Ruger Announces New GP100 in 22 Long Rifle

Status
Not open for further replies.
One thing I'd like to know is why did they seem to get rid of the standard GP100 adjustable sights?

The plunger-locked interchangeable front sight was such a good idea and has a large aftermarket support... the one on this new .22 version looks dovetailed.

Why Ruger, why? :confused:
 
They stopped producing them years ago due to low sales and I doubt they'll make a comeback.
Click to expand...
And you know this because you're privy to inside discussions at Ruger? Or are you just guessing.

Problem with the .327 GP was that it was a 4" barrel, instead of a more sporting 6".


If anyone can get me the cylinder array diameter
Click to expand...
It would have to be the same. Anything else would require a frame redesign.


The plunger-locked interchangeable front sight was such a good idea and has a large aftermarket support... the one on this new .22 version looks dovetailed.
Click to expand...
It does look like a standard dovetail. Did not notice that before. Not good for those of us who hate fiber optic sights.
 
I would buy one! I like GP's and a pretty much indestructible 10 shot .22 LR seems good to me. I actually prefer a bit of weight in my handguns so this looks like a winner.
 
CraigC said:
And you know this because you're privy to inside discussions at Ruger? Or are you just guessing.

Problem with the .327 GP was that it was a 4" barrel, instead of a more sporting 6".
Click to expand...
I'm speculating and yeah, a 6" .327 GP100 would tickle my fancy.
 
The plunger-locked interchangeable front sight was such a good idea and has a large aftermarket support... the one on this new .22 version looks dovetailed.
Click to expand...

QLghzJ7.png

Yep. Not sure why Ruger went with the dovetail instead of the plunger. The product video on Youtube mentioned using a smaller diameter barrel. Maybe the plunger system couldn't be used?
 
Last edited:
Looks good. Hopefully it will do well enough for Ruger to encourage them to make it available in other barrel lengths. Now if they would just make a 4" 10mm match champion.
 
CraigC said:
I love it when anonymous internet critics think they know better how to run a company than those who actually do. You do realize that Ruger has turned a profit every year since 1949, has no debt and operates on cash? Geniuses indeed.
Click to expand...

I didn't say or imply I knew how to "run a company" better than them, I said they made a stupid,ideologically-driven decision, over decades, to keep the Mini-14 as non-assault-rifle as possible, and the reputation and popularity of it has suffered ever since. That isn't an opinion, it's a fact, one I've heard stated by other would-be fans more times than I can recall.
I believe ALL of my LGS's have stopped even carrying them. Had Bill Ruger, and those running the company after his death, tried to actually make the mini closer to what they attempted to market it as, a smaller version of the M1A, we'd likley have legions of people happily owning them instead of AR's,and we wouldn't constantly be listening folks claiming, "no really, guys,the new one's are lots better now".
Well, too little, too late.
Even an "anonymous internet critic" like me could've gotten THAT call right. :neener:
 
I like the Mini-14 because it is not your typical AR. It's all that I need. I would like Ruger to make an adapter that would allow you to use AR-15 type magazines with it.
 
I didn't say or imply I knew how to "run a company" better than them, I said they made a stupid,ideologically-driven decision, over decades, to keep the Mini-14 as non-assault-rifle as possible, and the reputation and popularity of it has suffered ever since. That isn't an opinion, it's a fact, one I've heard stated by other would-be fans more times than I can recall.
I believe ALL of my LGS's have stopped even carrying them. Had Bill Ruger, and those running the company after his death, tried to actually make the mini closer to what they attempted to market it as, a smaller version of the M1A, we'd likley have legions of people happily owning them instead of AR's,and we wouldn't constantly be listening folks claiming, "no really, guys,the new one's are lots better now".
Well, too little, too late.
Even an "anonymous internet critic" like me could've gotten THAT call right.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what you're saying.

This ain't about the Mini-14 and who really gives a damn anyway? Is every single rifle that comes to market supposed to be held to AR mags? Buy some Mini mags and stop whining about it in a revolver thread. :rolleyes:
 
With some mini-mags, this would make an excellent home defense gun for the elderly or woman who cannot handle the recoil of anything more. I would love to see Ruger bring this out in a railed model so it can accept an underbarrel flashlight and/or laser sight, and maybe an RDO (Red Dot Optic) while they're at it via a pic rail on the topstrap.
 
It is good to see that Ruger understands that their is still a market for shooters
who want a quality firearm, made out of metal. Now, they need to follow-up with
a Super Redhawk , 5 inch barrel, .357 magnum.


There is WAY too much polymer framed GARBAGE saturating the market.
LCP, LCR, SR9, M&P -- The list of polymer framed JUNK seems ENDLESS!

No matter how much "advertising sugar" the gun companies put on
the polymer framed trash that they sell, it will never be "chocolate pudding" !
 
weblance said:
Its official, and on the Ruger websight. New GP100 in 22 Long Rifle.

Model 1757

1757_zpsycs95mlq.jpg
Click to expand...

Oh, wonderful!! At 42 ounces, I'm sure Ruger could have added four or five more ounces to the bloody thing! I'm just astounded they can sell a boat anchor like this. Ever since Bill Ruger died, the company has made one blunder after another, in my opinion. What next, a GP-100 in .25ACP? Maybe a rail mount on top for a scope and perhaps a 7.5-inch ported, underlug barrel? Ruger's trying to adapt the GP-100 to every handgun round they can think of so they won't have to develop new tooling and a new gun that might actually make some sense.

It's a complete mystery to me how they do it. My sister bought an SP-101 8-shot a few months ago and she's regretted it ever since. Personally I think she needs a larger, heavier gun that takes two more rounds! But who am I? I think many people are buying guns more for popping targets at the range rather than any practical reason. If the company announced the production of an 11-shot Super-Redhawk that fired .22WMR, I wouldn't bat an eyelash.
 
Confederate said:
Oh, wonderful!! At 42 ounces, I'm sure Ruger could have added four or five more ounces to the bloody thing! I'm just astounded they can sell a boat anchor like this. Ever since Bill Ruger died, the company has made one blunder after another, in my opinion. What next, a GP-100 in .25ACP? Maybe a rail mount on top for a scope and perhaps a 7.5-inch ported, underlug barrel? Ruger's trying to adapt the GP-100 to every handgun round they can think of so they won't have to develop new tooling and a new gun that might actually make some sense.
Click to expand...
I don't believe that Ruger is trying to put as many different chamberings for the GP as they can. They've always made them in .357, but when they tried .38 and .327, it didn't do well and those offerings are out of production. If anything, non-.357 GP100's are a bad venture because they don't last.

Ruger making a .22 GP100 seems like they're just trying to grab a share of the large frame .22 revolver market. Ruger fanboys who want a big .22 revolver now have a choice between their fav company, S&W, or Taurus.

And obviously, since Bill Ruger died the company hasn't made many blunders when it comes to gun designs. The LCP, LC9, LCP, and Ruger American rifles are extremely popular and sell very well. In fact, some of the biggest blunders Ruger has made is dropping guns like the Police Carbine and the semi auto .44 from production.

Having said all that, I'm not interested in this behemoth of a revolver and it's not like there was a large amount of people asking Ruger to make a .22 LR GP100.
 
A reason for the 10 shot GP100

I'm sure this is one of the main reasons for the 10 shot Ruger revolver:

http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2014/04/nssf-takes-over-rimfire-challenge-program/

(Formally the Ruger Rimfire Challenge program)

Also steel challenge matches (SCSA) and other speed shooting matches are really popular in the US and also in other countries and many are adding revolver divisions for .22's.

My guess is that steel challenge shooters will be some of the biggest buyers of this new revolver. Until now the S&W 617 10 shot was really the only choice if you wanted a 10 shot to shoot in the revolver rimfire division.

I have two 10 shot S&W 617's that I use for steel, you can use 6, 8 or 9 shot revolvers also but then you don't have the advantage of having the maximum allowed number of rounds (and sometimes you wish you had 10). I had an SP101 8 shot but found the trigger too hard and the grip too small for me. If the trigger and grip feel right on this new GP100 10 shot, I will be adding one to my competition bag!:)

DSC03033s_zps7dkfimyc.jpg

dsc00022-1_zpsn1dm78nq.jpg

dsc00048_zps0i9avnv8.jpg
 
DS-10-SPEED said:
I'm sure this is one of the main reasons for the 10 shot Ruger revolver:

http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2014/04/nssf-takes-over-rimfire-challenge-program/

(Formally the Ruger Rimfire Challenge program)

Also steel challenge matches (SCSA) and other speed shooting matches are really popular in the US and also in other countries and many are adding revolver divisions for .22's.

My guess is that steel challenge shooters will be some of the biggest buyers of this new revolver. Until now the S&W 617 10 shot was really the only choice if you wanted a 10 shot to shoot in the revolver rimfire division.

I have two 10 shot S&W 617's that I use for steel, you can use 6, 8 or 9 shot revolvers also but then you don't have the advantage of having the maximum allowed number of rounds (and sometimes you wish you had 10). I had an SP101 8 shot but found the trigger too hard and the grip too small for me. If the trigger and grip feel right on this new GP100 10 shot, I will be adding one to my competition bag!:)

DSC03033s_zps7dkfimyc.jpg

dsc00022-1_zpsn1dm78nq.jpg

dsc00048_zps0i9avnv8.jpg
Click to expand...
Congratulations on those awards, I'm very impressed.
 
Oh, wonderful!! At 42 ounces, I'm sure Ruger could have added four or five more ounces to the bloody thing! I'm just astounded they can sell a boat anchor like this. Ever since Bill Ruger died, the company has made one blunder after another, in my opinion. What next, a GP-100 in .25ACP? Maybe a rail mount on top for a scope and perhaps a 7.5-inch ported, underlug barrel? Ruger's trying to adapt the GP-100 to every handgun round they can think of so they won't have to develop new tooling and a new gun that might actually make some sense.
Click to expand...
Do people ever engage their brain before posting? Bother reading the thread??? You do realize that S&W has been selling 44oz full lug 617's and 42oz slim barrel 17's since Methuselah was a baby, right?
 
There are all sorts of preferences, likes & dislikes.

I don't think many of us who merely say we'd like a lighter 4-inch barrel are calling Ruger idiots or trying to lynch the company.

We're just saying we'd like a lighter & shorter version of the new model. :)
Doesn't need to build up into a shooting war.
Denis
 
I like that Ruger has a new GP100 and wish them great success. For me the $800.00+ price is out of my range for a 22 but then I already have many 22's so the need is not great. Good Luck Ruger and keep new stuff coming.
 
DPris said:
There are all sorts of preferences, likes & dislikes.

I don't think many of us who merely say we'd like a lighter 4-inch barrel are calling Ruger idiots or trying to lynch the company.

We're just saying we'd like a lighter & shorter version of the new model. :)
Doesn't need to build up into a shooting war.
Denis
Click to expand...

Shooting war. I like that. :D

Seriously though if an SP101 in .22 LR is light enough, but the small frame geometry is bad for the trigger pull, what is the option in a revolver? I'd guess aluminum alloy and polymer in a large frame revolver.

That is where the LCRx type could come in to play, but it sure wouldn't suit the needs of those that want all steel. Plus, the LCRx isn't exactly large framed.

I gotta admit, I like light weight. But when I want a multi-generational high round count revolver, alloy isn't the answer for me. I have a low round count alloy snubby that the cylinder's steel center pin is carving a groove in the alloy recoil plate. It suits a different purpose though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C0untZer0
  • Locked
Can anyone explain the differences between the SP101 in 22LR and the GP100 in 22LR ?
Replies
8
Views
3K
clang
C
R
  • Locked
Ruger GP100 22 VS Smith 617
Replies
13
Views
12K
Zaydok Allen
Zaydok Allen
weblance
  • Locked
New Ruger GP100-22
2 3
Replies
54
Views
5K
DPris
D
I
  • Locked
New gp100 model
Replies
1
Views
398
MrBorland
MrBorland
H
  • Locked
Ruger GP100 vs SP101 trigger
Replies
14
Views
4K
theoldgringo
T
Back
Top