Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Ruger question

Discussion in 'Handguns: Revolvers' started by eastwood44mag, May 4, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. eastwood44mag

    eastwood44mag Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    1,027
    This may be an absolute novice question, but here goes anyways:

    Why is it that the Super Redhawk has no lug, while the GP-100 has a full lug (current production models)? I would think the larger calibers would need the extra strength more than the .357.

    Anyone know why they're the way they are?

    Thanks.
     
  2. szuppo

    szuppo Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    7
    I believe the full lug was incorporated into designs for the added weight benefits to reduce recoil and for aesthetic reasons.
    While I am sure it does add strength, it adds it where it is not necessarily needed.
     
  3. ugaarguy

    ugaarguy Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    12,078
    I believe it's a market generated thing. Do a search for Smythons. These were S&W K-frames (Mod 19 & 66 mostly) in 357 magnum which folks had gunsmiths fit Colt bbls to for the full underlug Colt look on a S&W gun. When S&W introduced the new L-frame 586/581/686/681 they featured the full underlug bbl. Ruger's first DA revolvers were the Speed/Service/Security Six which were very close to the K-frame in size, and also lacked full underlugs. The GP100 is an L-frame sized gun, and is the 686's chief competitor.

    S&W has recently introduced the 620, an L-frame 357 mag without full underlug - presumably to meet consumer demand for such revolvers. If they take off Ruger may follow suit and supply what the market demands. On the other hand it took them quite a while to introduce a reasonably slim semi-auto pistol, the P345. They've also yet to introduce a lightweight alloy frame revolver, which is one of the hottest revolver market segments, though they have both the equipment and expertise to do so.
     
  4. rkh

    rkh member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    Messages:
    438
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    The full underlug is primarily cosmetic. It doesn't strengthen the gun in any meaningful way, although you can't blame Ruger for churning out flimsy revolvers--the GP100 is one stout firearm.

    That said, its mass does dampen the recoil a bit and helps to reduce muzzle rise.

    If I could open carry I might prefer a lighter 357. As is, however, I think the GP100's heft, balance and controllability are its principal selling points.
     
  5. bakert

    bakert Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,668
    Just my on personal preference but I don't much care for full lugged barrels. All of my S&Ws are older K frame guns and the newer ones look funny and kinda blocky to me and all the full lug does is add weight but many people like them . Don't have a Ruger D/A revolver (yet) but I've been kinda looking for an older GP100 with the half lug at a decent price.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2007
  6. rem1187a

    rem1187a Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    96
    Location:
    Michigan
    As mentioned above the GP has it for looks and a little extra weight for to help recoil. As for why it is not on the Redhawk or Super Redhawk would be due to the weight a full lug would add to the 9 1/2" barrel or even the 7 1/2" barrel
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page