"Overbuilt" Pistols?

Yes, I understand the Ruger GP100 can take all kinds of hot magnum loads, and it's a great handloaders double action because of this. However, 99% of people and exclusively pumping full-house .357 loads down range. Instead, they are mostly shooting .38 specials or the more moderate (neutered) .357 loads that are marketed today. The massiveness and weight of the GP100 is simply not necessary for the vast, vast majority of revolver buyers.

I know this probably also isn't important to most people as there GP100s will only see range or hunting use, but for me it's a downside because I use my revolvers for defense and they find there way into my waistband or onto my belt on a daily basis.

The Ruger -Six series guns were built very tough and could handle a good bit of full power magnum shooting, but were better balanced and lighter weight/more compact than the GP100. Also, Ruger was using the investment casting method for the -Six series guns as well.

Now I do like the GP100s, like I said they make good hunting guns and good range guns. But, for me personally, the -Six series are the better choice for defense and general packing around.

YMMV.
 
The massiveness and weight of the GP100 is simply not necessary for the vast, vast majority of revolver buyers.
Click to expand...

The weight is a plus for a range/house gun, to mitigate recoil.

As for "most shooters don't need or use the ability to shoot hot .357 loads all the time" .... tis better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.

I will agree your take that the Ruger Six series guns are better balanced .....nicer in a holster, and nicer in the hand...... until you fire a box of the hot stuff through them, particulary on a gun with the standard duty grips .... I work with my hands, so I have a pretty strong grip ..... full house 357's can be a handfull!
 
The reason that the P7 comes across as overbuilt/overengineered is structural: it relies on a gas piston to help control recoil for a 9mm round. Tolerance specifications and internals are accordingly higher/more complex.
 
tis better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.
Click to expand...

Well then you better use a Redhawk .357 because it's better to have the extra strength if you need it right? It makes the GP100 look slim in comparison, and really tames those magnum loads.
 
I can't believe we've gone through 3 pages of discussion on "overbuilt pistols" and nobody's mentioned the Finnish/Swedish Lahti!!!
 
I can't believe we've gone through 3 pages of discussion on "overbuilt pistols" and nobody's mentioned the Finnish/Swedish Lahti!!!
Click to expand...


Possibly because not many are aware of the Lahti .....

Overbuilt, obscure, foreign pistols have got to be a very small subset of the small subset that is "overbuilt pistols" ......

I've been a gun nut since ...... Ronald Reagan was POTUS..... and I've never seen a Lahti pistol, or even a picture of one .... when someone mentions "Lahti", I'm picturing one of those giant anti-tank rifles on skids .....

...though it would not seem a stretch to me that the builder of the Lahti AT rifle would build a robust handgun .....
 
when someone mentions "Lahti", I'm picturing one of those giant anti-tank rifles on skids .....
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing! Now a 20mm "pistol" without the stock WOULD classify as "overbuilt", and that's what I had in mind when I heard "Lahti".

Looking it up, it looks like a somewhat larger Luger to me but it doesn't use a toggle link action.
 
model12win said:
Well then you better use a Redhawk .357 because it's better to have the extra strength if you need it right? It makes the GP100 look slim in comparison, and really tames those magnum loads.
Click to expand...

Works for me. See Post #54.
 
mod12win said:
The massiveness and weight of the GP100 is simply not necessary for the vast, vast majority of revolver buyers.
Click to expand...

In reality, the massiveness and weight of even something like the SP101 or S&W J-frame is simply not necessary for the vast, vast majority of revolver buyers.

The vast majority of revolvers spend their life in a safe or a desk drawer.
 
In reality, the massiveness and weight of even something like the SP101 or S&W J-frame is simply not necessary for the vast, vast majority of revolver buyers.

The vast majority of revolvers spend their life in a safe or a desk drawer.
Click to expand...

Well aren't you clever! *slow clap*

Moving on, I think the Ruger Redhawk .357 is probably the most overbuilt DA revolver ever made.
 
Ruger is kinda famous for it

My SP-101 is heavy enough to make shooting +P's easy for anybody new to trying a snubbie.
 
I just wish Ruger would release the Super Redhawk in .357 magnum, or S&W could come out with an X-frame .357 five shooter...

You know, better to not need it than need it and not have it... ;)
 
Now the internet chatter is up I see a super redhawk 22 ultramagnum in the works.
Click to expand...

Probably not strong enough to handle the 22 Ultramagnum caliber. They'll release it first in .22 Short, then later on a version with a special stronger steel cylinder for the .22 Ultramag, similar to the way they went from .44 Mag to .480 Ruger.
 
My "overbuilt" list:

1911 --- hands down for frame / slide beef as well as the internals

Sig P230 / 232 / Mauser HSC / Beretta / Browning BDA --- any of these are a lot of gun to sling 380. They shoot like a dream and are built with a quality / heft to the parts that would suit a larger caliber

Smith and wesson 2206 way overbuilt both in metal content and tolerances for a 22 trainer / plinker. Of course for that matter most older generation 22's, say the ruger mark II are overbuilt compared to the modern polymer and zinc crud that prevades the 22 market.

Sig P210 --- overbuilt in almost everyway!

Ruger GP100 / Smith 686 / 27 / 28 any of these are a ton of gun to launch the 357 and most will never wear one out. I have never seen a 357 redhawk but would love one just "because"

Any steel 3rd gen Smith and Wesson automatic, as well as many earlier iterations. I don't get why S+w dumped them. They work, they last and they can take a beating.
 
Any steel 3rd gen Smith and Wesson automatic, as well as many earlier iterations. I don't get why S+w dumped them. They work, they last and they can take a beating.
Click to expand...

You can work yourself out of a job if you do it too well!:rolleyes: I first heard that from an older man when I was 18 cleaning out a warehouse. Perhaps the union workers at S&W thought the same.
 
Coincidental timing in that tonight's episode of "Gun Stories" features the legendary tank-like Colt Python (unbelievable that these things now demand $3K--that said, if I had it I'd grab a mint model). So to me that generation of .357's meet the OP criteria to the tee (5/686, GP100).

Speaking as an owner of such a gun, I guess my Ruger P95, 1911's, 92's, Hi-power would qualify to be sure. I do have a rather unknown gem that is a beast and highly recommend one for anyone seeking a "rugged" pistol, namely, the Bulgarian Arcus 98.
 
I would say my Ruger Redhawk is over-built.

The over- prefix suggests "more than is needed" and this is true considering most factory magnum loads. At the same time,however, the additional margins of strength put into the gun's design by having such heavy components go a long way to making the Redhawk what it is: the go-to revolver for those who want to shoot oft hotter loads through their guns.
It may not have been the reason I bought it, but has certainly become one reason I am glad I did!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top