New Ruger Super GP100 Competition Revolver 8-shot 357 5.5"

[JonInWA]

ISPSA, ICORE, Steel Challenge. Anything the Smith 929 or 627 now dominate.

I can’t see it making much of a dent in S&Ws share of that market. The price point is looks to be the same. It’s still got the same Ruger action, which is longer, slower trigger reset, and you just can’t do as much with it.

Where I think it could really challenge Smith is if it can chamber six big bore rounds up to.45 caliber, then there’s a good alternative to the N-frame that’s not as clunky as the Redhawk line.

For that purpose, they’d have to loose the vents and that hideous cylinder before I’d be interested.

Thanks for the insights-I agree on all counts. A .45 Colt/.45 ACP GP100/Super GP100 as needed) would be of interest, particularly in a 4.2" barrel ( with the .2 for our Canadian friends), and without the silly-looking vent cuts. It would intrinsically be more amenable to tuning to the .45 Colt/.45 ACP Redhawk that's currently available.

Best, Jon

[willie]

For this revolver to perform with excellent accuracy, two variables must be controlled. One is the relationship between the diameter of the chamber throats in the cylinder and the barrel's forcing cone. Further there should be little variation among chambers. The second variable is whether or not the barrel's rear bore section has a reduced inside diameter caused by torque when barrel is crush fitted into frame. Ruger engineers have always known these requirements but have tended to ignore them. Many here are also aware. I write this to remind all that this so called new offering will not be super duper in any respect unless these issues are addressed. Actually I would happily pay an extra $200 for most Ruger revolvers if they paid attention to these details to begin with.

[JonInWA]

For this revolver to perform with excellent accuracy, two variables must be controlled. One is the relationship between the diameter of the chamber throats in the cylinder and the barrel's forcing cone. Further there should be little variation among chambers. The second variable is whether or not the barrel's rear bore section has a reduced inside diameter caused by torque when barrel is crush fitted into frame. Ruger engineers have always known these requirements but have tended to ignore them. Many here are also aware. I write this to remind all that this so called new offering will not be super duper in any respect unless these issues are addressed. Actually I would happily pay an extra $200 for most Ruger revolvers if they paid attention to these details to begin with.

My personal sample size of multiple Ruger revolvers owned since 1989 or so have all been exceptionally accurate. Gunwriter Wiley Clapp has specifically noted, and commented on this regarding GP100s in particular in multiple articles and blogs through the years.

My gunsmith did replace a Ruger GP100 barrel under Ruger warranty on my behalf in the late 1990's, for another factory-fitted GP100 barrel.

I agree that Ruger triggers can use some tuning and interior cleaning-up (other than perhaps the Match Champions, or perhaps the Match Champions need it to a lesser degree), but the gun's inherent accuracy tends to be superb out of the box.

Best, Jon

[willie]

The issues I cited tend to be more problematic with lead bullets. Properly set up, most Rugers could shoot within three inches at 50 yards when ammo is selected. However, many of their revolvers have the variation that I described. In all fairness, so do other brands. They will fix problems, but often these must be pointed out to them. Today I read handgun tests conducted at 7 and 15 yards. I read some comments where shooters write that they see no point in practicing at such long distances as 25 yards. I was never a so called combat shooter but up until I was 60 years old I could fire rapidly with a 2 inch .38 J frame and continuously keep all shots within a 4.5 inch circle at 25 yards. Load was 5 of Unique and Lyman's 150 gr swc cast from straight wheel weights. When people practice the same tricks over and over, they learn them. I digress to explain that accuracy criteria varies from person to person. We have to be able to know the difference or to be able to tell the difference. I'm here to exclaim that Ruger, Colt, and S&W have the capability to turn out super accurate revolvers but will say that much variation exists.

[JonInWA]

Good points Willie. One issue that I have seen on a couple of my Ruger revolvers is that the barrel on two of mine was not correctly aligned with the receiver when torqued on, and were somewhat canted to one side. The sights on both were within the range of corrected adjustability, and the revolvers were quite accurate, but still.. Both were expeditiously corrected by Ruger, but there should have been a QC check that would have caught things before they went out the door.

Best, Jon

[jetfire]

Hardly. A well tuned 686 smokes it in SSR and the 4" 625 rules ESR.

SSR and ESR don't exist anymore, it's all just one big revolver division. Now it's been a while since I shot revo in IDPA, but last time I did I finished 2nd in SSR with a GP100. Lot of well tuned 686s that got smoked by my gun.

Well, it certainly isn't legal for IDPA on the basis of barrel length. What competitions is it aimed at?

Best, Jon

This gun is 100% for ICORE and primarily USPSA competition. USPSA started allowing 8-shot moonclip guns to compete in revolver so long as they score minor PF, which is cake to make with a .38 Special. It also effectively killed the 625 for USPSA, since using an 8-shot gun meant no more standing reloads, which you have to do with a 6 shot Major PF gun.

The big advantage to Ruger over S&W in general is that it's easier to get a decent trigger in a Ruger than an S&W, a layman can do it with two spring changes. Now, that being said you can get a better trigger in a well tuned S&W, but that requires an actual professional gunsmith. With a Ruger you can just go to Wilson Combat, buy some springs, drop 'em in, and have 1) reliable ignition and 2) an 9lb DA pull.

[JonInWA]

SSR and ESR don't exist anymore, it's all just one big revolver division. Now it's been a while since I shot revo in IDPA, but last time I did I finished 2nd in SSR with a GP100. Lot of well tuned 686s that got smoked by my gun.




This gun is 100% for ICORE and primarily USPSA competition. USPSA started allowing 8-shot moonclip guns to compete in revolver so long as they score minor PF, which is cake to make with a .38 Special. It also effectively killed the 625 for USPSA, since using an 8-shot gun meant no more standing reloads, which you have to do with a 6 shot Major PF gun.

The big advantage to Ruger over S&W in general is that it's easier to get a decent trigger in a Ruger than an S&W, a layman can do it with two spring changes. Now, that being said you can get a better trigger in a well tuned S&W, but that requires an actual professional gunsmith. With a Ruger you can just go to Wilson Combat, buy some springs, drop 'em in, and have 1) reliable ignition and 2) an 9lb DA pull.

I agree, Caleb. And if your GP100 has been professionally cleaned up internally and gunsmithed, the effect of the lighter springs is magnified.

With Remington/UMC primers, I found that I needed to go to a least 11 lbs to get 100% reliable ignition, but the 9lb one should work with Federal (or similar) primers. The 11 lb also works 100% with Sellier & Bellot primers, which are some of the tougher ones out there. For a carry/defensive/competition Ruger, I'd suggest starting with 12 lbs as a default, and then see if the lighter weight mainsprings will provide 100% ignition.

To use the lighter Wolff trigger return spring (I think it's 8 lbs) you really need to have things cleaned up internally; otherwise I'd suggest going with the stronger of the 2 lighter than OEM strength TRS Wolff offers.

Best, Jon

[JonInWA]

And while Caleb is right about IDPA consolidating revolvers into one division, when you read the fine print, there's a higher power factor floor for Enhanced Revolvers. and there are more modifications permitted. So, realistically speaking, there's still arguably two distinctions between Stock Service Revolver and Enhanced Service Revolver.

At the end of the day, however, there are so few people shooting revolvers in the IDPA matches (in my neck of the woods, anyhow), that the distinctions are relatively meaningless in the general scope of match participants. Most will still likely be slower with a revo than a semi-auto, due to reloading times.

Best, Jon

[jetfire]

I agree, Caleb. And if your GP100 has been professionally cleaned up internally and gunsmithed, the effect of the lighter springs is magnified.

With Remington/UMC primers, I found that I needed to go to a least 11 lbs to get 100% reliable ignition, but the 9lb one should work with Federal (or similar) primers. The 11 lb also works 100% with Sellier & Bellot primers, which are some of the tougher ones out there. For a carry/defensive/competition Ruger, I'd suggest starting with 12 lbs as a default, and then see if the lighter weight mainsprings will provide 100% ignition.

To use the lighter Wolff trigger return spring (I think it's 8 lbs) you really need to have things cleaned up internally; otherwise I'd suggest going with the stronger of the 2 lighter than OEM strength TRS Wolff offers.

Best, Jon

Oh yeah definitely, if you go with the lightest trigger return spring, you need some professional internal polishing to make the gun work reliably. I don't do that, and I use Federal ammunition exclusively in my competition guns to avoid any primer issues as well. There is nothing worse than being in the middle of a stage and getting a click, because then you have to go "CLICKCLICKCLICKCLICKCLICK" in hopes of getting that loud noise on the second try.

As far as IDPA goes, yeah they still have moonclip guns with a higher PF competing heads up against speedloader guns. I'm sort of on the fence as to which is preferable for IDPA as a game. On the one hand, moonclips are theoretically faster to reload with, but on the other hand, the speedloader 105 PF means I can use the mouse-fartiest of mousefart loads, which out of a GP100 is like shooting a 22.

[JonInWA]

Oh yeah definitely, if you go with the lightest trigger return spring, you need some professional internal polishing to make the gun work reliably. I don't do that, and I use Federal ammunition exclusively in my competition guns to avoid any primer issues as well. There is nothing worse than being in the middle of a stage and getting a click, because then you have to go "CLICKCLICKCLICKCLICKCLICK" in hopes of getting that loud noise on the second try.

As far as IDPA goes, yeah they still have moonclip guns with a higher PF competing heads up against speedloader guns. I'm sort of on the fence as to which is preferable for IDPA as a game. On the one hand, moonclips are theoretically faster to reload with, but on the other hand, the speedloader 105 PF means I can use the mouse-fartiest of mousefart loads, which out of a GP100 is like shooting a 22.

The revolver power factor floors are interesting, and I suspect are linked with what seems to be the tendency of ammunition manufacturers to go with lighter loads on their factory chamberings. Or the rulemakers might have just caved to the mousefart lobby ensconced in the revo-centric venues of the shooting sports arena...

I like shooting cartridges analogous to my carry loads when I compete. With my Security Six, my IDPA/practice cartridge is Remington/UMC's 125 gr .38 Special +P, which has a MV of 945, ME of 248, and a power factor of 118; my carry load for the Security Six is Remington's 125 gr +P Golden Saber, which clocks in at about the same, or with slightly more oomph-at any rate, I can zero for both, and shoot either without having to make sight adjustments.

With my GP100 (and Blackhawk), my practice and competition cartridge is Sellier & Bellot's 158 gr .357 magnim, with a MV of 1,263, a ME of 560, and a power factor of 200; for carry, I use Federal Hydra-Shok 158 gr with a MV of 1240, a ME of 539, and a power factor of 196, again allowing for single zeroing for both cartridges.

Interestingly, the Sellier & Bellot stuff is one of the few decently loaded "standard" .357 magnum cartridges. I initially found it when searching for a factory cartridge for a revolver match requiring (well, challenging participants) to shoot revolvers with a 200 PF load. In one of my hunting revolver books, there was a guy in New Mexico who used factory 158 gr S&B to take a 350 lb bear, so in my mind, it's pretty credible stuff.

For deer hunting with my 4.6" barrel .357/9mm stainless New Model Blackhawk, I use Hornady's 158 gr XTP .357 magnum, with a MV of 1250, a ME of 548, and a power factor of 198.

Best, Jon