Ruger SP101 8-Shot 22lr


PDA






deadduck357
September 15, 2011, 08:07 PM
Ruger sent me their new .22 Long Rifle SP101. This new model carries an 8 holed cylinder. .22 Short, .22 Long and .22 shot cartridges can also be fired from this revolver.
http://lead-slinger.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/SP101.221.jpg
Included in box: Instruction manual, action locking device and a single pre-fired cartridge case.

8 chamber cylinder
http://lead-slinger.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/SP101.2210.jpg

Rear sight is both elevation and windage adjustable
http://lead-slinger.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/SP101.226.jpg

Front sight is a dovetailed fiber-optic
http://lead-slinger.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/SP101.227.jpg

Five pull average of 3 lbs 14.4 oz. SA
http://lead-slinger.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/SP101.2212.jpg

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger SP101 8-Shot 22lr" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
deadduck357
September 15, 2011, 08:08 PM
At the range Federal Value Pack 36gr HP and CCI Mini-Mag 36gr HP ammo was tested.
http://lead-slinger.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/SP101.2215.jpg

http://lead-slinger.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/SP101.2216.jpg

Firing pin strikes appear sufficient
http://lead-slinger.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Sp101.2218.jpg

7 yards 8 shot group with CCI, offhand
http://lead-slinger.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/SP101.2221.jpg

7 yards 16 shot group with Federal, offhand
http://lead-slinger.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/SP101.2223.jpg

http://lead-slinger.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/SP101.2227.jpg
I have to say it is a fun handgun to shoot. The weight and balance made handling effortless. This SP101 will make for a fun plinker or to teach the novice and youth handgun fundamentals.

ColtPythonElite
September 15, 2011, 08:09 PM
The sent it to you for what reason?

deadduck357
September 15, 2011, 08:11 PM
To shoot it

ColtPythonElite
September 15, 2011, 08:13 PM
How does one get Ruger to send them a gun?....Edit...I visitied the site in your pic watermark and now understand.

David E
September 15, 2011, 08:35 PM
I presume the gun also shoots .22 Long Rifle cartridges in addition to the the short and long cartridges.

How's the extraction?

deadduck357
September 15, 2011, 08:50 PM
I haven't had any issues through countless rounds.

savit260
September 15, 2011, 09:19 PM
Were those groups fired double action?

whetrock
September 15, 2011, 09:25 PM
I like the looks of it I think it would be an ideal woods bumming gun, nice review by the way.

19-3Ben
September 15, 2011, 10:27 PM
I wonder what the DA trigger pul weight is, and what it could be lower to without sacrificing reliable primer strikes.
I haven't had to deal with it because I much prefer semi-autos in .22LR, BUT this little revolver could easily sway me to the wheelie .22 side.

highorder
September 15, 2011, 10:35 PM
I want one. Blued please.

deadduck357
September 15, 2011, 10:42 PM
Were those groups fired double action?

Those were single action groups

deadduck357
September 15, 2011, 10:44 PM
I wonder what the DA trigger pul weight is,

DA pull was 11 lbs 4.5 oz.

ColtPythonElite
September 15, 2011, 10:49 PM
What was the distance?

Quoheleth
September 15, 2011, 11:01 PM
DA pull was 11 lbs 4.5 oz.

With all due respect, that is why I'll stick to my K-22 Smith.

Q

David E
September 15, 2011, 11:07 PM
No offense, but that's a horrible group for 7 yds

Maybe bench it and shoot from 7 and 15 yds, single action.

19-3Ben
September 15, 2011, 11:07 PM
DA pull was 11 lbs 4.5 oz.

Not as bad as I would have thought. I'm very intrigued. I can only assume it will take the same spring kits as the 38/357 mag versions?

deadduck357
September 16, 2011, 12:41 AM
No offense, but that's a horrible group for 7 yds

Maybe bench it and shoot from 7 and 15 yds, single action.

Not planning to take it to Camp Perry

SC_Slowhand
September 16, 2011, 01:00 AM
You're over here as well.... Great pictures.

:)
Thanks....

ColtPythonElite
September 16, 2011, 01:13 AM
I'd like to see some groups at 15 and 25 off a bench.

fletchbutt152
September 16, 2011, 01:30 AM
This is BS. Why can't any gun designer get it right. This gun should have been with a six inch barrel or better and a full lug like the other sp101s. Not only that but the should make on like I describe in .327. I know they have a gp100, but i like the trimness if the sp101 (better carry) and want the improved ballistics. I'd buy one of the .22 and .327.

Oh yeah, and both should come with the optional black horizontal strioes like the other sp101s so they will match my M77 .270 all weather skeleton stock. Anyone know the official name for this stock?

ColtPythonElite
September 16, 2011, 01:43 AM
I agree with a full lug. I also wish they had left that trendy fiber optic sight off and just put a plain blade on it.

fletchbutt152
September 16, 2011, 01:46 AM
Diddo the chincy plastic sight.

Gary A
September 16, 2011, 01:49 AM
Why can't any gun designer get it right?

"Get it right" - a term meaning everyone else doing all things at all time in accordance with one's own personal preferences and wishes.

:rolleyes:

fletchbutt152
September 16, 2011, 01:57 AM
Well of course. There are two reasons to have a .22LR pistol. And one trumps the other so those should be the design specs, according to fletchbutt152. Target practice is one reason, but a 4" barrel just doesn't cut it if you want to be accurate. The other reason is to put meat in the pot. And for this u mist be accurate. Again a 6-6.5 inch barrel is more desireable. I wish money was no factor to me and I could my design changes I wish for in all my firearms. I just get disappointed when my anticipation of a new product is for naught.

Shimitup
September 16, 2011, 02:18 AM
Pretty gun, I agree about the sight, a plain vertical target blade would look classier. Personally I like the half lug and I figure the Ruger is heavy enough not to need any more weight. I also would like to see some groups off a rest with some standard velocity or CCI Green Tag to show what the gun will do. All of my rimfires seem to benefit from target ammo, although my S&W 17 does almost as well with Win SuperX. BTW I'm not going to Camp Perry either.

pikid89
September 16, 2011, 02:38 AM
Anyone know the official name for this stock?

@Fletchbutt

the skeleton stock is the Zytel stock...also referred to as the Ruger Canoe Paddle....I have 3 of them and I love them....still trying to find the elusive 10/22 version

Gunsby_Blazen
September 16, 2011, 04:42 AM
my only reservation is that the revolver only has fiber optic sights for the front.
i would have preferred both front and rear such as found on the Single-Ten

it is nice to see another "Kit Gun" on the market, S&W had pretty much cornered it.

Radagast
September 16, 2011, 05:50 AM
I'll be very interested in one of these if a spring kit comes available that drops the double action pull to around 8/9 pounds.In the meantime my Model 18 will be my all round favourite rimfire.
Deadduck357: Thanks for the pics and the write up. Much appreciated.

oldfool
September 16, 2011, 06:12 AM
Some here are being just a tad harsh with OP. He posted info many have been seeking on a new gun much anticipated by some; he wasn't challenging anyone to a shooting contest, you know.
Still, some more rigorous testing of the guns accuracy potential would seem in order.

I do hope it sells well for Ruger, but I myself will have to pass on it:
a bit heavy for a kit revolver
a bit short for a target revolver (although pinned front sights can easily be changed)
not truly a great matchup as a practice clone companion to my centerfire SP101
small frame rimfire DA triggers all tend to be a bit heavy, but >11# is not "to die for"

a small frame rimfire DA with all-time best-in-class DA trigger, now that would be more 'compelling'

Their new Single Six is a little more appealing to me, but I am just not that into rimfire SAs. Always thought it was a bit of a shame that Ruger didn't do a DA version of that, preferably with LR/WMR dual cylinders, not unlike the old Hi-Std Double Nines... but I reckon they see no need to mess with success, not for as well as their Single Sixes sell.

As limited as the market is for small frame size rimfire DA revolvers, you have to give them some credit for at least bringing something to the marketplace.

Gary A
September 16, 2011, 10:50 AM
I do like rimfire SAs but have not yet warmed up to the Single-Ten. I will be obtaining one of the new Sp101s for sure. I have one of the earlier versions, 4 inch, half-lug and it's a fun shooter. ('Course, I ain't going to Camp Perry either.)

CraigC
September 16, 2011, 11:21 AM
The front sight is steel, not plastic. If you don't like it, it is easily replaced. I don't like fiber optic sights either but like the sixgun and will probably get one. The first thing I'll do is replace the front sight. No big deal.

If you can't put meat in the pot with an adjustable sighted 4" .22LR, the problem ain't your pistol.

The is the exact sixgun everybody has been asking for. Ruger responded and upped the capacity to boot. If you don't like it, don't buy one. Lots of folks do and will.

welldoya
September 16, 2011, 11:31 AM
I think the MSRP on this one is $675. I wonder what the real world price will be ?

CraigC
September 16, 2011, 11:33 AM
Usually around 75-80% of MSRP. Guy on another forum is selling them for $549/shipped.

22-rimfire
September 16, 2011, 12:26 PM
After the intial surge in sales, I suspect they will sell in the $500 area.

You may notice that the SP-101 has a higher MSRP than the regular SP. I suspect they actually cost more to make which blows a hole in the argument that 22's should always be cheaper than their centerfire counterpart.

ssyoumans
September 16, 2011, 01:17 PM
I like it with the 4" barrel and 1/2 lug. Heck, my complaint if any is it should be lighter, not longer. I carry a 22 as a "finisher" when hunting, 4" packs much more comfortable than a 6". I love the 8 shot capacity. A few snake rounds and still have 6 shots of CCI mini-mags. 2" barrel is too short, 6" too long, 4" just right!
If I want a target 22, I'll pull out the Ruger MKII.
I guess I am the ideal customer for it, and pleased it is several hundred less than the S&W.

bergmen
September 16, 2011, 01:47 PM
The front sight is steel, not plastic. If you don't like it, it is easily replaced. I don't like fiber optic sights either but like the sixgun and will probably get one. The first thing I'll do is replace the front sight. No big deal.

If you can't put meat in the pot with an adjustable sighted 4" .22LR, the problem ain't your pistol.

The is the exact sixgun everybody has been asking for. Ruger responded and upped the capacity to boot. If you don't like it, don't buy one. Lots of folks do and will.

Psst. It's an "eightgun". And yes, the front sight is dovetail mounted, so it is a no-brainer to put whatever sight is desired on the front (much easier than the SA Rugers).

Also, the SP-101 (KSP-242-8) is now on the Ruger website.

Dan

bergmen
September 16, 2011, 01:50 PM
Can't get 'em in California or Massachusetts.

Dan

CraigC
September 16, 2011, 01:57 PM
Psst, it's a revolver, it's a sixgun. No matter if it holds five rounds, six, seven, eight, nine ten or twelve. It's a sixgun.

ultramag44
September 16, 2011, 02:28 PM
Just picked mine up @ lunch time!

Dealer ordered it yesterday, came in today.

Just handling it and trying the trigger, sweeeeet! :cool:

bergmen
September 16, 2011, 02:39 PM
Psst, it's a revolver, it's a sixgun. No matter if it holds five rounds, six, seven, eight, nine ten or twelve. It's a sixgun.

Uh, okay. Learn something new everyday I guess.

Fishslayer
September 16, 2011, 03:08 PM
Can't get 'em in California or Massachusetts.



Oh for goodness sake...:fire:

What now? A loaded chamber indicator & mag disconnect on a wheelgun?:banghead:

Seriously, my guess would be they haven't been submitted for extortion testing yet.

I like it. Might be hard to justify $500+ for a .22 wheelgun till ya see the S&W at $900+.:eek: Or a 50YO K frame @ $2K+. :eek::eek:

Half lug barrel... classic look and a bit lighter than the unnecessary full lug.
4" barrel works for me. I'm sure other lengths will come if the pistol sells.

The grips are the ones everybody has been clamoring for since they left the GP100.

Chuck Perry
September 16, 2011, 03:42 PM
Looks like a fun revolver to me. I'll definitely buy one.

FoghornLeghorn
September 16, 2011, 04:04 PM
it is nice to see another "Kit Gun"

Too big and heavy for a kit gun.

harmon rabb
September 16, 2011, 04:48 PM
Oh for goodness sake...:fire:

What now? A loaded chamber indicator & mag disconnect on a wheelgun?:banghead:

Seriously, my guess would be they haven't been submitted for extortion testing yet.

I like it. Might be hard to justify $500+ for a .22 wheelgun till ya see the S&W at $900+.:eek: Or a 50YO K frame @ $2K+. :eek::eek:

Half lug barrel... classic look and a bit lighter than the unnecessary full lug.
4" barrel works for me. I'm sure other lengths will come if the pistol sells.

The grips are the ones everybody has been clamoring for since they left the GP100.
While $500 for a 22 seems steep... that's a 22 that your great grandkids will be shooting long after you're worm food.

deadduck357
September 16, 2011, 05:46 PM
While $500 for a 22 seems steep... that's a 22 that your great grandkids will be shooting long after you're worm food.

You are probably correct, it is built like a tank.

oldfool
September 16, 2011, 05:58 PM
I agree, the price strikes me as reasonable enough (the real street price) for a real decent quality new revolver these days.

I wasn't knockin' it, it just doesn't quite fill my niche, 'cause my unfilled niche has gotten ever narrower, that's all. Was a time I wanted a rimfire SP101, having failed to snarf one up whilst they were still in production. Wanted some other stuff worse since then, and got it. Getting ever older and ever slower to jump on new models, but still glad to see Ruger doing things. Hope they sell a ton of 'em.

DPris
September 16, 2011, 07:28 PM
I'm with Harmon, I want this thing to last & have no doubts that it'll be around long after I'm not. :)
Denis

ultramag44
September 16, 2011, 07:28 PM
Got mine today! :cool: Pics in thread below.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=615020

As the front sight is on a dovetail, I suspect someone will have replacement front blades on the market in short order; all-black Patridge, ramp, or ramps w/ orange or yellow inserts, etc.

CraigC
September 16, 2011, 09:19 PM
$500 for a .22LR revolver that you can shoot several hundred thousand rounds with, through the course of at least three or four lifetimes IS cheap. You'll typically get more use out of a $500 .22 revolver than any other chambering.

Maple_City_Woodsman
September 16, 2011, 10:02 PM
There are two reasons to have a .22LR pistol.

Wrong. There are at least half a dozen common and legitimate uses of a .22 revolver. Your view of the world is very narrow minded.

pikid89
September 16, 2011, 10:17 PM
id really like to see an 7 or 8 round LCR type .22...that would be really cool

3 or 4 incher, really light weight

22-rimfire
September 16, 2011, 10:56 PM
Flecthbutt152 said... There are two reasons to have a .22LR pistol... Target practice is one reason, but a 4" barrel just doesn't cut it if you want to be accurate. The other reason is to put meat in the pot. And for this u must be accurate. Again a 6-6.5 inch barrel is more desireable.

I can think of a lot of reasons for a owning a 22 revolver. The 4" barrel on most revolvers has always been the most popular barrel length unless the revolver is designed for concealed carry. Ruger did just fine with the barrel length. A 6" barrel would have doomed the gun as the only barrel length. I suspect it will likely be an alternative barrel length down the road. Don't know if I will buy one. But I look forward to handling one.

toivo
September 16, 2011, 11:24 PM
I like it, except for the fiber-optic up front and the "two-tone" grips. I'll probably own one someday, but it will end up with a blade front sight and grips that are either all-wood or all-synthetic.

If it had those on it now, I probably wouldn't be able to resist: I'd have to get one right away. ;)

Psst, it's a revolver, it's a sixgun. No matter if it holds five rounds, six, seven, eight, nine ten or twelve. It's a sixgun.

Sorry, can't agree with that. When virtually all revolvers held six rounds, every revolver was a "sixgun." That's not true anymore.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/six-gun

22-rimfire
September 16, 2011, 11:46 PM
The grips are similar to the old Ruger grips. I didn't like them much initially, but they grow on you.

CraigC
September 17, 2011, 01:16 PM
Sorry, can't agree with that. When virtually all revolvers held six rounds, every revolver was a "sixgun." That's not true anymore.
Some of the first revolvers, flintlocks that well predate Sam Colt, were four shot. The first Colt revolvers were five-shot and Colt produced five-shot revolvers for years and years in their pocket models. Sorry, disagree all you want, I'll get my "sixgun" facts from sixgun experts, not the friggin' dictionary. A sixgun is a sixgun because it's a sixgun, not because it holds six rounds.

Unless you wanna go to war about "wheelguns". :rolleyes:

toivo
September 17, 2011, 05:28 PM
Some of the first revolvers, flintlocks that well predate Sam Colt, were four shot. The first Colt revolvers were five-shot and Colt produced five-shot revolvers for years and years in their pocket models.

Sure, but they didn't call them sixguns until the Colt Single Action Army came along and took over the handgun market. The name comes from an era when the vast majority of revolvers held six rounds.

Sorry, disagree all you want, I'll get my "sixgun" facts from sixgun experts, not the friggin' dictionary. A sixgun is a sixgun because it's a sixgun, not because it holds six rounds.

Does John Taffin count as an expert? He recognizes that there's an issue with calling a gun that doesn't hold six rounds a sixgun:

http://www.sixguns.com/range/S&wpair.htm

Note the references to a "seven-shooter" and the "generic sense" of the word sixgun. It's a term that does get applied to all revolvers, but it's not technically accurate for ones that hold five, or seven, or eight, or ten, or whatever. That's all I'm saying. Not a big deal, and I didn't mean to offend anyone.

Unless you wanna go to war about "wheelguns".

Now why would I want to do that? A wheelgun is a wheelgun because it has a "wheel" in the middle of it. No argument from me there. :D

4v50 Gary
September 17, 2011, 05:37 PM
I've got a good gun buy certificate from Ruger I'm going to have to use.

Oxide
September 17, 2011, 05:48 PM
Sixgun means six shot revolver. Any other capacity is not a six gun.

I don't need to cite the dictionary or any experts, I'll just cite common sense.

For as heavy as the SP101 is, which is not a gripe per se, I definitely want 8 shots. I did see a 6 shot one for sale on here though.

David E
September 17, 2011, 08:55 PM
No offense, but that's a horrible group for 7 yds.

Not planning to take it to Camp Perry

Again, no offense, but that's totally not the point.

To me, a proper review tells me what the gun can do and how well. This is especially important when it's a brand new gun on the market.

Not going to take this gun to Camp Perry? Well, no kidding. But many of us see this as an ideal hunting or trail gun. I'd like to know if it's capable of hitting a rabbit at 25 yds, on purpose, each time. If it could shoot your your 7 yd pattern, I mean, "group" at 25 yds, then it would be good to go.

As it is, your review tells me nothing about it's probable accuracy.

I did enjoy the pictures, tho.

Stainz
September 17, 2011, 09:02 PM
I'll have to see one of these new Rugers - thanks to the OP for sharing.

I have misgivings concerning Rugers, having divested myself of all of mine - save a SS Old Army bp 'sixshooter' - some 3+ years ago. I had everything from .22 Single Six to .32 H&RM SA & SP-101 to .357M, .44M & .45 Colt/ACP SA's to .45 & .454 DA (RH & SRH). I owned a bunch of Rugers - became quite adept at 'cleaning up' the crude innards of Ruger revolvers. The absolute worst was the 4" .32 H&RM SP-101. All of it's lockwork bores were crude - mostly unreamed. I followed the excellent instructions found over at the Ruger forum - including the one salient suggestion of dissassembling it's trigger group in a ziploc bag. It was the most impressive improvement of all of my Rugers - a true delight to shoot.

Well, shooting wasn't all that much fun. The chambers - like those in my 4.6" .32 H&RM BHG SSM - were almost out of spec large - .337+" OD - ammo sizes, homebrew and commercial, to .334" OD. Brass doesn't last - and the poorly reamed/polished chambers required effort to extract. It and it's sibling at the time in .22 both had a cheesy windage-only adjustable rear sight, making ammo production try to match the revolver's sight elevation for your favorite distance. I quit my quest for a .22 version - and started selling my Rugers. I got my first ever S&W, a new 625MG, over nine years ago - that started a trend.

An earlier poster pontificated something about there being only two reasons for a .22 DA - to target shoot or put meat on the table. Well, there is a definite third reason - if not more. I just like to plink - and it's fun to do so frugally. Sure, I shoot at paper targets - and steel plates, silhouettes and SPC targets. Then there are the film cannisters, pop cans, etc. I know the HiViz sight I had to install on my first two S&W .22's are not the best for bullseye - but they help my chronologically challenged eyes (I bought the first - the 4" 617 - three years ago - at 60!) acquire targets. My third revolver, a 3" 63 from last fall, came with a HiViz. They all got wood grips, too - something that may prove difficult with the SP's 'grip stud'.

Several caveats re the new .22 SP: it has my favored partial lug, a fully adjustable rear sight, a HiViz front sight, it's an eight-shooter, a la my 63's, and it was made after Ruger seemed to 'clean up their act', QC-wise. With that grip-stud, don't expect a selection of wood grips anytime soon. It will have to be at least looked at. As far as the DA pull - I doubt break-in will improve it - or that a lighter hammer spring will be useful as rimfires take more oomph to reliably pop. Then there is the shorter moment arms due to the down-sized (from the GP/SRH lockwork) lockwork. It'll have a higher DA pull than a GP, for sure.

Now, about S&W .22's... The 4" 617 below has a current MSRP of $829 while the 3" 63 is $769. They translate locally to $689 & $639 respectively - not $900 as another poster suggested. If you can afford most of $600 for a 4" SP-101 in .22, another C-note or so will likely get you a 4" 617 (... and it's a ten-shooter!), less for the 3" 63 (The 5" 63 was dropped a year or two back.). Here are my DA .22's:

http://s171.photobucket.com/albums/u307/Stainz_2007/IMG_4604.jpg

I'll bet the new Ruger will be a great eight-shooter - and a super plinker. The main thing here is to not do what I did! I waited to sixty years of age to buy my first DA .22 revolver - don't do that! Sure, they are expensive - but they offer a lifetime of frugal shooting fun (Mine's cost was offset by selling my ten plus year old Ruger MKII and accessories - which I never missed!). Amortized over your life - or you and your offsprings' - or by round count/cost - you'll come out ahead - and so will your wrist.

Stainz

PS The 'put meat on the table' suggestion gave me some amusement. Firstly, I'd put it on a plate... but, taking small animals in my subdivision would mean shooting someone's pet - or a squirrel - maybe a snake. I did get a great holster for that 3" 63 - should be fun 'woods bumming' revolver.

CraigC
September 18, 2011, 12:25 AM
Does John Taffin count as an expert? He recognizes that there's an issue with calling a gun that doesn't hold six rounds a sixgun...
Indeed! I have all his books, they carry names like "Big Bore Sixguns" and "Single Action Sixguns", even though they may feature guns that hold more or less than six rounds. Countless are the references to five-shot guns as "sixguns".

toivo
September 18, 2011, 01:46 AM
Does John Taffin count as an expert? He recognizes that there's an issue with calling a gun that doesn't hold six rounds a sixgun...
Indeed! I have all his books, they carry names like "Big Bore Sixguns" and "Single Action Sixguns", even though they may feature guns that hold more or less than six rounds. Countless are the references to five-shot guns as "sixguns".

OK, OK, you win ... :cool:

EVIL
September 18, 2011, 05:58 PM
I want one of these! When production ramps up and the street price becomes reasonable, this will be in my future. This also looks like a fine weapon to train youngsters on the fundamentals of pistol marksmanship too.

The SP101 frame with a 8-Shot capacity sounds like a great woods companion. Pairing this with a .357 3" SP101, and the bases are covered.

I agree about switching out the fiber optic front sight though...

Gideon
September 18, 2011, 10:28 PM
They should make this as a conversion model that comes with a cylinder for .22 mag. But then they'd be canabalizing business from their own new model Single Sixs....
Gideon

Gary A
September 19, 2011, 12:14 AM
I think I have read that the bore is designed to be a true .22 LR rather than a slightly over-sized combination barrel.

CraigC
September 19, 2011, 09:34 AM
I don't think there will be enough room for the .22WMR's larger rims. Which is probably why it's not offered as a convertible.


I think I have read that the bore is designed to be a true .22 LR rather than a slightly over-sized combination barrel.
Would be nice but not likely. Ruger has used the same barrels for all their .22 Single Sixes since ~1968.

ultramag44
September 19, 2011, 09:54 AM
Sorry guys, I was not able to get to the range last weekend! :(

I'll be on vacation (cruise ship to Canada, VIP Deluxe Suite), so, no range report till after that! Sorry!

Maybe one of the other fellows that bought @ the release date can cover me W/ their range report until I get back.

FullEffect1911
September 21, 2011, 09:00 AM
accuracy testing information from a ransom rest:

http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-SP101-22.htm

I think it's about time a good DA .22 revolver was offered to compete with S&W.

Mouse Gun
September 21, 2011, 11:42 AM
Impactguns.com has the Ruger on its site for 499.

DPris
September 21, 2011, 12:44 PM
Ruger says the problem to be dealt with in a Magnum version is the case rims, as Craig noted, and that's one of two reasons why I don't expect a convertible model with an 8-shot Magnum cylinder.

Further, they list the bore at .2160"-2180" and groove at .2210"-2225".

Best I've been able to get out of mine was 5 shots at 25 yards off a pistol rest with Winchester Super X 40-grain hi-vel into 1 5/16 inches.
The fiberoptic sight still isn't my first choice, but the squared blade top gets me past it when going for accuracy using a six-o'clock bull's-eye hold on black targets.
Denis

Triggernosis
September 21, 2011, 02:26 PM
Oldfool wrote:
a bit heavy for a kit revolver
What would be your choice in a lighter kit revolver, then?

deadduck357
September 24, 2011, 12:58 AM
Took it out again and we put somewhere between 200 and 300 rounds through it, very much fun. We were squabbling over who was gonna shoot it next.

oldfool
September 24, 2011, 12:37 PM
Oldfool wrote:

What would be your choice in a lighter kit revolver, then?

old model 4" S&W model 63 in 22LR, and matching old model 4" S&W 651 in 22WMR
(and/or other similar blued models, but I only own the two named)

but I say again, not knocking the Ruger, it's just an "almost but not quite" for me
good thing too, because if they were all just-right-for-me, I would be bankrupt you know !
I would own a Bearcat if I were just a tad more into SA... then again, the day ain't over with yet...

Triggernosis
September 24, 2011, 07:49 PM
Oldfool, I hear ya on the all-just-right-for-me issue, as I'd be broke too.

I handled one of the new SP101's today and liked it immensely, EXCEPT - it looked like maybe they'd screwed the barrel on just a tad bit too much and the front sight was crooked! Gosh dang - when are American mfrs. gonna learn?!

19-3Ben
September 24, 2011, 08:31 PM
I'd love if Ruger comes out with a 10 shot GP in .22LR. That would be one sweet shooter.

I really want the SP though. I think it would be about ideal for a few people who have asked me to teach them how to shoot.

deadduck357
September 25, 2011, 07:45 PM
I really want the SP though. I think it would be about ideal for a few people who have asked me to teach them how to shoot.

This is my main purpose for it.

Waywatcher
September 25, 2011, 07:49 PM
Call me traditional, but I'd have been much more tempted by a 6 shot cylinder instead of 8.

masterofchaos
September 27, 2011, 09:00 PM
I'm intrigued. Revolvers seem to handle the CCi snake shot better than autos (re: jamming). This might be a great gun for hiking and plinking later at the campground area. I like 4" barrel cuz it is a good carry and target length. I can't wait to see/hold/try one. Thanks for sharing and providing us here a sneak peak. Oh and I like that it's around 30oz cuz to me anything around 38+ is too heavy unless superbly balanced.

Dr_B
October 30, 2011, 06:13 PM
I finally found one of these in a local store today. Seems like a very nice revolver. Looked slick. The barrel stamping is more professional-looking than what's on my older SP101 .357. I didn't want to bring it home for $499 though, because I already have some plinkers. Maybe in the near future if they come down in price a little.

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger SP101 8-Shot 22lr" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!