Diving Deeper into GP100 Shooting: The Journey Starts

[gato naranja]

I have been trying to recall what were the biggest problems I had with the GP-100s I had before I basically exited the revolver world. This is more or less in numerical order and does not include stuff so out of spec to begin with that required a trip back to the factory (like b/c gap issues). Despite potential pitfalls, I still would much prefer self-smithing a Ruger DA to trying to cure a S&W on my own. YMMV.

1. Pieces of debris in the guns was easily number one. I learned that I had to disassemble any new Ruger DA and clean them thoroughly, because there was ALWAYS at least one significant piece of metal somewhere, even when the gun seemed normal. Foreign object removal was what spurred me to get Iowegian's Book of Knowledge (IBOK) for the GP-100 and maybe save myself from making things worse. (I can always make things worse.) It was a great resource but is hard to find today.

2. The hole in the trigger guard assembly for the trigger link plunger/trigger guard latch spring/trigger guard latch was a multiple offender. Burrs and/or crap making the trigger action inconsistent. If there was a stage in the process of making a GP-100 where a cutter or bit went to die, this was the place. "Change my mind," as Crowder says.

3. Either the pawl or the ratchet having a burr. If it was the pawl, the problem was consistent; if the ratchet, different chambers were affected.

4. Transfer bar not freely sliding/pivoting.

5. Burr on the hammer or grit at the hammer/hammer strut interface. (Here I will mention that the self-inflicted issue of a hammer strut or mainspring seat flipped around can also be embarrassing).

6. Burr/machine mark on the cylinder latch where it would rub on the cylinder before lock-up. This is one that surprised me.

Time for a confession: I still consider DA revolver service to be sort of an art form compared to work on SA revolvers or (most) semiautomatics.

[SwampDweller]

I have been trying to recall what were the biggest problems I had with the GP-100s I had before I basically exited the revolver world. This is more or less in numerical order and does not include stuff so out of spec to begin with that required a trip back to the factory (like b/c gap issues). Despite potential pitfalls, I still would much prefer self-smithing a Ruger DA to trying to cure a S&W on my own. YMMV.

1. Pieces of debris in the guns was easily number one. I learned that I had to disassemble any new Ruger DA and clean them thoroughly, because there was ALWAYS at least one significant piece of metal somewhere, even when the gun seemed normal. Foreign object removal was what spurred me to get Iowegian's Book of Knowledge (IBOK) for the GP-100 and maybe save myself from making things worse. (I can always make things worse.) It was a great resource but is hard to find today.

2. The hole in the trigger guard assembly for the trigger link plunger/trigger guard latch spring/trigger guard latch was a multiple offender. Burrs and/or crap making the trigger action inconsistent. If there was a stage in the process of making a GP-100 where a cutter or bit went to die, this was the place. "Change my mind," as Crowder says.

3. Either the pawl or the ratchet having a burr. If it was the pawl, the problem was consistent; if the ratchet, different chambers were affected.

4. Transfer bar not freely sliding/pivoting.

5. Burr on the hammer or grit at the hammer/hammer strut interface. (Here I will mention that the self-inflicted issue of a hammer strut or mainspring seat flipped around can also be embarrassing).

6. Burr/machine mark on the cylinder latch where it would rub on the cylinder before lock-up. This is one that surprised me.

Time for a confession: I still consider DA revolver service to be sort of an art form compared to work on SA revolvers or (most) semiautomatics.

Well, my plan for my next revolver is to get a TK Custom worked-over GP100. They go through the gun and do an action job, and the owner has told me they do make sure everything is in spec while they do it. I'm hoping that's actually true and it will be good to go out of the box.

[358156hp]

My Redhawk .45 came with a burr on the hammer that was significant enough to drag on the frame, which contributed to light strikes in DA mode until I had a gunsmith fix it.

See what happens when I make an absolute statement? I must not be working on enough later production Rugers.

[Hambo]

I could be wrong, but I get the impression that QC was higher on revolvers back then since they were modern issue service handguns at the time with forged components.

You're wrong. Google "Bangor Punta Years". Colt had somewhat fragile lockwork and crappy fitting of 1911s. S&W had a variety of problems at different times. However, gun shops had gunsmiths, not parts changer/armorers. Even the small town I lived in had one with a lathe, a vertical mill, and enough skill to work on anything. Even in a small town, he had enough work to provide a living.

Another thing: no one expected perfection. They expected malfunctions in semiautos or work to be done on revolvers. The idea that your firearms will be perfect from day one is relatively new.

Because cars were mentioned, they were the same as guns. You knew you were going to get the ignition timing and carburetor tuned, and that you couldn't just turn the key on any car and have it fire up.

[gato naranja]

You're wrong. Google "Bangor Punta Years". Colt had somewhat fragile lockwork and crappy fitting of 1911s. S&W had a variety of problems at different times. However, gun shops had gunsmiths, not parts changer/armorers. Even the small town I lived in had one with a lathe, a vertical mill, and enough skill to work on anything. Even in a small town, he had enough work to provide a living.

1911s were indeed a staple of the area gunsmiths as far back as I can remember. The GI ones slumbered in drawers, while the newer ones were alternately being used and being fixed in a closed loop.

When I was a kid, it was a half-hour drive right to the door of the nearest sporting goods store that had a full-time gunsmith equipped with all the machine tools you describe. There weren't many real gunsmiths in the area because that part of Iowa was relatively sparse in population. The guy stayed very busy despite a reputation for being gruff, but I was a kid that didn't go in there pretending to know more than he did and we got along fine. Adult men annually bringing in their broken or limping guns two days before some season started would really get his goat, and then it was best to stay in the retail part of the store.

Anyway, it wasn't all obsolete or low-end stuff he was fixing, and there was always some relatively recent high end iron up there with a repair tag tied to it. In fact, one of the reasons people bought their "better" firearms at MSRP there - besides Iowa having fair-trade laws in those days - was the fact that they could get most problems "fixed" on-site without having to ship the gun to the factory. That was a consideration even in pre-'68 days.

From time to time there would be some guy helping him out in the shop with stuff like cleaning dirt and vegetable matter out of filthy long-recoil semiauto shotguns or replacing broken/bent/missing springs... springs of some sort probably being the most common bad actors in those days. Ruger handguns were the least likely to have a broken spring, about everything else having at least one spring somewhere that was susceptible to something-or-other.

[SwampDweller]

You're wrong. Google "Bangor Punta Years". Colt had somewhat fragile lockwork and crappy fitting of 1911s. S&W had a variety of problems at different times. However, gun shops had gunsmiths, not parts changer/armorers. Even the small town I lived in had one with a lathe, a vertical mill, and enough skill to work on anything. Even in a small town, he had enough work to provide a living.

Another thing: no one expected perfection. They expected malfunctions in semiautos or work to be done on revolvers. The idea that your firearms will be perfect from day one is relatively new.

Because cars were mentioned, they were the same as guns. You knew you were going to get the ignition timing and carburetor tuned, and that you couldn't just turn the key on any car and have it fire up.

Fair point. Would you say that current Smith revolvers are better made than the ones of yesteryear? (Pre lock, pre MIM, forged parts, etc)

[Hambo]

Fair point. Would you say that current Smith revolvers are better made than the ones of yesteryear? (Pre lock, pre MIM, forged parts, etc)

S&W had quality ups and downs for decades. New revolvers are probably better than some BP era revolvers, but definitely not as good 1930s-1950s, maybe 1960s era. The biggest problem with Smith, IMO, other than QC, is the lack of support (armorers, gunsmiths, parts) for revolvers.

@gato naranja's post reminded me that back in the early 1980s, troopers carried their own .357s. I was told that Ruger was the most reliable, followed by S&W (esp. when the 681 became their issued revolver), followed by Colt.

FWIW on your Ruger. If it were me, I'd find brass that doesn't rim lock and drive on. Also FWIW, depending on how well a cylinder is machined, you may find that rims are thicker on some ammo brands and cause drag. Recessed chambers would solve both of those problems, but that's probably gone forever.

[gato naranja]

@gato naranja's post reminded me that back in the early 1980s, troopers carried their own .357s. I was told that Ruger was the most reliable, followed by S&W (esp. when the 681 became their issued revolver), followed by Colt.

The city forces of my childhood were pretty dismally armed by today's standards, with very basic S&W and Colt .38 Specials of no particular merit, some of them - and their carriers - a bit long in the tooth. When they hired a local lad who had come back from military service in the 1970's, the PTB were aghast at his carrying a Model 29, and he was persuaded to downgrade to a Model 27 (IIRC... might have been a Model 28, but I think the former). He proved too honest for some local rich men whose spoiled sons were involved in the local drug traffic of those days.

Anyway, it was the county sheriff's offices where the "good stuff" was carried and fussed over. By those days, anything that wasn't a .357 was rare. No group is immune from notions of style, and the Colt Python was the "image" revolver, followed by the Smiths (the bigger the frame, the more the cachet), and Ruger's Security Six was the "upstart" that was stirring the pot. I well remember how different-looking the Ruger DAs struck me, though they were not bad looking guns for all their more "utilitarian" lines and comparatively sedate finishes.

The amount of issues each make had did appear to be in inverse order of the above "stylishness" spectrum. One of the deputies I had a nodding acquaintance with was something of a pragmatic gun guy and he became a big fan of the Security Six; a bit of a character in some ways, he was wont to chide other LEOs who had trouble with their "classics." It was pretty well established by the time the various departments switched to semiautos that the Rugers had lower rates of failure given similar amounts of care and use. The older gunsmith of my choice was of that opinion as well ("(NONE) of them work if they're dirty," he growled).

The last big adventure in gunplay before I moved away from the area involved some gymnastics across the cruiser and the ability of a Security Six to penetrate a vehicle. When I heard the details, I was a bit surprised by how smartly the middle-aged deputy could move, but not by how well his weapon worked and what kind of shooting he did. The whole lot are now either long-retired or have recently passed away; as with railroaders and teachers, they don't make them like that anymore. Most of those guys parted with wheelguns rather reluctantly, feeling that a big .357 was the best controllable long-range medicine they ever had. They liked their revolvers big and their Mopar interceptors bigger out on the wide-open prairie in those days.

[SwampDweller]

Ruger is honoring my initial request and are replacing the 7 shot GP100 with a 6 shot. However, after my 6 shot developing some kind of issue, I'm considering the following:
1. Keep the revolver and send it off to Gemini Custom for their "Essential" job and request they do a QC check and fix anything that might need to be fixed while they're doing the action job.
2. Sell the revolver and put the money towards a TK Custom GP100 with an action job, which I assume would mean they'll have everything set up correctly in the gun and would head off any potential QC issues.
3. Just shoot it and see if it develops any problems.

After shooting several hundred rounds each in two GP100s only to find they were defective, #3 doesn't really seem that appealing to me. I'd rather pay some money up front to make sure someone who knows what they're doing make sure everything is set up right.

[03RN]

I vote for shooting it first.

Smoothing out the insides is something you can do. Unless there's something actually wrong with it I think it's a waste of money.