Ruger Forum

Flipper66 · June 29th, 2012, 08:46 PM

Get the 6...it is more accurate and more fun to shoot...Great for hunting and maybe even a scope...

KJS · June 29th, 2012, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colt Seavers

I have a 6" full lug gp100 (with hogue grips)

Me too. Bought it in 2008, being the first gun I ever bought.

Quote:

And before people bring up the difference in weight, it's a 5oz. difference between a 4.2" and a 6". If that's going o make or break your ability to carry the weapon, then I'd suggest an entirely different and lighter weapon all together (like an sp101 or LCR).

It's not simply an issue of weight. It's how that weight is distributed as that impacts balance. A 6" GP100 is muzzle-heavy. I state that as a fact to be considered by those thinking about buying. Whether that's good or bad will depend on your intended use & personal preference. I personally want that extra weight up front to tame the muzzle flip of Mag loads. Same concept as bull barrels on .22 pistols.

Quote:

Also, some states require 6" minimum barrel length for hunting.

I live in Wisconsin where they'd allow one to hunt Bambi with my 4" .38 Special or a Glock 34 (5.3" 9mm). WI only demands a handgun be a centerfire over .22 caliber with a barrel of at least 5" measured with the action closed (thus the cylinder of a revolver would be included in such measure). WI demands "expanding" ammo, so I guess .38 LRN would technically qualify as it expands to some degree. Guess you sneak up behind Bambi and fire directly into his head or something.

KJS · June 29th, 2012, 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flipper66

Get the 6...it is more accurate and more fun to shoot...Great for hunting and maybe even a scope...

Ruger doesn't make adding a scope too easy. I've only once seen a pic of a GP with a scope mount, held in place by removal of both front & rear sights.

This is one area where S&W actually manages to beat Ruger, with a very long rear sight hiding that the top strap is drilled & tapped.

Perhaps Ruger figures that if you're really serious about using a handgun for hunting you'll go with a .44. And then you can get their integral scope mounts in either SA SuperBlackhawk or DA SuperRedhawk variety.

Colt Seavers · June 30th, 2012, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KJS

It's not simply an issue of weight. It's how that weight is distributed as that impacts balance. A 6" GP100 is muzzle-heavy. I state that as a fact to be considered by those thinking about buying. Whether that's good or bad will depend on your intended use & personal preference. I personally want that extra weight up front to tame the muzzle flip of Mag loads. Same concept as bull barrels on .22 pistols.

Agreed, I probably could have been a bit more specific on exactly where that extra 5oz. is located, but I figured it was a given. I figured it would also be implied by my mentioning of next to no recoil, but upon rereading that, it is very subjective.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KJS

I live in Wisconsin where they'd allow one to hunt Bambi with my 4" .38 Special or a Glock 34 (5.3" 9mm). WI only demands a handgun be a centerfire over .22 caliber with a barrel of at least 5" measured with the action closed (thus the cylinder of a revolver would be included in such measure). WI demands "expanding" ammo, so I guess .38 LRN would technically qualify as it expands to some degree. Guess you sneak up behind Bambi and fire directly into his head or something.

Glad to read that your particular state is not as restrictive as others.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KJS

Ruger doesn't make adding a scope too easy. I've only once seen a pic of a GP with a scope mount, held in place by removal of both front & rear sights.

This is one area where S&W actually manages to beat Ruger, with a very long rear sight hiding that the top strap is drilled & tapped.

Perhaps Ruger figures that if you're really serious about using a handgun for hunting you'll go with a .44. And then you can get their integral scope mounts in either SA SuperBlackhawk or DA SuperRedhawk variety.

It actuall is fairly easy with this product:
Ruger GP-100 Scope Mounts No Drill

Granted it is more money, but it is still cheaper than a gunsmithing job to drill and tap your ruger, and can be taken off whenever you want with no lasting impreessions left on your firearm.

avjay · June 30th, 2012, 04:02 PM

I purchased the 4" GP 100 a month ago. My first Ruger revolver. I have thoroughly enjoyed the gun. Recoil with the full 357 load is very manageable. Accuracy is excelllent. Prior to this I had a S&W 686plus in the 6" barrel. This was a beautiful gun but for me it was just too big and always felt nose heavy at the range. After putting a thousand rounds through it I used it as a trade and ultimately went with the Ruger. I might have felt differently if I was a hunter but my primary use is target and home defense. The size of the 6" barrel was just a little too cumbersome for my needs.

Gman56 · July 8th, 2012, 04:33 PM

I say go with a 4in!!!My 4 in is very accurate.I have 6in revolvers but I like the 4in better. I don't think you will see much difference in accuracy with a 4 or 6 in.You would have to be a world class shooter to notice the difference. Considering the distance you will be shooting 25yds 5o max. I know that my shooting is mostly 15 yds.Get a 4in they point nice and handle better also I think they look better!

McD · July 26th, 2012, 08:43 PM

I went with the 4.2" GP100. I have the longer barrels and find that the longer barrel is problematic in a defense piece. The 4" does not seem to lose much energy in the 357 and can serve in the field for big game at short range (I am comfortable shooting to around 30-35 yards -- about the same as my bow!). It is good.