Anybody "unhappy" with their GP100? ..and sold it?

[mtnbkr]

Twoblink,

I've had mine for 5-6 years and I've probably run 5k or more through it, about half of that being HOT magnum loads. I'm a big fan of 180gr bullets, so that's all I use fo rmy mag loads. Mine's not showing any sign of wearing out.

Chris

 

[mec]

this last couple of posts show what the GPs do better than any other product

 

[Doug b]

Down loading .357 Rem.

IMR Trail Boss looks like it's going to be "the deal" to load the .357 down to 38spl. velocities.Also mag. primers in .357 Rem.Mag. create erratic ignition.All powders suited to this round ignite more uniformly with standard small pistol primers.

 

[Master Blaster]

.357 Rem.Mag.

.357 Rem Mag, what the He77 caliber is that???????

 

[AStone]

this last couple of posts show what the GPs do better than any other product

Mec, I'm a little slow here (late night last night, no coffee yet), so bear with me.

You mean that they shoot hot rounds without damage for a long time? Better than Smiths?

Or am I missing your point?

Nem

 

[mec]

you got it. One guy told me he had shot one loose but you seldom hear of it.

 

[Jamie C.]

One guy told me he had shot one loose but you seldom hear of it.

Ah, but with what load, and how long did it take?

I don't think mere mortals could seriously injure a GP with standard factory or "reasonable" hand loads without devoting some real time and effort to the chore. But even at that, there is always the chance of getting a "Monday morning" gun....


J.C.

 

[pezo]

#2 was size, it is much larger than a 357 needs to be or should be, a Smith K-frame is a much more reasonable package for 357

then why did smith and wesson drop the k-frame? The k-frame is a .38 designed to OCCASIONALLY shoot .357's. I dont shoot .38's for any defense shooting. The beloved 686 is almost identical in size and weight to the gp100. the 686 and gp100 were designed for the .357 magnum, unlike the k-frames which were. (thats right were) redisigned for the magnum.

 

[pezo]

Alas. If you truely want a real .357 magnum for shooting heavy and hotloaded .357 magnum rounds. You do not buy a k frame!!!!!!!!!

 

[AStone]

then why did smith and wesson drop the k-frame? The k-frame is a .38 designed to OCCASIONALLY shoot .357's. I dont shoot .38's for any defense shooting. The beloved 686 is almost identical in size and weight to the gp100. the 686 and gp100 were designed for the .357 magnum, unlike the k-frames which were (thats right were) redisigned for the magnum.

So, I'm not picking points with anyone here, just trying to learn something about these revolvers.

Here's one Smithy I'm interested in: their 386 Hi-Viz. It's listed as .357, and they describe it in their section on "Medium frame: K or L".

Do I assume, therefore, that it's really an L? (Even though when I look at the image, it appears to be a smaller frame than a 686...but I haven't actually seen one yet, let alone held it.)

The only thing I don't like about it is the MSRP.

Nem

 

[Jamie C.]

Keep in mind that the 386 is an alloy-framed gun.... It's not going to be as tough as a steel frame. Is it lighter than an all-steel gun? Yep. Is it as strong, and less apt to show wear? Nope.

J.C.

 

[JohnKSa]

I couldn't get to reliably fire .357s w/ lighter springs - the manufacturing tolerances made 1 or 2 cylinders not fire w/ magnum primers (the firing pin wasn't hitting hard enough). Since I intended it as a SD gun, that wouldn't work.

Hmmm... Sounds to me like you were unhappy with your home modifications, not the gun.

 

[Master Blaster]

K frame model 19's and model 66 were designed to shoot .357 magnum. They can take many tens of thousands of .357 magnum rounds. The problem is that some ammo manufacturers have designed 110 and 125 grain loads that are extremely hard on the forcing cone and frame of the revolvers.

The real .357 magnum round was originally supposed to be loaded with a heavier bullet. 158 grains is the proper weight for a .357 magnum. When you shoot thousands of these through a K-frame you dont see split forcing cones or stretched frames.

Here is a story by a gent who has put thousands of rounds of full power .357 magnum through his model 19 with no problems. Note he is using the heavier bullets.

http://www.gunblast.com/Butch_SW-Model19.htm

 

[MrAcheson]

K frame model 19's and model 66 were designed to shoot .357 magnum. They can take many tens of thousands of .357 magnum rounds. The problem is that some ammo manufacturers have designed 110 and 125 grain loads that are extremely hard on the forcing cone and frame of the revolvers.

So it isn't the gun makers fault that their guns can't handle the ammo, it is the ammo makers fault for making that ammunition? Ammunition which is entirely within specifications for the caliber yet still causes problems in K frames?

Sorry, but that isn't how it works. If the ammo makers load to spec, then the gun should be able to shoot to spec. This is especially true for 125 grain .357, which is pretty much the standard round in that caliber. The real problem with K-frame longevity is that it is a beefed up .38 that they didn't beef up enough.

 

[Master Blaster]

Mr. Acheson, who said that blame needs to be assessed????

Why must it be somones fault?????

I stand by what I said The 125's and the 110s could cause problems in a K-frame if you shoot thousands of them. The cost of the ammo to wear out a K-frame will exceed the cost of the gun many times.

Shoot whatveer you like in your K-frame.

 

[Paco]

The original 357 was designed around a 158 gr. pill. I will not shoot a 125 gr. pill through mine because of numerous reasons such as handling, as well as fire-cutting on the top strap and forcing cone problems, among other problems.

-Yes the GP100 or 686 can handle it but the gun was designed around a different pill.

 

[W Turner]

My Ruger GP-100 was given to me by my mother and she had purchased it from one of her uncles. I still have the original receipt and I think it is dated around 1987. It is a blued 4" model with a very tight lock-up and the DA has come right along since I became the owner and started dry-firing it.

The DA is different from a S&W but is still very good. I personally think that the DA of the Ruger lends itself to fast DA work better than the SW. The SW's trigger on the other hand is much easier to stage if you shoot that way. The Single action on mine is great so I have no plans to change any springs or do anything to it.

W

 

[Sean85746]

I bought a GP-100 when they first came out...WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY back in the late 80's. I thought it would be a great revolver for hunting the ever elusive whitetail deer in the southern half Michigan, where one can use only a handgun or shotgun.

It was beefy, therefore better to handle 180 gr jsp's I intended to use (I didn't want to beat up my beloved Smith & Wesson Model 19). It was stainless steel, and had a decent set of grips. I had also considered a Smith Mod 686...but the Ruger was almost a hundred bucks less money. This was a concern for my college student budget.

I took it to the range, and started firing from the bench to get an adjustment on the sites. The BEST I could do were 5-inch groups at 25 yards! I was mortified. Nothing came close to point of aim. The trigger was also NOT a Smith trigger.

I tried different loads, and bullets, handloads, and more factory fodder. I couldn't make this big thing work for me.

I got rid of it, and ate mac & cheese for 2 weeks, and bought a 6" Smith & Wesson Model 686 with the target hammer, target trigger, and red ramp, white outline setup. I put on a set of ROPER grips, and VOILA...I shoulda done it this way the first time.

The 686 shot into 1 1/2" offhand at 25 yds, sometimes into under an inch from the bench. It still shoots like that. I take it to Michigan every year for deer season (where I will be in a week).

I am not bashing Ruger. I have 3 10/22's, and several Mk-I's, II's, and III's, and even a Single Six Convertible. But I am not impressed with their DA wheelguns.

Though my late father had, and I now have, a 3" SP-101 .357 that isn't bad, but it is too heavy for a good BUG.

 

[go_fish]

So far, I have never sold a gun....just seem to purchase them and love each one of them flaws and all! Anyway enough of my personal problems. I looked at the GP-100 and the S&W 686, I ended up purchasing the 686 with a 4 inch barrel and I have never been sorry. I shoot well with it, I like the action, and everyone of my friends and relatives that have shot it really like it. I do not think you would be dissapointed.

 

[Pistol Toter]

I have a 3" stainless GP100. I'm not unhappy with it but I can't say that it is anything special either; it lays in the vault. I wish I had bought the 4" version instead with adjustable sights. I will keep it unless something better comes along that I might trade it on. It would not be another Ruger, not that I dislike Ruger but I figure that I've got the best Ruger built, an SP101 2 1/4"er that I carry. P.T.

 

[Delmar]

jlh26oo - this GP has been the cat's rear end for me. Did a bit of sight adjustment and it now blows out the bulls eye at 25 yards with 125 or 158 grain loads. Taking it deer hunting in a couple of weeks and have a spot where no shot will exceed 40 yards. If I ever do decide to give this one up, I have 3 people who already love the way it shoots. The DA pull is good, and I can stage it if I want. For the money, I don't think you can do any better than this particular pistol.
I would certainly regret giving it up!

 

[TimboKhan]

You know, its hard for me to say a 686 is a bad gun, mostly because its not, but all things being equal, isn't the Ruger cheaper? Not that cheap is always the way to go with a gun, but if a guy likes them both, and if one is less expensive, not sure why you would go for the more expensive model. Look at all the praisethe Rugers get, and then look at all the praise the Smiths get. This is one of those discussions thats interesting to me because by and large you don't have anyone coming out and saying "Those smiths suck" or "Those rugers suck" like you do when you discuss autos. Your basically talking about two really good guns. Maybe its just me, but if I were in your shoes, I would go for less expensive of the two, because everything else does appear to be more or less equal.

 

[jlh26oo]

jlh26oo - this GP has been the cat's rear end for me. Did a bit of sight adjustment and it now blows out the bulls eye at 25 yards with 125 or 158 grain loads. Taking it deer hunting in a couple of weeks and have a spot where no shot will exceed 40 yards. If I ever do decide to give this one up, I have 3 people who already love the way it shoots. The DA pull is good, and I can stage it if I want. For the money, I don't think you can do any better than this particular pistol.
I would certainly regret giving it up!

Yeah, I'm glad my complaints are not applicable for you. Because you reload, you can dedicate to .357 exclusively, and the .38spl rings will not be a problem. But people are acting like I am making this phenomenon up. I know you can testify to what less than 200 rounds put in the cylinders, right? It is just my position that if you plan to shoot .38spl, don't do it in a .357 revlover, unless you like to spend alot of time scrubbing or removing the cylinder for soakage.

Told you it shot straight! Good luck w.the hunt.


Hey btw Delmar, letting go of my p89 and 870 for as much of a steal as the gp was if you are headed back to H-town any time soon. Check the trading post forums here.


Nema- take note of Pistol Toter's post above regarding 3" FS vs. 4" AS during your decision making process. Whether it be SW or Ruger, I endorse the 4" adj sights (unless you go the small frame route of course).

 

[AStone]

Nema- take note of Pistol Toter's post above regarding 3" FS vs. 4" AS during your decision making process. Whether it be SW or Ruger, I endorse the 4" adj sights (unless you go the small frame route of course).

JLH, I'm on it. Thanks for the reminder.

I have bounced back and forth between wanting a 3" barrel & a 4", but now I'm leaning again toward the 4. And I hear ya about those AS.

My only reason for considering the fixed FS was back when I was looking harder at GP100's, someone (geez, memory is bad...who?) suggested that I look at the FS model cause the grip was a bit smaller.

Now that I'm leaning towards the Smithie, that's less of an issue.

(Of course, I'm still trying to decide how bad I really need that .357 wheel gun in additon to my K9. Geez, so many choices.

Nem

 

[jlh26oo]

(geez, memory is bad...who?)

Millcreek and falling block.