GP100 7 SHOT 357, not completely fixed - Ruger Forum

Ruger Forum

GP100 7 SHOT 357, not completely fixed

This is a discussion on GP100 7 SHOT 357, not completely fixed within the Ruger Double Action forums, part of the Pistol & Revolver Forum category; Since the older thread is closed, I have decided to chime in. Not that is matter to me a whole bunch unless it becomes more ...


Go Back   Ruger Forum > Pistol & Revolver Forum > Ruger Double Action

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes

Old February 6th, 2019, 09:15 AM   #1
 
JLS1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: SW Virginia
Posts: 73
JLS1980 is an unknown quantity at this point
GP100 7 SHOT 357, not completely fixed

Since the older thread is closed, I have decided to chime in. Not that is matter to me a whole bunch unless it becomes more and more common with ammunition. The 3 areas they were supposed to improve, either a epic fail, didn't do it or both. Here is why:

I noticed that when i loaded white box (not usa branded) winchester 38+p, i was getting this issues that were beaten to death in the closed thread. I used my micrometer/caliper to measure those rims and they had a wide variance from 0.434 to 0.438. Now I could push the last round in most of the time but it was difficult to extract unfired rounds if I did. Now to I got interested and tried the other brands I have, which included: UMC 38+p 125 grain hollow points, all measured less than 0.435, no issues, would fall with out using the ejector, i moved on to federal standard 38 158 grain round nose lead, measure up to 0.436, no issues, fall right out, I then went to my magnum loads of sig sauer elite 125 self defense ammo, perfect, drop right out, then on to barnes vortex hunting loades 140 xpb bullet, same, fall right out, then on to remington HTP 158 grain soft points, same result, no binding all fall right now. So it leads me to conclude that my particular 7 shooter is limited to 0.436 and lower for flawless function, which is a tad better than the original guy who measured his blazer brass at 0.436 and had issues. When I contacted Underwood and talked with them about hunting loads and mentioned the rim diameter issues, they even recognized that firearm companies squeezing that 7th chamber has caused the ammunition industry to take note and the starline brass they use is 0.432-.433, straight from the horse's mouth.

This leads me to believe that Ruger has indeed not fixed their "issue" (if you want to call it that). Now why do I say that, the answer is I called and gave my serial number to see when it was made, well it was shipped to the FFL in November 2018, well after the issues were brought to Ruger's attention. When I mentioned that it was a known issue to the CS rep, she acted like she had never heard of it, and mentioned all she had to do was research the net and she would find that it is known and then I asked if I could speak to someone else more in tune with the GP100, she acted like no one would know anything she didn't know. Instead of arguing I just said "ok". So what do you choose to do here, send it to them, let them tell you its in spec or trade it out for a 6 shooter (which i don't mind, but if i am trading i want to be able to see the firearm before i say ok!!). That's the part that bothers me, I love to inspect my purchase before I buy it. I did with this 7 shooter, nicely made revolver, so I bought it. The other option is to just live with the fact it can't currently shoot all ammunition without difficulty.

So whoever is making the list of ammo that had caused binding, add winchester white box 38+p 125 ammo to it. So far, my particular revolver doesn't seem to have as tight a tolerance as the original complaint, but it still isn't far off. Ruger hasn't fixed it guys, so either wait, or just know that its not going to accept everything out there. For me, I don't really want alot of aggravation, so unless I run into more brands that give me fits, I am not going to worry about it. Just passing my experience along.



JLS1980 is offline  
Advertisements
Old February 6th, 2019, 09:38 AM   #2
 
Old School Wheelgunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Old Dominion
Posts: 1,424
Old School Wheelgunner will become famous soon enoughOld School Wheelgunner will become famous soon enough
Depressing. My GP is an old (1996) model. If I were after a seven shot today, I would look to S&W, lock and all. I have shot a friend’s pre-lock 686 with seven rounds. It is a fine revolver. I would start by looking for one of them, if you get rid of the Ruger.

QC remains suspect for all the big companies, I fear: they want to sell lots of guns to the upgrade-constantly crowd, not build a lifetime relationship with a customer who might only buy a few. Every time Glock or Smith have a new Gen pistol, you can snag the last versions at good prices, used, at my LGS.

For some owners, it is like upgrading the phone...
Old School Wheelgunner is offline  
Old February 6th, 2019, 11:04 AM   #3
 
JLS1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: SW Virginia
Posts: 73
JLS1980 is an unknown quantity at this point
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old School Wheelgunner View Post
Depressing. My GP is an old (1996) model. If I were after a seven shot today, I would look to S&W, lock and all. I have shot a friendís pre-lock 686 with seven rounds. It is a fine revolver. I would start by looking for one of them, if you get rid of the Ruger.

QC remains suspect for all the big companies, I fear: they want to sell lots of guns to the upgrade-constantly crowd, not build a lifetime relationship with a customer who might only buy a few. Every time Glock or Smith have a new Gen pistol, you can snag the last versions at good prices, used, at my LGS.

For some owners, it is like upgrading the phone...
I hear ya. I own a Taurus 66 7 shot, and it doesn't have this issue. I wanted the GP100 to use full magnum loads like they used to be made, like those from underwood for the purpose of hunting. Taurus is a good revolver but their CS is terrible, they destroyed mine when I sent it in for a barrel replacement after I dropped it from a tree stand, now they are sending me a blued version (original was stainless) because they were out of stainless and wouldn't accept any other model, so it was either wait for 6 months likely or accept the blued version. I guess it could have been worse and them sending back a destroyed pistol that they did themselves screwing a new barrel on.

I knew the Ruger was built like a tank, so it was obvious that was the direction I would go if Taurus keep screwing with me. Contrary to what one says about cylinder thickness being a concern in strength, well I know well enough that the strength is mostly in the frame, not the cylinder, hence the lock positions to the frame. Went ahead and got it. I haven't fired the revolver yet to know it if has extraction issues with the ammo that feel freely out of it unfired. I wanted the 6 shot version to begin with because it was 50$ cheaper but they were out of the 6" model at the FFL, but they had this 7 shooter with a 6 inch, figured what the heck, paid the premium, I love the sights and the grips but this does make me wonder if I should fire it and see where that goes or go back to the FFL and see if they can swap it for me. I dunno, its a tough one, revolver looks great and I hate to keep blowing money on background checks lol
JLS1980 is offline  
 
Old February 6th, 2019, 11:49 AM   #4
 
Kenny53's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: In my backyard
Posts: 2,099
Kenny53 will become famous soon enoughKenny53 will become famous soon enough
JLS1980: Welcome to the forum. I might be inclined to keep the gun and shoot the ammo that works. If the gun shoots well I would call it a ammo issue.
Kenny53 is offline  
Old February 6th, 2019, 11:55 AM   #5
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 861
GP Fan is on a distinguished road
I don't know if Ruger has a QC issue with the 7-shot GP's or a geometry problem. The GP's cylinder is actually a bit smaller in diameter than the 686's and that may be the reason the rims overlap with some ammo in the GP but not in the S&W. The difference is small but so are the interferences with the GP.

I know the 6-shot 686 and GP use the same speedloaders but the 7-shot guns seem to have individually spece'd speedloaders telling me the charge hole circle centers are not the same.
GP Fan is offline  
Old February 6th, 2019, 12:10 PM   #6
 
JLS1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: SW Virginia
Posts: 73
JLS1980 is an unknown quantity at this point
My opinion is they were designing the chamber clearances based on an industry average instead of the industry standard. The problem with the average is there are too many variables between runs of brass and between ammo companies, just forming an opinion as to what may have gone on. Too many 7 shot's have this issue, some a lot worse than mine. If it does well and doesn't give me a fit with ammo I know drops in well, I will probably keep it, but if it extracts rough at the range from brass expansion, well I guess you know what the answer is going to be at that point. I honestly didn't research issues etc before I bought it, who would expect one in an GP100? Once I did and researched, found it is fairly common, which says design flaw, as least to me. I hunt with mine and hike, so 7 shots isn't a big deal to me, 6 high powered killers is good enough for that.
JLS1980 is offline  
Old February 6th, 2019, 12:20 PM   #7
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: New Haven, Vermont
Posts: 22
vtfarmer is on a distinguished road
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by GP Fan View Post
I don't know if Ruger has a QC issue with the 7-shot GP's or a geometry problem. The GP's cylinder is actually a bit smaller in diameter than the 686's and that may be the reason the rims overlap with some ammo in the GP but not in the S&W. The difference is small but so are the interferences with the GP.

I know the 6-shot 686 and GP use the same speedloaders but the 7-shot guns seem to have individually spece'd speedloaders telling me the charge hole circle centers are not the same.
The HKS speedloaders for the S&W 7-shot, #587, have worked perfectly in my 7-shot GP100 for going on a year now.
vtfarmer is offline  
Old February 6th, 2019, 12:31 PM   #8
 
JLS1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: SW Virginia
Posts: 73
JLS1980 is an unknown quantity at this point
Quote:
Originally Posted by vtfarmer View Post
The HKS speedloaders for the S&W 7-shot, #587, have worked perfectly in my 7-shot GP100 for going on a year now.
Have you experienced certain brands or loads that the rims bind at all in yours?
JLS1980 is offline  
Old February 6th, 2019, 01:31 PM   #9
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: New Haven, Vermont
Posts: 22
vtfarmer is on a distinguished road
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by JLS1980 View Post
Have you experienced certain brands or loads that the rims bind at all in yours?
I'll set the stage by saying that I do all my volume shooting with handloads. I've got about 2500 cases of various headstamps. In my 7-shot 4" GP100 Winchester cases don't work at all. Federal cases are borderline, usually they worked, but I did have the occasional jam, so I've stopped using them in the 7-shot. I have plenty of 6-shot revolvers that will handle anything. Of the cases in my inventory, PPU, PPC, UMC, and Remington work without any problems. My carry load is Remington factory, so I'm good to go.
In regard to speedloaders, those Winchester cases I have seem to have a tendency, in addition to wider case rims, to have thicker case rims. HKS speedloaders retain the cases rotating a projection into the gap between the case body and the rim. The thicker rims on some of the Winchester cases causes a lot of resistance to rotating the knob retain the cases, which also causes the cases to splay slightly outward. Too much so to slide into the chambers. If you force the rounds in, it puts so much pressure on the knob that won't turn to release the rounds. I have bunch of 686 HKS speedloaders, and it doesn't happen with all of them. My impression is that with usage the tolerances on the speedloader loosen up and the problem is less likely. Just to point out that speedloader problems can come from the cases involved. I've never had that problem with cases of any other headstamp than Winchester.
vtfarmer is offline  
Old February 6th, 2019, 04:43 PM   #10
 
jstanfield103's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: KY
Posts: 1,506
jstanfield103 will become famous soon enoughjstanfield103 will become famous soon enough
I am really not interested in a 7 shot. But I did just buy a GP100 TALO unfluted model. After reading this I am glad I only got the 6 round model.
jstanfield103 is offline  
Old February 6th, 2019, 06:32 PM   #11
 
Sr40ken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Missouri
Posts: 3,266
Sr40ken is a jewel in the roughSr40ken is a jewel in the roughSr40ken is a jewel in the rough
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLS1980 View Post
My opinion is they were designing the chamber clearances based on an industry average instead of the industry standard. The problem with the average is there are too many variables between runs of brass and between ammo companies, just forming an opinion as to what may have gone on. Too many 7 shot's have this issue, some a lot worse than mine. If it does well and doesn't give me a fit with ammo I know drops in well, I will probably keep it, but if it extracts rough at the range from brass expansion, well I guess you know what the answer is going to be at that point. I honestly didn't research issues etc before I bought it, who would expect one in an GP100? Once I did and researched, found it is fairly common, which says design flaw, as least to me. I hunt with mine and hike, so 7 shots isn't a big deal to me, 6 high powered killers is good enough for that.
One heck of a stab in the dark. Maybe you could use some engineering skills and take some measurements and then it would't be an opinion.
Sr40ken is offline  
Old February 7th, 2019, 08:00 AM   #12
 
Rover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 1,816
Rover is on a distinguished road
"My opinion is they were designing the chamber clearances based on an industry average instead of the industry standard. " SR40Ken

I don't think they bothered with the consideration. They simply took what they had in the 6 shot in terms of center of axis of the cylinder to center of the bore and ran with it. By doing so they would not need to alter the frame by moving the barrel further up the frame and coming up with a whole new cylinder on outside dimensions. It could be they modified a 7 shot .327 Fed model and maybe checked it with a few cartridges and it worked so they ran with it. If they had done some mathematical analysis with the cartridge case head max dimensions should have revealed the interference.
Rover is offline  
Old February 7th, 2019, 09:14 AM   #13
 
JLS1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: SW Virginia
Posts: 73
JLS1980 is an unknown quantity at this point
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sr40ken View Post
One heck of a stab in the dark. Maybe you could use some engineering skills and take some measurements and then it would't be an opinion.
Just an educated guess obviously. I did measure the rim diameters of all the brands I had on hand. Winchester was running to a max 0.438, the max SAAMI spec is 0.440, so they are in spec but on the high side. Remington came in around 0.434, hence the lack of an issue, underwood states starline is 0.432-0.433. If everything is correct about the closed thread and geometry didn't allow for the max SAAMI spec, then it is definitely an engineering flaw, you never design on an average, you design on what the accepted SAAMI allowable spec is. Some said it can't be done with the current cylinder due to the axis and bore alignment. The guy that said he had a contact within Ruger, says there are 3 areas they can address to correct this issue, but could not give details for whatever reason. So obviously there is a fix they can do but can not apply the fix to a prior production run. That makes one think they had to move the bore alignment and open the cylinder up a few thousands, change their mold for the frame slightly. But again, this is just me speculating and adding 2+2.

Now here is the funny part. I was curious, I called Ruger again yesterday and talked to a guy named Dewayne. As soon as I mentioned the model of subject, he instantly said "so you are experiencing rim lock", I said yes, and gave him the run down of my experience with measurements of the ammo. His response was as such: "Yes, we have a fix for that now, but it will require switching the gun out for one of our new production models, so please send it to us". I told him that the person I had spoken to before told me that my revolver was a november run, he said "yes, that was still the old run that had the issue, we changed a few things and fixed the issue since then", the never said if it was done in december or at the 1st of the year. So obviously they knew, took a whole year to work up a change and just now implementing the change in current production. So there you go guys, if you want to buy a 7 shot, DO NOT BUY IT WITHOUT KNOWING THE TIME OF PRODUCTION. I will respond back to all this when I get the "fixed" model and test it.

Jason
JLS1980 is offline  
Old February 7th, 2019, 09:20 AM   #14
 
JLS1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: SW Virginia
Posts: 73
JLS1980 is an unknown quantity at this point
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rover View Post
"My opinion is they were designing the chamber clearances based on an industry average instead of the industry standard. " SR40Ken

I don't think they bothered with the consideration. They simply took what they had in the 6 shot in terms of center of axis of the cylinder to center of the bore and ran with it. By doing so they would not need to alter the frame by moving the barrel further up the frame and coming up with a whole new cylinder on outside dimensions. It could be they modified a 7 shot .327 Fed model and maybe checked it with a few cartridges and it worked so they ran with it. If they had done some mathematical analysis with the cartridge case head max dimensions should have revealed the interference.
Agreed, and likely the deal with all this. The most alarming thing that doesn't make sense, when they knew about the issue, they kept making the darn things without the changes applied to the revolver that they have said they made recently. Seems like a money loss and counting on customers to just accept the flaw, maybe that worked to an extent but it obviously was serious enough for them to do something about it later....
JLS1980 is offline  
Old February 7th, 2019, 07:46 PM   #15
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: TN
Posts: 71
TNMark is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLS1980 View Post
Just an educated guess obviously. I did measure the rim diameters of all the brands I had on hand. Winchester was running to a max 0.438, the max SAAMI spec is 0.440, so they are in spec but on the high side. Remington came in around 0.434, hence the lack of an issue, underwood states starline is 0.432-0.433. If everything is correct about the closed thread and geometry didn't allow for the max SAAMI spec, then it is definitely an engineering flaw, you never design on an average, you design on what the accepted SAAMI allowable spec is. Some said it can't be done with the current cylinder due to the axis and bore alignment. The guy that said he had a contact within Ruger, says there are 3 areas they can address to correct this issue, but could not give details for whatever reason. So obviously there is a fix they can do but can not apply the fix to a prior production run. That makes one think they had to move the bore alignment and open the cylinder up a few thousands, change their mold for the frame slightly. But again, this is just me speculating and adding 2+2.

Now here is the funny part. I was curious, I called Ruger again yesterday and talked to a guy named Dewayne. As soon as I mentioned the model of subject, he instantly said "so you are experiencing rim lock", I said yes, and gave him the run down of my experience with measurements of the ammo. His response was as such: "Yes, we have a fix for that now, but it will require switching the gun out for one of our new production models, so please send it to us". I told him that the person I had spoken to before told me that my revolver was a november run, he said "yes, that was still the old run that had the issue, we changed a few things and fixed the issue since then", the never said if it was done in december or at the 1st of the year. So obviously they knew, took a whole year to work up a change and just now implementing the change in current production. So there you go guys, if you want to buy a 7 shot, DO NOT BUY IT WITHOUT KNOWING THE TIME OF PRODUCTION. I will respond back to all this when I get the "fixed" model and test it.

Jason

Jason,

Fantastic information. So it seems as long as the 7 shot GP100 was made in 2019, it 'should' be good to go. I went to a LGS yesterday where I first saw the TALO Edition GP100 model 1782 which is a 3" stainless 7 shot unfluted cylinder model. They still have it and it's still priced at $840. I'll wait, I still think I may just prefer the model 1708 if I can find one. That way my existing GP100 speed loaders would work on all the GP's.
But thank you again for reporting that Ruger claims to have it fixed now.
TNMark is offline  
Reply

  Ruger Forum > Pistol & Revolver Forum > Ruger Double Action

None


Search tags for this page

are newly made gp100 7 shots fixed

,

gp100 7 shot

,
gp100 7 shot issue
,
gp100 7 shot issues
,
gp100 7 shot problems
,
is the 7 shot ruger gp100 just as strong as the 6 shot ruger gp100 in .357 mag
,
model 1773 casing issues
,

ruger gp100 7 shot issues

,

ruger gp100 7 shot problems

,
ruger gp100 7 shot problems 2019
,
ruger gp100 7. round 357 issues
,
ruger model 1782 review
Click on a term to search for related topics.



Similar Ruger Forum Discussions
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
.357 reloading sbninja Reloading 70 April 20th, 2019 11:57 AM
Fixed sight SS 4" full lug GP100? stantheman86 Ruger Double Action 20 December 18th, 2017 10:33 AM
Ruger... How About a 7 Shot, 2" GP100 .357 weblance Ruger Double Action 35 August 14th, 2015 05:48 PM
Older model GP100 fixed sights gqucool Ruger Double Action 2 March 16th, 2015 10:08 PM
Ruger GP100 4" Stainless fixed sights Mr Wren Optics 16 June 24th, 2010 04:26 PM

Top Gun Sites Top Sites List
Powered by vBulletin 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1
Copyright © 2006 - 2020 Ruger Forum. All rights reserved.
Ruger Forum is a Ruger Firearms enthusiast's forum, but it is in no way affiliated with, nor does it represent Sturm Ruger & Company Inc. of Southport, CT.