GP100 Internal Rust

Status
Not open for further replies.
UAV Dan said:
Also, are there any magic oils or something that would help prevent this rust accumulation in humid, wet environments?
Click to expand...

Sounds like you have the pistol you may need already and a righteous cleaning and application of RIG is in order.

Remember, once this cancer has taken hold the only successful way to deal with it is to starve it or remove it.

Unfortunately, being *stainless*, electrolysis is contra-indicated.

Me, I'd revel in having one of the finest rough duty pistols made and in a fine alloy already so, I'd strip it, clean the bejeepers outa it and use an ultrasonic with heat. Then upon reassembly, paint the innards with a thin but consistent layer of RIG.

Todd.
 
I would definitely give Hornady One Shot a try on the inner workings of your revolver, regardless of manufacture.

By the way @UAV Dan
Thank you for posting this. It’s a good reminder that “stainless” doesn’t necessarily mean “impervious”, regardless of the gun or manufacturer. :thumbup:
 
Abusing a Smith is certainly gonna get you the same results but breaking a Ruger down to thoroughly clean it after the abuse is way easier. I own a 686 and. GP100. The 686 is different than the GP but not better. Truth is, I’d keep the Ruger over my 686.

as for no department choosing Ruger, that’s a stupid point. Government bids have little to do with quality. The NYPD trusted thousands of cops to carry a Ruger revolver. So did the border patrol and post office police.

Selling a Ruger at a loss to spend $700 on a Smith then more to hard chrome seems like a waste to me. Whole thing could have been avoided with some maintenance. If you preferred the smith to the Ruger why didn’t you buy the Smith to begin with?
 
Most of my many revolvers were made by Smith & Wesson and I prefer them to most others most of the time for my own needs and wants. But some in this thread have made the most apropos argument for using a Ruger revolver in situations where the internals of the gun is apt to get wet-the Ruger is far easier to access the internal works of the gun for cleaning, lubricating and protecting the parts, whether the gun is "stainless" or not. For this reason alone, I'd opt for a Ruger if I knew my revolver would be getting wet on a frequent basis.
 
San diego .PD , Baltimore,PD , Wisconsin State Police,and NYPD all used Ruger pistols.at one time or another. and The Mini 14 rifle has been used by hundreds of Prisons, as well. San diego and san bernadino? still use them instead of AR15's as does the French National Police. I would never say that Ruger is anything less of a weapon that what a police dept uses. They buy what is cheapest weapon they can buy in bulk. I guess Ruger doesnt care to sell for less. They do plenty of business w/o needing to sell to police imo
 
I'm surprised nobody mentioned Ballistol. Great product that's been around over a hundred years and will still protect when mixed with water. Not to mention the heavenly aroma! Something akin to the smell of a wet dog, smelly socks, and licorice, all rolled up in one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ozo
a little tub of mineral spirits to soak in for about 30 minutes. then an aerosol type spray like gun scrubber, then oil as prescribed.
 
UAV Dan said:
My question wasn't should I keep the GP100, it was what steps can I take to prevent having this happen again.
Click to expand...
And the consensus answer is: standard maintenance, on the GP100.

I've rebuilt several S&W revolvers. They're works of ingenuity, and I love the feel of the action. That said, they're less robust than Ruger's Stupid-Simple action, and will be noticable less tolerant of contaminants.

Do as you will, but you should probably hold the GP100 until you put the S&W though the wringer and see how it does.
 
I'm a revolver fan and have multiple examples of them but, as much as I hate to say it, you are better off with a plastic fantastic semi-auto than repeatedly disassembling a revolver to clean out the water on a regular basis regardless of make.

If you get a popular make such as Glock or S&W M&P, replacement parts are easy to obtain and cheap if damaged. Working on a Glock or Smith M&P (dunno about the new line of Sigs) is easy peasy and field disassembly is a snap. With open interiors, you can basically hose the remaining working parts down if need be.

If you do have to detail strip a revolver, you need a good mechanical sense and tools to do it right and sometimes you have to fit replacement parts to that individual revolver with some parts are not readily sold by the mfgs due to mischief by buyers such as cylinders and the like. Field stripping the GP100 is about the easiest of revolvers but it is a PITA if you have to detail strip one and special tools make it a lot easier.

You can do the same with a Glock or similar design with basically a Glock specific pin punch (available multiple places) and some sort of hammer.

In former days, you would suffer quite a bit on reliability and/or accuracy but most modern design semi-autos now have rough equivalence in accuracy and superior durability in rough use, much as it pains me to say.

Now, flame away, I know that I am expressing a heresy on a revolver thread.
 
boom boom said:
I hate to say it, you are better off with a plastic fantastic semi-auto than repeatedly disassembling a revolver to clean out the water on a regular basis regardless of make.
Click to expand...
Agree, depending in the area. If a powerful handgun is required , tactical Tupperware will fall short. 10mm would be close as you'll get.but ease of maintaining a modern polymer gun of course is far better than any revolver.

boom boom said:
much as it pains me to say.
Click to expand...
Pains me too, but progress is good.

The magnum revolver isn't going anywhere for outdoorsmen. When a semi auto can put down 44 mag performance in a factory gun with saami spec ammo reliably (lookin at you, 460 rowland) and not be 5# (desert eagle) or beat the shooter up and batter the gun to scrap. I have no delusion about cartridge performance but the magnums still leave all those bottom feeders in the dust. If I'll be carrying only one gun I use a 5" super redhawk, gives me confidence against any kind of critter, no legs, two legs, four legs or whatever.if you're like me, live and play in the Midwest , a 9mm or 45 acp is enough. If you go off grid with no help for miles, I always choose a big magnum. I think with OPs situation and expectations a g20 would be the best choice, unless a revolver is just more comfortable or easier for them to shoot well.
 
boom boom said:
I'm a revolver fan and have multiple examples of them but, as much as I hate to say it, you are better off with a plastic fantastic semi-auto than repeatedly disassembling a revolver to clean out the water on a regular basis regardless of make.

If you get a popular make such as Glock or S&W M&P, replacement parts are easy to obtain and cheap if damaged. Working on a Glock or Smith M&P (dunno about the new line of Sigs) is easy peasy and field disassembly is a snap. With open interiors, you can basically hose the remaining working parts down if need be.

If you do have to detail strip a revolver, you need a good mechanical sense and tools to do it right and sometimes you have to fit replacement parts to that individual revolver with some parts are not readily sold by the mfgs due to mischief by buyers such as cylinders and the like. Field stripping the GP100 is about the easiest of revolvers but it is a PITA if you have to detail strip one and special tools make it a lot easier.

You can do the same with a Glock or similar design with basically a Glock specific pin punch (available multiple places) and some sort of hammer.

In former days, you would suffer quite a bit on reliability and/or accuracy but most modern design semi-autos now have rough equivalence in accuracy and superior durability in rough use, much as it pains me to say.

Now, flame away, I know that I am expressing a heresy on a revolver thread.
Click to expand...

I agree. I also love my revolvers but I'm in the market for an auto for a beat around/edc mainly because I end up covered in dirt and sweat more often than not and i'd prefer something that field strips quicker so I can spend more time doing something besides cleaning my gun.
 
boom boom said:
I'm a revolver fan and have multiple examples of them but, as much as I hate to say it, you are better off with a plastic fantastic semi-auto than repeatedly disassembling a revolver to clean out the water on a regular basis regardless of make.
Click to expand...

I'm also in agreement with this bit of heresy in the revolver forum. But if anyone insists on regularly carrying a revolver in inclement environs, a s/s Ruger Blackhawk single-action might be a good choice. It's a pretty simple, timeworn design that is relatively simple to field-strip for cleaning, lubrication and protective duties.
 
UAV Dan said:
Also, are there any magic oils or something that would help prevent this rust accumulation in humid, wet environments?
Click to expand...
Check out the testing done with SBGO silverbulletgunoil.net
Midnite Rider (owner) is an old friend, but he did testing in salt water - submerged steel. Give it a look.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

WrongHanded
  • Locked
Stiff cylinder on GP100
Replies
17
Views
2K
JohnhenrySTL
JohnhenrySTL
G
  • Locked
642 rusting already-anyone else?
Replies
24
Views
1K
sgt127
sgt127
G
  • Locked
642 rusting already-anyone else?
Replies
11
Views
682
sixgunner455
S
MarsocDad45ACP
  • Locked
GP100 Material
2 3
Replies
56
Views
3K
JohnKSa
JohnKSa
C
  • Locked
340pd/386pd best revolver for water?
Replies
4
Views
883
Jim March
J
Back
Top