.44 Special GP

Status
Not open for further replies.
I mean if I'm gonna spend serious bucks I want one I can pack, not a brick that weighs so much I leave it home.
The mods you mention would cut very little weight. Enough to notice? Maybe. Difference between one you can "pack" vs a "brick"? Doesn't seem likely it to me.

The 696 is in the neighborhood of 35/37 ounces. Did someone confirm what this 3" GP-100 .44 Spl would be?

And oh yea, Ruger isn't into svelte. At least not since they discontinued the Security Six. :)
 
I'd hope Ruger makes it look like a Mountain Gun (S&W). Bit thinner barrel to as well as no full length underlug, fluted cylinder, chamfured front end of the cylinder, and a full tang for grip (like the Security Six had.)

I mean if I'm gonna spend serious bucks I want one I can pack, not a brick that weighs so much I leave it home.

Deaf
34 and a fraction ounces is not a heavy gun. This is not a pocket gun. My Security Six weighs 36 ounces in 4 inch, including a bit for a vented rib added, aluminum, I believe.
WP_20161218_002.jpg

Herrett's Detective grips in minimum dimensions.
 
Minimizing the underlug would be a nice touch, rounding the end of the barrel. but I think it would be only a fraction of an inch before weakening the ejector shroud.

Based on the wood grips of the Match Champion and the GP's grip frame requiring pocket grips, a rarity among grip makers, I would do what I am doing now with a 3" GP and use the compact rubber grips with wooden inserts, Altamont as I recall. They are short and would conceal better.

On the flutes, I wonder if Ruger was concerned about making the cylinder stronger. Pictures of guns that blew up often show the cylinder popping at its thinnest point. In 44 caliber (.429) the chamber wall and flute might have been too close together, even in 5-shot. My point is that there may have been strength and safety concerns mandating an unfluted cylinder not just styling the gun.

I think one either likes or accepts the look of a Ruger or they do not. Customizing a gun can double its cost and void the warranty. That's how I would view it. Personally I prefer the look of fluted cylinders.
Ditching the underlug does not imply shortening the ejector. It just means ditching the underlug.

Flutes have no affect on strength whatsoever.

Rugers have no warranty to void.
 
Ditching the underlug does not imply shortening the ejector. It just means ditching the underlug.
Seems like a nit. If you mean "ditching" the ejector shroud also, I think that is a different question. I didn't mention shortening the ejector. To me, reference to an underlug is to anything extending beyond the ejector shroud, which is going to have some minimal material ahead of the actual ejector.

Flutes have no affect on strength whatsoever.
If you say so, but to me they intuitively do, just looking at the unfluted cylinder. It is common for blaster models from various makers to have unfluted cylinders, implying that it is more than for just styling.

Rugers have no warranty to void.
Yet they may or may not agree to repair a gun at no charge. Another nit.
 
Then you've obviously never looked below the surface. Ruger still makes .44Mag's with flutes. Every custom maker building five shot .475's and .500's will also flute them. The S&W X-frames are fluted. Flutes are also an option on FA's. The FACT is that Ruger simply deleted the flutes for the Super Blackhawk to add weight. The fluted .44 Blackhawk was not discontinued until three years later.

A lugless gun would simply be a 3" version of this.

IMG_6975b.jpg
 
For many years Ruger has emulated the "overbuilt" look on most of their revolvers. The removal of the half-lug GP100s from the lineup is just one example. Having that lug out front and no flutes on the cylinder just add to that "built Ford tough" mentality for some. Then some will try to rationalize the extra weight and bulk by claiming and added strength is somehow necessary, or that the full-lug barrels "improve balance" but to me, it's an aesthetic choice by Ruger to distinguish their guns from other manufacturers. They WANT them to looks like boat anchors! :)

Still not a bad thing that we have a factory .44 special GP100. It just goes to show that the revolver has plenty of life left in it.
 
I'm glad to hear about Ruger making a 5 shot 44 spl. GP-100, I wonder if this will lead to the possibility of a 5 shot GP-100 chambered in 41 mag?
 
The cylinder flutes do not add any strength to the cylinder. The weakest part of a cylinder has always been the cuts for the locking bolt. In a 5 shot cylinder those cuts are in between the chambers. On a 6 shot they are directly over the chamber. On a 5 shot cylinder the strength is exactly the same with or without flutes and a 5 shot will take more pressure before it blows than a 6 shot. Flutes are a throwback to the old black powder cap and ball revolvers to reduce the fouling buildup between the cyl. and frame. The flutes just give the crud somewhere to go. They really serve no purpose today but people really like a traditional appearance. Leaving them off makes the machining of the cylinder less expensive. The added weight of a non fluted cyl. is not even worth talking about. Ruger dropped the half lug barrels because customers were buying more of the full lug models and a full lug helps hold the muzzle down in recoil. It's not about "looks".
 
Last edited:
The cylinder flutes do not add any strength to the cylinder. The weakest part of a cylinder has always been the cuts for the locking bolt. In a 5 shot cylinder those cuts are in between the chambers. On a 6 shot they are directly over the chamber. On a 5 shot cylinder the strength is exactly the same with or without flutes and a 5 shot will take more pressure before it blows than a 6 shot. Flutes are a throwback to the old black powder cap and ball revolvers to reduce the fouling buildup between the cyl. and frame. The flutes just give the crud somewhere to go. They really serve no purpose today but people really like a traditional appearance. Leaving them off makes the machining of the cylinder less expensive. The added weight of a non fluted cyl. is not even worth talking about. Ruger dropped the half lug barrels because customers were buying more of the full lug models and a full lug helps hold the muzzle down in recoil. It's not about "looks".
Note that the GP100 Match Champion does not have the full lug, and it is one of their latest models. Go figure.
 
OK I may be speculating but I would imagine the main market for the "Match Champion" is going to be people shooting light .38 wadcutter loads. A full lug isn't going to appeal to them. The "Match Champion" name sounds like a simple marketing excercise to me. Plenty of people have bought are are still buying the full lug 4 in. GPs. It has a very good weight and balance ratio IMO. But if you're going to carry it 24/7 you will need a good belt and holster.
 
OK I may be speculating but I would imagine the main market for the "Match Champion" is going to be people shooting light .38 wadcutter loads. A full lug isn't going to appeal to them. The "Match Champion" name sounds like a simple marketing excercise to me. Plenty of people have bought are are still buying the full lug 4 in. GPs. It has a very good weight and balance ratio IMO. But if you're going to carry it 24/7 you will need a good belt and holster.
I think the point of the Match Champion is that Ruger did NOT drop the half lug and it is indeed about the looks of the gun in more ways than the underlug barrel. I have never made sense of the name Match Champion but it never occurred to me to use mine for target 38 wadcutters. I have a fine 38 match gun already, a 6" Sauer Trophy model. The MC handles 357 Magnum like a "champ", pretty much the same class gun in weight and size as the Security Six.

Note that the MC was introduced with tactical sights, only later getting adjustables like one would want on a target gun. But here we go, getting off topic with a sidebar.
 
" The weakest part of a cylinder has always been the cuts for the locking bolt. In a 5 shot cylinder those cuts are in between the chambers. On a 6 shot they are directly over the chamber. On a 5 shot cylinder the strength is exactly the same with or without flutes and a 5 shot will take more pressure before it blows than a 6 shot."

Ruger's cylinder bolt is offset from center of the frame so their six shooters do not have the bolt notch above the chamber.

"OK I may be speculating but I would imagine the main market for the "Match Champion" is going to be people shooting light .38 wadcutter loads.

I'd prefer a 1:16 twist for that.
 
Last edited:
Altamont does not offer the Compact GP wood/rubber grips, only the full-sized ones.

Ruger is again selling the Compacts.
Denis
 
Here's mine
Ah Max......... you dirty bastard, you..........;)..................

I had no idea when I started shooting years ago that buying a gun meant I'd never have any money in my wallet, ever...............:)

Hey how do you like that front sight? For some reason I don't care for fiber optic sights on a revolver. They belong on plastic guns in my opinion. And yet their utility is undeniable.
 
Had not paid attention to the Smith, but if that model uses a two-piece barrel, that'd be another deal-killer for me. Won't own either the lock or a two-piecer.
Denis, I noted this post of yours earlier and forgot to ask you a question. The lock aversion I understand. However, can you please elaborate on your refusal to own a two piece barreled gun? From what I've read a two piece barrel offers good accuracy and durability, so I'm just curious what it is exactly that makes you refuse to own one.

I have an undefinable aversion to the two piece barrel on the model 69, but have no real justification for that feeling. I just don't like the notion. Maybe it's just the way S&W executed it.
 

Honestly I'm not really enthused with the adjustable / neon green sights on this model. I'm not going to jump at it... wait and see what others come out. With those sights I could almost be talked into a 4.2" or 5" barrel, but then that would change the gun's mission.

3", fixed sights, blued, big ol' Hogue grips would be fine because I'm going to change them anyway. Fluted or not fluted, I'm not sure that I care.

Maybe someone will make some practice ammo available at a decent price...
 
I'm sixth on a list at my favorite LGS.
I wonder if the value of my 696 ND will decrease?
 
I wonder if the value of my 696 ND will decrease?

Perhaps in the considered opinion of those who are not S&W aficionados... but! if you're a Smith & Wesson devotee, then, no; it will not. For example, I think the Model 696 to be one of the sweetest-proportioned guns they've ever made. What makes it even more desirable is the chambering. One either "gets" the .44 Special cartridge or one doesn't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top