Ruger Forum banner

GP100 "Match Champion" - Be The First

22K views 68 replies 30 participants last post by  robertbank 
#1 · (Edited)
#3 ·
Quick! I must be first! ;)

It's great they're available now. Are you thinking you want one at some point?[/QUOTE]

No, at least not at those prices. I would be more interested in making up a similar 4" GP100 out of one I already own. Slab side the barrel, contour the cylinder, reface the muzzle, cut a target crown, and trigger job with shims are all doable. Only aspect that would not be doable would be the Novak dovetail sights but then I prefer adjustable sights anyway so that's OK. I would probably bead blast the finish and use a different grip. Would make a fun project.

I really don't like the big bold "MATCH CHAMPION" on the left side. Seems dorky to me. But I applaud Ruger for coming up with another new version of the old GP100. I know it gets mentioned a lot here but they really should offer a 7 or 8 shot .357 version. That would get a lot of people fired up.
 
#4 ·
I like some of the aspects, like the half lug, shimmed hammer, chamfered cylinders...but there are things I don't like. Stippled grip, I'm not sold on that rear sight, I don't like that they didn't keep the removable front sight either. Add to that my semi LGS can get in a regular 4.2" full lug for about $599.

I'm not saying I won't own one, not just yet.
 
#7 ·
I'd be happy to just get my 1705 home.
And, it cost me AU$900.00.
I think someone has forgotton about me.
(At the NSW Firearms Registry, our licencing dept.)
 
#9 ·
For what one gets I don't think the price is high. The extra labor is well worth a couple hundred bucks. I guess my point was you get a custom revolver, but not necessarily to your liking. I look at the specs on this one and think "sigh, almost want I wanted".
 
#10 ·
It's a no for me too.
Seems like a great gun, but as Wave said, you could do most of the tuning yourself and not have that stupid "Match Champion" billboard on the driver's side.
 
#16 ·
I'm sure that Ruger has overbuilt the top strap to begin with, but to me the deeply cut rear sight dovetail makes me go Hmmm. Sure is a snazzy looking gun though. But I still prefer my early 2000's 6 inch stainless half shroud with the old style (not MIM) trigger and hammer. Don
 
#17 ·
"No, at least not at those prices. I would be more interested in making up a similar 4" GP100 out of one I already own. Slab side the barrel, contour the cylinder, reface the muzzle, cut a target crown, and trigger job with shims are all doable. Only aspect that would not be doable would be the Novak dovetail sights but then I prefer adjustable sights anyway so that's OK. I would probably bead blast the finish and use a different grip. Would make a fun project."

I agree. My GP already is tuned and has the Bowen rear sight which I prefer. I think one could mill the bevel on the top strap back to the rear sight ears readily. Somehow, to me, the Novak rear looks more at home on an auto. Another benefit is one can retain the front interchangeable sight system.
 
#18 ·
I like the gun and it would be a buy for me except I already have a tuned GP 100. I am not sure why they went with a fixed front sight. Doesn't make much sense as that was a real feature on the GP 100. More a bean counter thing I think. For playing IDPA you really don't need an adjustable rear sight so that would be a plus for me. Good on Ruger and the gun sells for $200 less than the equivalent S&W 686 up here anyway. It will sell up here for sure. Ruger is making a play for IDPA attention and this gun will suit the purpose well. The GP 100 should stand up better in competition than the 686. Time will tell.

Next out should be a .45acp revolver. Smaller than the existing Redhawk though. That gun is to big for serious competition use.

Take Care

Bob
 
#20 ·
Some associate the "Match Champion" with a "target" gun, may be useful to remember it isn't intended to be a target gun. Built for IDPA & carry use, where it'd be perfectly do-able even if it couldn't do any better than 4" at 25 yards.
Which it certainly can. :)

And, Ruger says the sight dovetail is not an issue. They've analyzed & tested it, does not create a problem in compromising the topstrap's strength.
Denis
 
#21 ·
Hey Denis - Since you've had the privilege of working with this one already I was wondering about the shimmed hammer and/or trigger. I seem to recall on another thread someone bought a new GP100 and either the hammer or trigger (or both - I don't remember now) had "shims" that looked like they were cast in the piece and not a separate set of actual shims. Does the new 1754 have actual shims or have they "shimmed" it by dressing/fitting tighter tolerances on these parts?

Did you do any disassembly on the one you shot or see any of the internals?

Also, has Ruger gone to MIM on the hammer and trigger like the SP101 or are they still casting these parts as before?
 
#22 ·
GP 100 Match

:)Beautiful revolver. Ruger is smart in marketing this thing to knowlegable revolver shooters re; the specs. for this new product mention that it has an 11 degree muzzle crown. Bill Laughridge, of Cylinder and Slide, has written extensively about competition hand guns; and in his articles he never fails to mention that the single most important design criteria to the inherent accuracy of a handgun is the 11 degree muzzle crown. :)
 
#23 ·
Ruger says both hammer & trigger are shimmed. I took the hammer out to check, genuine stainless steel washers, I have not removed the trigger assembly, but I'd assume same there.
I actually left the hammer shims out when I put the hammer back in. More trouble than they're worth in reassembly to me, lazy as I are. :)

There are MIM parts in the GP now, including the trigger. Ruger decided the necessary contours of a MIM hammer in the GP would be non-gorgeous enough to stick to cast hammers for the foreseeable future. :)

The MIM trigger face is rounded, and a definite improvement in that respect over the cast triggers. I've paid to have that done previously, the MIM moulds are constructed to drop the new triggers out with it already done & no sharp rear edges.
Ruger says that's common to all new GPs going forward, not just the MC.
Denis
 
#26 ·
For most shooters under Master Class in IPSC/IDPA most of the "improvements" are nice features but make little difference in competition other than the shooter might think it makes a difference. It does squeeze a few more bucks out of the purchaser which is fair enough in the spirit of the free market. Personally I am a great fan of Ruger. They were the first to offer a 4.2 revolver for the Canadian market and said so in their catalog, something that has not been lost on Canadian shooters.

Three out of five of our regular shooters at our club shoot the GP 100 and it presently was used by both the Alberta and BC Provincial SSR IDPA Champions.

Take Care

Bob
 
#27 ·
Fixed rear sight = deal killer

As the owner of many Ruger revolvers, including a few GP-100's, I am bewildered that Ruger went to the trouble to make the cut, then installed a fixed rear sight. For any application that I can imagine, including competition, hunting and self-defense, one would want to be able to find a zero with the ammunition of choice.
 
#28 ·
As the owner of many Ruger revolvers, including a few GP-100's, I am bewildered that Ruger went to the trouble to make the cut, then installed a fixed rear sight. For any application that I can imagine, including competition, hunting and self-defense, one would want to be able to find a zero with the ammunition of choice.
The reality is there isn't enough variance in impact point to worry about for any of the applications you list where this gun would be used. It isn't a target pistol and is aimed at the IDPA crowd where the maximum distance is 35 yards with most targets at 15 yards or less. The down Zero is 8 inches in diameter. Well it could be used for hunting I suspect the users primary reason for buying the gun will be self defense and competitions.

Of the guns I use for IPSC and IDPA that have adjustables I can say over the last 15 years or so I have yet to adjust the sights once they are set for one load. I haven't touched my sights on my GP 100 and I go from .357 to .38spl and never touch the rear sight for the shooting I do. Kinda like putting lip stick on a pig.

Take Care

Bob
 
#29 ·
Bob: I take your point. Competition, with some modest success, for many years in handgun silhouette has informed my ideas about accuracy. The better stability of heavier rounds at longer distances calls, in my experience, for sights that can adjust from lighter, higher trajectory rounds and also from competition rounds that may be tuned just to meet the requirements of a particular discipline. Ever if this were not so, why not an adjustable sight even if only as an option?
 
#33 ·
Adjustable sights aren't necessary, may not have a wide enough notch to ensure quick acquisition and can go out of adjustment. Using my 1911 .45acp as an example I use 200 gr and 230 gr bullets almost exclusively and find no material difference in point of impact going from one cartridge to another. Maybe there is if you put the gun in a vise and shot it. But in my hands I am not capable of shooting 1/2" groups at 15 yards from a rest on my best day. I think a lot of folks kid themselves when they think it makes a huge difference. Olympic level shooters yes. For most not so much.

Take Care

Bob
Happy New Year = I see itis just after 12:00 midnight as I type this.
 
#34 ·
Most silhouette shooters in this area either change loads or adjust elevation for different distances. I know both techniques work with Blackhawks and Super Blackhawks. In forty years with many 1911's, I have not seen problems with quality, American-made adjustable sights. They are on my guns from Wilson and Baer and on a full custom from Pat McAndrews. The early sights on the Gold Cup models came out of adjustment frequently, as do some of the modern, low-end Chinese products. A safe-edge file is useful to widen the notch or even to fine-tune between clicks when working from a rest at the range. While we may not agree, discussions of this sort can be useful for those who may have less experience to learn the views of men with well over 100k rounds downrange and who have used small arms in direct military circumstances.
 
#35 ·
Godan,
Again- for the distances used in IDPA & regular carry, it doesn't matter that much. :)
You're still viewing it from a "distance" perspective that doesn't apply to Ruger's intended purpose for the model.

My oldest GP, a fixed-sighter from '88, is actually my favorite.
The only downside I see to the sighting system that came on it, for practical carry, is that the sights are not as quick to pick up as others offering more contrast.

I have two fixed-sight 3-inch GPs, one of which I carried daily after retirement & till 9-11, and I have the same problem with those. The dark sights on the blue one blend together & take longer to acquire, the stainless one has a black blade that does offer some contrast against the "bright" rear notch & is a bit quicker.

My best GP sights are on a custom version, with a gold bead front & a white-outline Bowen rear.
Those jump right out at my eye.

In all the years I've carried fixed-sight GPs, point of impact has never been a problem.
Out to 25 yards or so, the most difference in elevation comes between 180s & 110s. I just don't use 110s. Otherwise, I'm viable on a black paper silhouette & I don't push the guns to a 50-yard steel silhouette. :) Or farther.

I find the slowest to acquire is a dark front.
The fiber-optic on the MC much easier to drop into the wide rear notch than a dark front blade.

IDPA & defensive carry involve close-in and quick, and you don't have all day to leisurely acquire a 50-yard sight picture on a steel target that just sits there & minds its own business till you ring it. :)
Denis
 
#41 ·
Projecting roles onto a gun beyond its intended uses has been central to a great many improvements in weapons technology and shooters' skills. The development of both the 50 caliber and .308 sniping rifles came from that. Most of handgun silhouette also involves shooting at distances much past what the rounds are "intended" to reach. I believe the Marines still qualify with the M16 (or whatever it is now called) at 500 yards - much beyond the intended range of both the round and the rifle. Distance is just another form of requiring accuracy - with the additional issues of wind, trajectory etc. I think that any firearm should be "intended" to shoot as accurately as its mechanical fundamentals and the physics of its round will allow. Further, I recommend that anyone who carries a firearm should practice out to the limits of his ability to approach the theoretical possibilities of its accuracy. To each his own, of course, and anyone who decides his firearm and his practice should be limited to easy shots at close range can please himself.
Godan I hate to be blunt but what a load of hooey. You imply that anyone who doesn't engage in silhouette shooting out to 50 yards and more is some sort of lessor being. You think IDPA or IPSC is easy. Try it. There is more to pistol shooting then simple pure accuracy. Every revolver made doesn't have to be intended for your silhouette shooting. Putting adjustable sights on a firearm intended for personal defense is like putting lip stick on a pig or put another way gilding a lily.

You want a revolver for your sport than go out and buy one. Your choice likely would be a poor one for the sport I enjoy. In the meantime regal in the fact Ruger has chosen to make a revolver perfect for IDPA or for anyone interested in a revolver for personal defense against two and four legged threats.

Take Care

Bob
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top