<*(((><
Member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2013
- Messages
- 2,747
Luck is a cruel mistress.
Very much so, but my gunsmith says he'll slick it up and lighten the trigger for $60-80
Luck is a cruel mistress.
I had to do the same on a SP101 in 22lr. The chambers were rough enough that ejecting the spent cases was really difficult, and my hand would be sore after three or four cylinders.My last Ruger revolver (Single Six) had rough chambers from the factory and ammo wouldn't seat properly after the chambers got fouled. It only took a few cylinders worth of firing to make ammo hard to seat. I polished them myself with a cleaning rod tip chucked in a electric drill and used a cleaning patch with polish on it to polish out the tooling marks.
I would probably hand polish that entire gun several times with Mothers until it had a nice shine to it. I've done it on several revolvers and I prefer it over a brushed finish. Just my preference though.
Hand polishing guns is my version of knitting in front of the TV.
That's the nice thing about stainless guns, no finish to worry about replacing. Polish away.That's what I would do.
@DS-10-SPEED
I've never taken the firing pin out of a revolver, how hard is it? I like the picture you posted of the before and after of the cartridges, it seems like this would be a great improvement to do to mine. I'm assuming you don't change the overall length (no filing perpendicular to the pin), just chamfered/radiused the edges?
Most rimfire revolvers have countersunk chambers but some, like the USFA 12/22, do not. I think this is a moot point with modern ammo.On another thread I posted a blow out with hypervelocity ammo in a 22 revolver. One post noted that early 22 revolvers had rebated cylinders because blow outs in 22 rim fires were common back in the day. Interesting to see that this Ruger has that rebated cylinder also. Another gun for the wish list.
That right there would have been a deal breaker. There is no way there should be firing pin marks on the inside edge of the chamber. The firing pin retainer should prevent that from happening, if it continues you may have trouble seating rounds in those charge holes. Back to Ruger it Goes...It came with a few firing pin marks on a couple of the cylinders
That right there would have been a deal breaker. There is no way there should be firing pin marks on the inside edge of the chamber. The firing pin retainer should prevent that from happening, if it continues you may have trouble seating rounds in those charge holes. Back to Ruger it Goes...
I very well may be wrong, but I thought I read on a forum somewhere, that you shouldn't dry fire rim fire 22 revolvers without snap caps which are unnecessary for center fire GPs. What you're seeing is what they were warning about.So your saying the gp100 .22 should be safe to dry fire without contacting the edges of the cylinder?
If so then yes mine needs to head back to Ruger
Ditto on the Ruger fit and finish but most issues are pretty easy to correct yourself and once you put the personal touches to you'll likely be very happy with it. I bought a new model 1740 5" GP-100 stainless which had some of the same issues as yours. The rear sight pin kept backing out, the cylinder had machine marks from when the lock notches were cut in and right side of trigger guard was rough and sharp like yours. The trigger assembly where it meets the frame had a couple shallow chips that looked worse then they were and came out with light sanding. The hammer pivot pin sat raised above the frame because of a burr left on frame from when they drilled the hole. The extractor action wasn't smooth until it spit out a burr during a cleaning. Add hammer and hammer dog shims and a set of Altamont inserts and I've got a gun that I really like and enjoy.The fit & finish issues are to be expected with a Ruger. It's always been that way.
The only Ruger I ever had to send back to the mothership was a New Bearcat that peened every chamber right out of the box. They replaced it, rather than fixing it. That said, I also subscribe to the idea that rimfires should never be dry fired without snap caps or drywall anchors.
Agree completely. It shouldn't be happening. Some rimfires are safe to dry fire without snapcaps (dummy rounds or spent cases) and some aren't. I don't really dry fire any of my guns anymore without snap caps.I do not dryfire my rimfire revolvers without snap caps, or any rimfire rifle I own.
I own S&W K22, and model 34 revolvers that are over 50 years old and owned by who knows who before I bought them, none of them have firing pin dents in the cylinder.
My SIngle six has fired thousands of rounds since I bought it used in 1985 it has no dents.
If I saw this on a rimfire I would not buy it as it has clearly been abused. For a new gun to come this way is unacceptable.
Back to Ruger...
I would read @460Shooter post above. When researching the sp101 and GP100 .22’s there were lots of people complaining about the trigger on the sp101. And it makes sense like he said that the GP100 with the larger hammer can handle a lighter pull weight as it has more mass/momentum to hit the firing pin with.
30 lbs? Yikes. I don't even understand how that could leave the factory. My 357 mag SP101 has a light SA pull, and acceptable DA pull. I don't have a gauge, but I'd estimate it in the 8-9 lb range.An elderly relative has an SP-101 in .38 Special and was having trouble with the DA trigger weight as well as cocking it for SA shots. Took it to a gunsmith a bit north of me and he was startled that the DA pull was 30 lbs. !! He said he couldn't do the alterations due to liability but he did talk me through it. We took the trigger spring out of the handle CAREFULLY and cut off a little piece. After reassembly, the weight was down to 11 lbs. so we took off a bit more. We finally got the DA trigger pull down to ~5 lbs. which allowed said relative to use either method. If I live long enough to inherit this gun, I'll probably have to replace that spring for my own use. Oh well.