Just saw on Jeff Quinn's Facebook page, the new Ruger GP100 in .44 Special. 5 shot cylinder and 3" barrel in the initial offering. Don't really know how to show the post, but I think the link to his picture is here:

https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.ne...fd52218675686834b8a0fc40&oe=58AE7A1E

Sonofabitch....

Well, I'll be having one of those.

I expect they'll be on back order for a bit

Sweeeeeet.

He said they are shipping to dealers next week. Don't know how many each dealer will get, but I imagine they will be moving off the shelves pretty swiftly.

Assuming no bullet weight restrictions (like some of the S&W L-frame 44spls), I will definitely be buying one of these.

Im realy likeing my old Charter Arms Bulldog 44, this thing looks Sweet!

Looks good.

Okay, I like the 44 Special concept.

Im hoping they see the gun being 41 Mag capable....

....6-shot .41 Special like the custom makers turnout was my hope...

But I am happy for you .44 Special guys...

Bob

Looks great.. Maybe I need one for Christmas!!

That is one of the most sensible revolvers to come along in a while, IMO.

This would be the better, and by far more interesting, revolver for Ruger to make.

Or 10mm/10 Mag, like the custom makers turn out. To me, the appeal of the Bulldog is its light weight, its compactness and the good-size chunk of lead it fires. Take away any of those qualities and it's just another belt gun.

But I am happy for the 44 Special guys too, RJM.

The latest rebirth of the Rossi 720, S&W 696, and Taurus 441/431. 'Hope that Ruger will sell enough of them so that they'll have a longer run than than the Rossis, S&Ws, and Taurus' did.

I've got to believe these will sell. I like my 696, and my 431's, blue and stainless. Like Sarge my Bulldog get's carried.

I would prefer a 4" barrel, but hey it's still pretty friggin' sweet!

45 Colt would be nice.

Love my 431 3", HATE my worthless bullpuppy, would love two of these, one 3" one with 5.5- 6.5" barrel.

This.^^^

4" barrel, Magnum capable (like the Smith 69), lose the overly large and ill shaped Hogue grip and dump the fiber optic front sight and it would be perfect.

Praise the effing Lord.





Dave

You know Smith has admitted those restrictions were stupid, right?

You can shoot whatever you want out of the L's.




Dave

I have two Taurus 441's but that will definitely be the third .44 SPL in the safe.

I gotta have this one. Would have preferred a fluted cylinder to help knock off a little weight, but I still want one. As has been said, a grip change and front sight change will almost make it perfect.

I will definitely be ordering one. I love the concept of a medium frame, five shot, .44 Special. What's the weight on it, I wonder.

PS I'd like to see one in a Speed Six configuration, i.e., fixed sights, but this one will do.

36 oz.

Yeah, I have four 44 specials but I'd have to add one of those before they stop the production run. I'd put the original GP100 grip on it....

Wow. That's no lightweight.

Seriously, no need for those overbuilt, super shock absorbing, rubber grips on a 36 ounce .44 Special. Even wood grips would be fine.

Dear Santa, I've been sorta good this year...

That's one nice looking Ruger! Yes, wood grips would make it better, so bring them too.

That's not so bad, in my opinion.

I'll bet the balance is real nice though, and it will be a real pleasant shooter with 240s in the 900-1000 fps range.

Isn't the S&W Mountain Gun around 39 oz?

i went into davidson's gun genie last night and they showed the gun.
but also said demand exceeded supply, so no linking to a local dealer.
may be a while before you see one for sale.

For 37 ounces I like the smith 69 better, better front sight as well

I wish they had that one on the market a few years back. I would have got that instead of the Taurus Tracker.

That's a good thing.




Dave

Its shame they can't squeeze it into a SP101, a 3-4" at 28 oz or so would make a fine woods gun.

I agree. Too light, and it wouldn't be much fun to shoot. A common theme with the CA Bulldog.

Several advantages of the Mountain Gun over a smaller-framed piece. I had both the L frame 69 and the Mountain Gun and decided the MG was superior. I sold the 69 to a cop who seemed to like it.

A lot of people hate the Governor, but it also fills nearly the same niche. The Governor is also pretty light. It's a bit bulky for concealment, but in cooler weather, it works. I haven't tried to conceal the MG that I recall.

Cool gun, but I'll pass so somebody more interested can get one. Elmer said he was in favor of anything that burned powder. I can't disagree.

Ordered.


Grab 'Em by the pussy.







Clark

How'd you order it?

I have absolutely no need in the world for this pistol. Where can I buy one?

That's the Spirit!!

Ok

I see a Redhawk 8 shot 357 mag in my future.

Sent a text to my FFL.




Clark

Well played Clark/Dave/Trav..........you've just helped make America great again.

Awaiting the range report. My post-election wish list is growing fast.

Got mine ordered last night, maybe it will be here for Christmas!

Grab 'em by the pussy.




Clark

I've had one since the summer and I really like it. It's a good platform for the .44 Special and it shoots well.

Yep, I told my LGS manager that I wanted the first one off the truck.

I second that remark. gonna haffta have one of them.

Can you post a picture? It'd be nice to see a couple of full side views.

What are the reasons for a dedicated 44spl over a 44mag?

It's a GP100, a midsized frame.

I had a GP100 357 with a 6" barrel back in the 90's, shot mostly 38spl out of it, is the 44spl GP100 a different frame?

No it's the same.




Travis

I don't recall your saying anything or showing pictures here. I thought we were friends????

Well aren't you a fancy pants!




Dave

Ah wtf I thought we were going to order them at the same time???

GP100 5-shot 44 Spl Review

Thanks Steve for the link was a good read!

Yep. Daddy Likee.

I wonder what prompted them to make it with a 3" barrel? It's not a concealed carry piece, or if it is there are tons better options. I know powerful stubby revolvers are a big fad now - the 2.5" Ruger Alaskan in .454 Casull and some other short barreled .44 Magnums out there - but a 4" barrel seems like a much more all around useful length.

I would think because the 431 is, and the 696 is, and the 396 is. I like it.

Yep, and I would consider it a perfectly appropriate concealed carry piece. Three inches in a medium frame revolver is about right for that, reminiscent of the FBI configured S&W Model 13.

They should have shot for the stars and gone 5".

But I'll be happy with three.

(That's what she said)




Travis

Hey Whit',

Safe to say we can hot rod the fugh out of these things? The GP is a tank.




Travis

Your hands may disagree. 900fps should be enough.

Here's a photo of mine -- more to follow (excuse the poor quality):

Agree on all Ethan. A 45 Colt MG is 3 ounces heavier and the Governor is 10 ounces lighter. The GP44 is only an ounce and a half lighter than a S&W Model 22-4 with a 4" barrel.

I agree totally. 5" is about perfect for this class of revolvers. It would make it legal to hunt with in states with barrel length restrictions.

None for me. I prefer 4-6 inch barrels for hunting revolvers. But I applaud Ruger for once again coming out with another new model.

Seeing that picture makes me wish for a 4" half lug barrel and a fluted cylinder. A 5" half lug would be fine also.

American Rifleman Review

The only DA revolver I have left is a stainless GP-100 6” .357 with the half lug barrel, they only made a few of those maybe 8-9 years ago. They made a run in blued finish as well but I don't know the particulars on those.

While the full lug has a nice muzzle heavy balance IMHO it isn’t needed for a .357 Magnum level of recoil, the half lug really brings the balance back into the hand and gives the revolver a much lighter and more responsive feel.

I agree that a 4" or 5” half lug would be the bee’s knees for a field use .44 Special. While obviously Ruger’s market research led them to this 3” full lug, I still can't figure out the thinking behind that.

Hmm, wonder what kind of pressures it could run as a 45 colt? Also curious if I could find a take off 454 barrel and have it fit.

No comments about POI/POA.

I hope they didn't fugk it up.




Dave

That cylinder can swallow a LC?

I was thinking ACP and clips.





Dave

Google fu shows 1.60" for the GP-100 cylinder. You'd have to stick with shorter bullet lengths, but it would work.

I guess it would be cheaper for me to get 44 sp dies, brass and bullet molds than convert to 45 colt. Cheaper still would be the 4" 45 colt redhawk.

Dear Ruger: This, in a six-shot 10mm. Hurry please.

That too, would be a wicked mofo.

I hear what some of you fookers are saying. Essentially, you want a Match Champion GP100 with a 5 shot 44 special cylinder.


Hmmmmm. Yeah, I could like that too.

How come it says 357 Magnum??? I think they may be able to figure this one out.

Exactomundo! Except don't cut the barrel flats which are an extraneous homage to someone's warped sense of aesthetics.

I don't mind the barrel flats but for goodness sake leave off the laser etched billboard announcement on the side.

I see Gunblast has their review up now.
http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-GP100-44.htm

This jumped out at me:

"The GP100 44 Special is built primarily of stainless steel, and wears a three-inch barrel with integral upper and lower ribs...I do expect other barrel lengths and options to be offered later."

I sure hope he's right.

RAGING HORNET!!!!!!

Another ass hole that doesn't discuss POA/POI!




Dave

Correction. He hits on it in the video.




Dave

Sweet, yea, you could definitely pump up the volume on those.

Sure, you could magnumize it. That's, of course, where the .44 Magnum came from, i.e., the Special was loaded to magnum levels in N-Frame .44 Specials, inspiring the new longer case to prevent such loads being chambered in less stout .44 Special revolvers. Likely this Ruger is stouter in construction than were those old N-Frames.

Yep, I've got to have one. With a proper holster, I can see this as being carried a lot. Thanks for the picture Whitworth1

I think that is close to my M624?

I like the concept and would never pass a chance to own another handgun but I'm having a hard time replacing the S&W 69 on my wish list with this. It will handle 44 SPCL and magnums, already has the 4.25 barrel, and a better front sight plus a better selection of after market grips. Maybe I'm missing something?

Well, I'm going to have to relunctantly agree. I initially thought it was going to maybe split the difference in portability between the 629 and a Bulldog while being a solidly built, high quality gun. But it's awfully close in weight to my 42 ounce, 4" 629.

Excuse me.

This is the Handgun Forum.

Not the Exercise Practical Decision Making Skills Forum.

Move along.





Dave

Do believe I'll have to snag one of these....when I can find one.

Might like a 4" but i dont mind the FL 3" and I LOVE unfluted cylinders...

And Smith is making a run of 2 3/4" Model 69's.

Interesting times.

I've been moving this direction, too, since my initial enthusiasm. I also originally thought it would be a difference splitter between the CA Bulldog .44 and the S&W 29. I already have a four inch 29, and I'm not sure I need a near functional duplicate that only takes Special.

and then there is the six shot 41magnum redhawk with a short barrel.
it's fun with a full load of powder and a 265grain bullet.
I pulled out the 696 the other day after reading this thread,
i still like that revolver no matter what anybody says.
however, reading on here about a short barrel 69 gets my attention.
I showed a guy yesterday a cast 130 grain 38special, next to it was a cast 265grain 41mag, also can be done in 41special.
they is a small bit of difference, i think he used the word, wampum, in it hitting something.

i also tried to find some loading info for a 310grain pill in 44special with no luck.

No reason not to have both. No reason to make it more complicated than necessary.

Lot's of short revolvers it seems. I heard an 8-shot 357 Redhawk, 2.75" is the pipeline too.



What are the odds that gunmakers were tooling up for a HRC win, and legislation against manufacture/sale of semiautos to civ's?

Makes as much sense as anything.

Okay, I'm asking this as a completely honest question and not looking to start an argument but what is the draw for snub nose super powerful revolvers?

From what I can see you get a huge amount of muzzle blast while taking away the whole reason for a magnum case, which is to be able to throw a nice chunk of lead faster than it's "special" or original counterpart. Yes, you still may get more velocity than a shorter case, but you're not going to get all that much, certainly not in proportion to the increased recoil and concussion.

In a .4x caliber the diameter is what does the work, speed mostly just gives you flatter trajectory. And flatter trajectory is only needed as ranges increase. In a super short barrel you take away speed and you take away sight radius for longer range accuracy, so regardless of whether a very good marksman might be able to make a 100 yard shot with one there are far better tools for that.

So I'm gong to assume one doesn't buy these specifically for long range shooting but rather for up close shooting. So again you're left with a lot of blast and recoil when the same diameter and weight bullet could be driven at a near enough speed from that barrel in a much less offensive manner.

In a decent holster a 4" barrel is no more problem to carry than a 2.5" or 3" and gives you increased sight radius and it does give just that much more velocity.

Anyway, I don't see the reasons for these little snub nose cannons like a Ruger Alaskan .454 Casull or a 2.5" .44 Magnum but that's because I don't see them. But I am always open to enlightenment, so could someone please tell me why these are so popular?

(P.S. when/if you answer, please don't start off with "you've obviously never..." which is really insulting. I'm stating up front that I have never.... whatever with a short barreled canon, which is why I'm asking.)

Since we're talking about a 44 special and not a magnum, we're not talking about a super powerful revolver. We're looking at ~250 gr of lead @ 900-1000 fps. You're not going to loose a lot of velocity with the 3" tube, and you're not going to have hellacious muzzle blast as I assume one would be using a medium burning rate powder.

I'm in the camp that would prefer a 4" barrel, but there is an appeal of a compact revolver that has enough power to get real work done. We're looking at just a little more oomph than a 45 acp, in a compact solid revolver and because it's not a fire belching magnum, it'll be shootable. Even with the short sight radius a competent shot shouldn't have trouble making a heart lung shot inside 50 yds, or head shooting a grouse a stones through away.

as many have already alluded too, there is no reasoning or logic when it comes to handguns, especially "hunting" or "backpacking" or "hiking" handguns.

You forgot "woods" and "truck" gun.

I think on the sum total of it you are completely right. I am i think of the big fat bullet at moderate speed crowd. The L shape 696 or my little ruger 2.75 will both throw a 200something pill at about 1000fps. So will the 3inch, 4inch, six inch, and 7inch something blackhawks i have in 41mag. The only real atvantage i can think of in the "mag" category is it can last a long time at the upper ranges of the non mag rated version of the same thing. I am still debating the utility of the 2.75 redhawk 41mag. It works, but it is nowhere as near sweet as the lew horton smith i have in the same caliber.
The reality of it is which is difficult to admit to, the 4inch 57, or the 4inch 58 works just about perfect anyway. I put a 696 44special smith next to a 58 41magnum out of curiousity, and they are not to me that much different in size, except six shots and if i want to, i can really up the velocity in the 58. The difference in .410 and .429 diameters is not really that important. I came in possession of a smith "classic" four inch model 29, i removed the factory stocks, put something on it i liked, and replaced the front sight with one of those red fiber optic's i think comes on the 329?
I have only fired a full house load a few times through it.
mostly, stuff around 1000fps. And i can do the same in a 44special, 41special, 45colt, and for that matter a 38wcf. And the same in a 10mm glock.
but sensibility doesn't have much to do with it.
I have had a few people over and asked them to try the fit in hand, trigger, and single/double action of a smith in these categories vs. the ruger. Smith every time. Being a rather ol fahrt these days, i also carried a k frame 19 four inch both in uniform, and concealed in the 70's, 80's, 90's, and so on till i got smitten with other things.
I never felt it was an issue. But i never fired much of the hipower stuff in the 19, i have a 28 for that in 357. But i have been messing with .41special in 170grain bullets for the little redhawk.
they seem a perfect mix. I could see wanting to do something like that with this 44special ruger.

Jimbo!

I have a number of .44 Specials but I can't tell you what they weigh exactly.

My Flattop is more smaller than a Super Blackhawk and with the steel grip frame it makes a wonderfully shooting big bore revolver. It's a 4 5/8" and sees a steady load of the 260gr Keith at 950-1000fps. Even kids shoot this thing with no problem. 250yds gongs are in trouble with this one.

Another I own is a 24-3 Lew Horton. This probably makes the least sense because it's in an N-frame. But at the same time it would never see magnums even if it could. The above mentioned load is horrid in the Lew Horton. Horrid. It sees a lot of 200gr. wadcutters at around 850fps. 250 gongs are more safer with this one, but not by much.

The other I own is the 396NG. A backpackers dream and a great CC gun. But 260's @ 1,000 fps will make your vagina hit the floor so hard you'll think somebody dropped an octopus on the linoleum. I load it with these anyway in bear country. It's downright wonderful with 180gr XTP's between 750-800fps.

I still shoot a lot of 260's around 1,100fps in my Model 4" 29-2. But sooner or later I'll stop doing that and just use Special brass/loads exclusively. 250yds gongs are fugked when I'm shooting this.

The GP100 isn't going to do much of anything different. But I do know I dig the .44 Special in short barrels. Not so much for weight reduction but just all around packing.

I know the weight of that GP should be ballpark for allowing me to shoot a lot without discomfort.

Or maybe it will just be a big POS. I'll let you know regardless.


Dave

typing at the same time i think, you said it better than i did.

Sorry, I should have been more specific.

While I would prefer a 4” barrel, I can sorta/maybe see a good reason for this 3” Ruger .44 Special. In fact I think a .44 Special in a mid-size revolver is probably one of the better field guns one could find, since most .44 Magnums are loaded to Special velocities most of the time anyway. My post was more referring to things like the 2.5” Model 69 loaded to full pressure or the 2.5” Ruger Alaskan in any of its full powered chamberings.

Yeah. You couldn't give me one of those.

But to each their own.

I do need a 4" .500 though. But that's only because I have a small dick.




Merry Christmas,
Clark

I still want a 480 Toklat, but looks like I'll need to Bobbit a full length 480.

Not sure who they consulted when naming the snubby super the Alaskan as I'd venture to say most Alaskan's would say it should have been named the DSMFer.

LMAO.

This guy.

Though I am a big fan of the 44 Special and own a number, I am lost on what this does over a tidier SP-101 357 Mag, which I was out shooting today? For CC the SP-101 wins, for romping the woods a proper six shot short barreled Blackhawk wins, assuming Ruger was a requirement.

this ought to make a few people lose sleep. I got an email from ruger this evening announcing the five shot 44special.
they also announced a .357magnum EIGHT SHOT with the 2.75inch barrel.
HEE Hee
Yeah they did.
and that's in the gp100

and edited to add i goofed, the .357 is in the redhawk. thats what happens when you got a nasty head cold sinus infection and its too late at night.

Isn't the 8 shot .357 in the Redhawk?

Yes, the Redhawk......bug hunk if steel.

It is definitely steel.

I'd like to see Hickok45 run it.

He most likely will. Stay tuned. They will likely send him one of the first that comes out.

Considering the first that came out were sent to writers several months ago, the "he will get one of the first" ships has passed.

Did I see there was a reason? I also didn't know that 2 makers coming out with short barreled, light'ish 44's complicates sheit.

Edge of my seat.




Dave

Are you fugkin' serious?

I'd rather have one of those.

GD I am SICK of winning.




Dave

I wish my 500 Smith was a four or five inch instead of the eight

On Libsey's site. Just recently announced. I guess sometime in 2017


http://www.lipseys.com/itemdetail.aspx?itemno=SM10064

Do you have a hacksaw?

It has crossed my mind

Still a boat anchor

Powerful Boat Anchor

Maybe not so much after you shot it.

Plenty of powerful revolvers that aren't boat anchors.

You just wish you had his YouTube channel.

Whittaker has these in stock now for $629.

https://shop.whittakerguns.com/product/ss-24343

FYI -- click on the link. We're normally closed on Monday's, but I decided to open this Monday as a Customer Appreciation Day. Condensed hours...just 9-4.

Anyway, we're doing 5% off all new guns and a bunch of other stuff. Online shoppers get a jump on the discounts. We had to program the POS system before we left yesterday.

The discounts only run through Monday, so grab them while you can! Everything goes back to normal price Tuesday...

I think we have 5 of the 44 Specials. 15 more or so should be there Monday.

Oooohhh.... a YouTube "hero" who still didn't get one of the first of these Rugers. How friggin' "special".

SAS - Sent you a PM. I can't get your website to come up.

Let's help poor 'flave with a title. How about Kinkcock45 lol.

Merry Christmas

meanwhile, Whitworth1 got his last summer, LOL

Gunblast has put up a review/video of the pistol.

Probably won't happen, but I sure wish Ruger would do a GP-100 in 10mm with moon clips next. I'd buy one in a heart beat!

ch, why not just get a 41 mag.. ?? Just askin, I am not a 10mm or 41 fan..

Because I all ready have several revolvers in .41 mag. And I've only got two 10mm's

Oh, Lord.... Whitworth has had his for months and now GunBlast already has up a review?

But, the Internet legend Hickok was supposed to get one of the very first? Chriss said so....

This review from a normal consumer (not an industry pimp/writer) is kind of disappointing.

Poor accuracy, keyholing jacketed bullets...


https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/rugers-new-44spl-gp100-got-one.815453/

It wouldn't do that if it had a 4" barrel...

And it does look like there's not much 'meat' at the forcing cone and barrel threads.

If tightening the barrel caused some constriction, that could create problems too.

If that's part of the problem, maybe some firelapping would help....

I've not seen the barrel constriction at the frame on GP-100 .357's, or at worst it's minimal, but have seen it in a lot (most) of the .44 and .45 caliber Blackhawks and Super Blackhawks I've owned, plus one .357 Blackhawk. It usually involves about a .001" to .002" smaller diameter than the rest of the bore forward of the frame. Since this is their standard .357 magnum GP-100 barrel with a .430 hole in it I'd say a constriction is quite possible.

Ruger SA revolvers are what allowed me to get a fair amount of experience in firelapping...

Mine has shipped.



Dave

Thank you for the report. As a veteran firelapper, and longtime lover of SA Rugers, it's good to know that Ruger finally learned how to build a revolver w/o the barrel constriction.

This thread has fueled my preexisting itch for a GP100............the 6".

Schweeeet!

Read this out loud to yourself, Hint!

Looking forward to hearing your impressions.

Never weighed my 22-4 so thought I would. It weighs 2 ounces more (38 ounces) than the Ruger's advertised weight, so I'm guessing this will stay as my big bore, 'light' gun.

Still glad to see someone bring the 44 special back around.

Safariman traded me out of mine .. I got a winch, a bear hide, and 7mm mashburn that's shoots 120gr bullets at 6000 fps

Good speeds fer shure.





Dave

Yeah I can shoot a moose 3 miles out.. it has a leupold scope he got from the campfire to donate to a Vietnam vet but he decided to keep it and put it on the ol mashburn

i had a neighbor come by this morning, telling me a mutual friend had just got in one of these rugers at his LGS yesterday morning. I groaned and said why did you tell me that? Now i am having to go look? Kike i need one, but what does need have to do with it? Luckily my friend at the LGS at sold it yesterday afternoon, the same day it got in.
A M.D. actually bought it.
I am safe with loosing money out of my pocket for a while.
He did stick me with a box of .45colt 225 jacketed soft point at about half price.

Shame on you, sir.

Steelhead, makes me kick myself for selling a nickel Triple-Lock mfg in 1906.......smoother than a buttery action Python.

I always felt a GP-100 in 41 Mag, say a 4" would be a good wish list item........a 44 sp is close.

Got mine today, hit the range and put about 50 rounds through it.

Trigger is nothing to be proud of that's for GD sure. I may have to drop this New Year's resolution and do some gunsmithing.





The 260 gr. Keith doing about 950 fps hit POA @ the 25 and the 15 with the rear sight bottomed out. Will try some more loads tomorrow. I have some XTP's and 200gr. W/C's loaded up.




Travis

my friend that owns the gun store is pretty experienced on handguns, he used to run about 40k to 50k a year, actually took rob once or twice.

He made the same comments about the trigger. Other comment was they are built strong but they aren't a smith. He is a smith guy. but they about half the price of a 696 these days too.

I just stoned the innards and things are a bit smoother. Will order some Wolf springs tomorrow.

The weight and those grips handle that load very well. I don't think I'd want it much lighter.



Travis

My 5 1/2" 500 Linebaugh weighs near my 6 1/2 M629.

Looks like the GP100 could benefit from a taller front sight.

Normally I don't swear but... jiminy.

What did you run through it?

260gr.Keith and Power Pistol. I forget how much though. It could be running closer to 1,100fps.

I'll have to check.




Travis

Damn, that made me cry.

I'd like to hear your take on this Ruger vs. me waiting on the 2.75" s&w "sexty nine" . I've got the 4.25" 69 and dig it tremendously.

69 without question.





Dave

But I'm from the south ... did you factor that in ?

Oh.

Well in that case, stop fugkin' your cousin, learn to read, and then buy the 69.

WINNING!!





Dave

His cousin may be hot, and might be a distant (like fourth or fifth) cousin....

I dated my cousin in high school and she wouldn't put out , so I've filled the void with the 4" smith which I love and will likely follow up with the "almost 3 incher " as well I suppose . Still watching this ruger though just in case



Apologies for picture whoring an off topic piece

Git your hunk of schit Smith out of this thread. We're trying to make America great again.





Dave

200gr. W/C's had the same POI as the Keith's.

15yds. and I wasn't taking my time.





200gr. XTP's = same/same.

But yes, Ruger. If these three loads are hitting to the same POA, with the rear sight bottomed, you need a taller front sight.

I can't wait to find one of the new model S&W Model 69 with the 2.75" barrel in 44 mag! That will be THE Shiitt when you need a snub nose packing gun!!!

I just bought one of the new Ruger Redhawks in 45 colt / 45 acp with the 4" barrel. Love it!
Needs a little trigger work, but that's just the way it is when you buy any new RUGER.

Does it have the tall or short Ruger rear sight blade???????

Your 69 won't be anything to write home about either...

Trigger wise.


Dave

Couldn't tell you. I'm not a Ruger guy.



Dave

I've got one of the 4" Model 69 in .44 mag. It's plenty accurate with the right Handload using a 260 gr LBT WFN Cast Bullet with 10 grains of Unique. Most of the loads for mine are at .44 special velocities. I'll be using the same loads in the 2.75" version. Sort of like a + P .44 special.

If I want to shoot heavy loaded .44 mag hunting loads, I use my .44 RedHawk or Super BlackHawk.

Sure wish S&W would have done a 3" bbl instead of the 2.75" version.

I know modern Smiths are good guns I was just saying their triggers leave something to be desired.

As do Ruger's.




Dave

Gotcha. And I agree. BTW, it should be real easy to change the front sight on your new Ruger .44. And I bet if you call Ruger, they will send you one for free.

Advise folks to dry-fire their piece 10k times to "improve" the trigger pull and you are in like Flint.

According to my calculations, the rear sight blade on the new GP100 is the short edition. Comparing to the blade on RedHawks anyway. A real easy fix, but I do like how low and out of the way the stock variant is on mine. Since replacing the grips and doing a little trigger work, I can't find anything on the little .44 that I don't like.

Mine needs some faux ivory.




Dave

Will have t see how the Hogues fit my hand and feel but, damn, if those grips don't look about perfect. Compact or regular ones?

Which load are you shooting?

(That's what she said)

Twirl that sob on your finger first then shoot it Jesus.. then fire couple rounds off in the air

I see XS is making the Big Dot for the GP100 and Bowen is making the Rough Country.

This hubcap could be polished to a high sheen before year's end...




Dave

I think I have settled on the Keith #429421 250 gr. over 7.0 gr. of Unique with a CCI 300 primer. I may reduce it a bit more. I've got .44 Magnums if I want anything more powerful. I kind of like shooting .44 Special equivalents in this little gun.

Compact.

Hey Doug, who makes the GP compact grips since Lett's went out of business?
My last GP 100 4" was perfect with the compacts. This new 44 Special with those could make my S&W 329PD sweat as to who's the favorite packing pistol.

I ordered mine straight from Ruger.com. I don't know who is making them for Ruger now, but I think they just recently became available again, both the Compact as well as the standard size. They fit both the GP100 and the Super Redhawk. As far as your 329; they are sure nice to carry due to their light weight. But they are bigger than the GP100. I see this little gun as my constant carry piece except when I need deep concealment.

I gave you some of the best pistol shooting advice ever and you come back with this..

This is serious business.




Dave

Same here. I rarely use magnums.

In my pistols...




Dave

I have wanted a "portable but effective and efficent" handgun to carry when blood trailing deer, hunting hogs with dogs (short range), and general bumming around the woods. Is this .44 Special what I want?

Looks beautiful.



But I really slave performing R&D for you guys.



The GP kills stuff pretty dead.

Shots were everywhere from 3 to 30yds. I must say I made some fabulous shots this morning.

The 260gr. Keith really drives them into the earth. I love that bullet.

You da man! Nice haul. What's your method?

Walk, walk, walk. Grin...

3 miles in about two hours this morning. Snow was deep. Kinda hurt my vagina.





Dave

I've noticed on my GP100 44 and most of the ones I've seen there is a small gap between the front sight and the barrel. Apparently they are designed that way to be so consistent. Anyone have any idea why they are that way?

Jack,
Mine is fitted the same way. I just figure it is sloppy manufacturing or that Ruger used another company's sight that just didn't quite fit correctly. I intend to change it out when I can find what I want. Of course the standard GP100 sight won't work.......

Happiness is a tailgate full of rabbits and a new gun!

Good shooting Travis! Man I wish we had populations of rabbits like that around here. I love fried rabbit. This Ozark timber has great squirrel hunting and while squawks aren't terrible on the table they aren't as tasty as rabbit!

A correction here. Earlier on this thread, I stated that speedloaders for the S&W 696/396 would work on this GP 100. I shouldn't have relied on someone else. They do NOT work. I bought an HKS today and found that the spacing is not close to the same. Sorry if my incorrect answer on here caused anyone to buy one. They do not work.

I bet Quickstrips will work. They're my preference for field carry anyways.

I was kinda hesitant after reading your post. I'm glad I held off.

I've found that I really like pouches believe it or not when it comes to field guns. They kind that have two pockets. One for loaded rounds and one for brass.




Travis

Thanks.

They're thick as fugk here when you find the right spots. More like an infestation than good hunting.

They're a non-game animal here too.




Travis

That might be the only option. Since the gun has only been out for a couple of weeks, I doubt that the speedloader manufacturers will have one available any time soon. Could be wrong again though...........

No doubt!

I should add that shot was supported. I had my elbows on a table.





Dave

Voice over?

That camera died out there but I swear on my kids I went 3 for 3 on the 250yd gong.

Suffice to say, the GP ain't going anywhere.




Dave

Hell Dave, when you come over bear hunting just bring the 44 spcl.
You don't need no stinkin rifle!

I hope he takes the frigging thing elk hunting..

nothing serious on 24 hour

Got mine in today.

Think I want a little thicker grips (and these seem to hold high for me). I'm looking at the Ruger or Altamont--a thread from 2013 on the Ruger forum wasn't really upbeat on the Altamonts. Maybe they've improved?

Mine also has the gap under the front sight. Was gonna come on here and ask and see that it's already been mentioned. Might change that--kinda annoying.

Trigger isn't near my PC 686 (obviously), but not bad. Wolff springs on the way and will file and stone appropiate surfaces then...

My HKS speedloaders seem to work. Model CA44 stamped on back.

FWIW, here are a couple of pics of the GP in my two 686 holsters.

DeSantis 527



Galco silhouette hi ride. (SL104)

Anybody?

I don't see why not. Get a good bullet and you are good to go.

It's like those LIncoln commercials with Matthew McGonagay.




Dave

WTF do you not understand about BULLY FREE ZONES!





Clark

I'd get a Glock 19 or 17 myself.

The only reason I buy .44 Specials is because I love .44 Specials.




Dave

I don't know.

Things get pretty serious up on the Hunter's Campfire.




Dave

I never noticed until you had mentioned it.

Thanks, a-hole.




Dave

Mojo and Deflave, where did your dealers find the GP's?? I had mine checking and he said they were not available til spring..

Wyo,

Snagged mine from Whittakers. It was the last one left in their second batch (ordered it last Wed).

Haven't looked today but last week some showed up on Gunbroker, albeit, mostly priced high...

Hoping to get out and shoot mine today. Been giving it handjobs all night and this morning....

Thanks, I checked Whittakers, and they must be out.. Enjoy!!

250gr Keith SWC with Unique or 2400 should be what you need

Schit, I really don't know. I never bothered to ask.

I can ask him tomorrow though.



Dave

FAP! FAP! FAP!




clark

"portable but effective and efficent" - you really couldn't ask for a much better fit to your specifications than this .44.

Due to the high expansion ratio a .44 Special doesn't lose that much velocity going from a 6" or 4" to a 3" barrel and it still throws a heavy, wide chunk of lead. A 245 grain bullet at 900 fps - very doable in this revolver with any of several powders - makes a powerful thumper without blasting your ears or smacking your hand too hard.

2400 in the 14-16 grain range works but is not what I would recommend for a shorter barrel. FWIW, once you hit about 15 grains of 2400 the recoil gets a bit frisky, more so than folks who get .44 Specials are expecting.

Unique is classic but hard to find these days, but any medium to quick handgun powder works well in the .44 Special case. Ramshot's ZIP is a very good choice. TiteGroup or 231 would also be excellent choices and be very efficient in that barrel. You would also find those faster powders behind the heavier bullets - 245 gr. and up - help keep the muzzle blast down although that's a minor gain. I'm sure there are lots more powders that would do just as well but those are the only ones I've worked with so couldn't comment on the others.

Portable, effective, and efficient makes me think of a S&W Shield in 45 ACP...

Not the GP 100.




Dave

Try Universal if you can find it. 6.0 to 6.5 gr. with a 240 to 260 gr. bullet.

Mental note:

If I'm a bad guy, I don't want me shooting at me with the GP100.

Power Pistol for the win...




Dave

+1. I quit using Unique after trying Power Pistol.

I may have to go back and try some. I've just been stuck on Unique and Universal for several years and have plenty of both. If I remember correctly, the one time that I tried Power Pistol, I had a problem with granules sticking to the inside of my powder measure that were a pain to remove when switching powder. Anyone else had that problem or is it just me?

I have used most of the powders mentioned, power pistol is i think a good one for when you want something to really snort.
But a fellow on here sent me a sample of some 41magnum with titegroup and universal. They both meter well, clean and i ended up buying a 4lb jug of titegroup a few weeks ago.

Try wiping the inside with a dryer sheet.




Dave

Spring kit just put this revolver into the unsellable category.

Holster ordered. Tritiums in the future. Have to consult the consultable.




Clark

You're talking me into one of these. Last "compact" 44spl I owned was a S&W 624 3" and I sold it because the bore axis was just too darn high with the 3" barrel--gave a bit too much "whip" with Keith loads. The GP100 looks to not have that issue, and I've got several .357 GP100's that have absorbed a ridiculous number of hot H110/180gr LFNGC loads over the years with no apparent weakening.

You seem to know handguns and all I can tell you is Ruger got this one right.





Travis

It's a bummer that they didn't use the Redhawk/GP100 plunger interchangeable front sight mechanism; but understandable, given how much machining it takes and the cost it would add. I would like to see factory sight blades available. A taller Patridge blade would be just the thing for heavier bullet loads, or mild velocity 250gr loads.

All that is quibbling, though. What matters is Ruger is making them and making them right. The past five years have been great years for Ruger revolver enthusiasts.

I'll throw some tritiums on it sooner or later. I may order a Rough Country for the rear.




Dave

Just picked up 4 lbs of Power Pistol.

Clark better be right.....


Any of you guys shoot heavies yet (250+)?

Wondering if it's gonna need a taller front sight...

Put a set of compact grips on mine (lastrounds pics convinced me), polished the in arcs to a mirror finish (helped noticeably) and have Wilson Combat springs on the way.

Truly an über gun....

I wish they had threaded the muzzle for a can......

Then they could use them in movies.

Which holster did you order?

Yes, you piss drunk cock. I've been slinging the 260gr. Keith on top of 8.5gr's of Power Pistol.

You have to bottom out the rear sight. Yes, they should have gone with a taller front.



Dave

The Safariland 569.

I'm going to clip it to a duty belt. I'll never carry this as a CC gun. I'm hoping the clip allows me to snap it onto a hip belt too. We'll see.






Travis

I've used that belt clip with a nylon duty belt and it'll work fine there. If you use it on a typical trouser belt, expect a little movement unless you take measures to snug the fit.

Hey,
No bullying, dammit!

Figured I'd might as well order Bowen's tall sight.

Yeah, it's going on a duty belt.

I'm surprised more people don't use true gun belts for sidearms when fugking off in the woods.



Dave

Last time I ordered some sights from him I called and asked some questions about height and he was extremely helpful.

Dude knows his schit.




Dave

I just got off the phone with Ruger customer service about the gap under the front sight. The gap under mine is .019 and is one of the first things I noticed on an otherwise outstanding revolver. They said I was the first that had mentioned it and it was engineered that way. I explained to him about the way a dovetail should fit and does on every other gun on the market so he went and checked. I just don't think they had noticed. No need at all for a .019 gap under a dovetail sight and shows a lack of attention to detail. I think they will deal with it if they hear from us about it. The service rep was very nice and positive about constructive criticism. I did thank him for the long awaited production of this option in a GP100.