PM
As mentioned above the GP has it for looks and a little extra weight for to help recoil. As for why it is not on the Redhawk or Super Redhawk would be due to the weight a full lug would add to the 9 1/2" barrel or even the 7 1/2" barrel

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger question" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!