Ruger GP100 22lr

R

redlightrich

New member
Hello all, I just purchased my first revolver, a GP100 in 22lr. This gun is so overbuilt, I can leave it to my great grandchildren. I have many auto's but this is my first wheel gun. I made a direct comparison to the SW 617, in both 4" and 6" models. Based upon the examples I was able to see, the Ruger appeared better built, so I took it. By the way, the trigger is not bad in my opinion. Yes it could be better, but a carefully selected spring set can cure that. I don't love the trigger or hammer pull, but I don't hate it either. It works well, but would benefit from some fine tuning. The metal work and finish machining was what sold me when compare to the SW. All parting lines are so crisp and tight. I was very surprised. The barrel was not canted, but one of the SW's was. I will say, I like the proportions of the 4" SW much better. I really wish the Ruger had the 4" option as opposed to only 1 choice, which is 5.5". I originally had the SP101 in the comparison, but I quickly eliminated it due to the fact that it's grip was uncomfortably small. I am not a large person, I wonder who would find that comfortable?

Anyhoo..........

I used it on day one, and ran 270 rounds thru it. No problems. Day 2 I ran another 250 rounds thru it and when I went to clean it, I noticed what appeared to be "swedged metal" near where the barrel enters the frame. It was in a semi circle around where the cylinder would face.

After looking carefully, and getting a pick to see if it moved, the "metal" was actually a build up of remnants of powder.

I used the same ammo as the previous day, except I introduced some CCI tactical ( day one I ran all my garbage 22 just to see if the GP would eat it).

I did clean it after the first use, and this build up did not exist. It was very humid on the 2nd day, if that makes a difference. I have never noticed this type of build up on any of my semi's.

Although I have no experience with a silencer, the build up seems to be the same type that silencer people speak about, built up in the baffles that is so hard that solvent will not dissolve. It requires being chipped away with a tool.

I have 2 questions that the knowledge base here can help with....

1) Why would powder build up of the revolver be different than a semi? Is it the fact that the chamber is detached from the barrel and in a semi that build up occurs inside the barrel?

2) In the store, the sales person also matched the GP side by side with a MKIII ( also a 5.5" barrel). All things equal, should the revolver have greater accuracy due to the fact that the MK's barrel has the chamber included in that 5.5" where as the revolver is all barrel ( beyond forcing cone)?

Any insight would be greatly welcomed.

Kind regards

Rich
 
S&Ws are usually the choice of revolver for competition, due to the trigger design.
But, as you say, any trigger can be improved, so enjoy your Ruger.

To help answer your questions:
There is usually more build up of powder residue with revolvers due to the air gaps from cylinder to barrel and the restrictions of the forcing cone.
Plus the timing of the cylinder rotation and alignment.
No getting around it.
Then there's the differences in ammo, always a consideration with .22s, in both quality and accuracy.
It's just part of the nature of rimfires.

And very generally speaking, autos can be more accurate since the bullets have less to deal with in traveling from chamber to barrel.
Probably more important than how long the barrel is.
All other things being equal, of course.
 
Powder, carbon residue, bullet lube, and lead would have fewer places to build up on a semi auto. Different types of ammo use different types of lubes which can have an impact on the build-up. Some 22 ammo is very dirty.

The length of a barrel isn’t going to have much effect accuracy if any at all. A longer sight radius is going to impact your ability to aim, but has no effect on the guns accuracy. The barrel’s bore diameter, twist rate, and finish of the internal metal surfaces are all going to effect the accuracy along, with the fact that different guns prefer different ammo. For a good match quality ammo at regular prices I use CCI Standard Velocity.
 
Ruger needs to make a 6-shot .22 revolver on their Super Blackhawk frame. It will be the most "overbuilt" and "durable" and "heavy duty" revolver ever made! :D
 
I also have the GP100-22 and I also traded my SP101-22 to buy it because I thought it was too small for my use and wanted a full size gun.

As to your questions,

1. it sounds like what you are describing is that it is spitting some lead around the forcing come due to imperfect chamber/cylinder cone alignment. I had a similar problem with my SP101-22 and it started affecting accuracy. I sent it into Ruger and they fixed the problem for free, including shipping. I would call them. It is a real pain to clean that lead buildup and it will eventually affect the performance of the gun. They may cut the forcing cone wider or reset the crane. Last resort you may get a new gun if the problem is because of a frame issue. None of those things are acts I would trust to a run of the mill gunsmith. Best send to Ruger, plus it's free. In the mean time the problem will be slightly less if you shoot copper plated ammo.

2. I also have an MKIII. Generally (and there are lots of exceptions to this) revolvers are more mechanically accurate than semis, but often harder to shoot accurately due to DA trigger pull, etc. The MKIII is an exception to this generality. Because of its fixed barrel and the sights mounted to a fixed barrel it can be every bit as accurate as a revolver. In fact, when it comes to 22 caliber revolvers, it's likely to be more accurate. This is because 22lr is a dirty, wide-spec/wide-tolerances class of ammo. Revolvers are a little more complicated to build in a way that handles these issues than semis. The tolerances on a 22 revolver have to be really tight. (As you are finding out with the lead spitting issue.) A semi that slams a round into the chamber doesn't have to worry about chamber alignment but do often have issues with jamming/cycling for similar reasons related to the wide-spec issues with 22lr. MKIIIs are some of the best for eating all the 22lr ammo you can feed into them. Consequently, pound for pound I would bet that on average an MKIII is likely to be more accurate than a GP100-22. However, if you send in your GP100-22 and get it tuned up it could easily match an MKIII for accuracy. I would say my GP100-22 and my MKIII are about even in accuracy.
The barrel length is not that big of a deal. Your question is really an issue of sight radius. I think the two guns are about equal on sight radius. A barrel that is a half inch longer will not affect accuracy in any measurable way compared to all the other factors that affect accuracy.
 
"...can leave it to my great grandchildren..." You can pretty much expect to do that with any firearm. If it's properly maintained. Firearms are one of the very few mass produced products you can expect to be handing down.
"...grip was uncomfortably small..." Aftermarket grips will fix that and are readily available. Not always cheap though.
S&W triggers are a nightmare compared to a GP. No tools required to disassemble a GP. All SS parts too.
"...actually a build up of remnants of powder..." Yep. Over 500 rounds in 2 days will do that. Doesn't it with a .38/.357 too. Bath time is where you start.
 
Congratulations! I wish I had one. 22 ammo is dirty and you shot a lot of it. If it was accurate, I wouldn't worry about the fouling. IMHO, if it is just for plinking and targets, you might as well get a big heavy handgun with a long barrel and good sights. If I didn't own so dang many 22 handguns I would get one for myself. :)
 
Thanks for all the replies. So far, it is more accurate than I am, but after I get used to it, maybe I can start to scratch it's potential. Yes, I will keep it clean, but before I return it to Ruger, I want to try a diet of good ammo and see if the problem persists with build up. I have been purposely feeding it garbage ( all the stuff that my autos won't readily eat) to see some of the benefits of a revolver.
It is big, heavy, but I do like it a lot!!! Also, I have full faith that Ruger will stand behind their product if I do call upon them to make some adjustments!!

Thank you, this site always has the answers!!!

Kind regards

Rich
 
I also have a GP100 22. Love mine. I actually like the trigger. Double action is not as light as my SW 617, but it is smooth and crisp. It balances better than my 6" 617.

As far as accuracy, pretty good. I don,t own a Mark lll . But i have a Mark ll and it out shoots any rimfire revolver I own. It is scary accurate .
 
Most good semi-auto 22 pistols will out shoot a pretty good double action revolver.... semi = one chamber, revolver =6+ chambers. I have a 5.5" Mark II with heavy barrel and it shoots great. It approaches my High Standard Victor in accuracy but not trigger.

But I generally like double action 22 revolvers better because they are more fun to shoot in both single and double action. I'm not really an accuracy freak any more. Just don't care that much beyond "good" and consistent at plinking or normal 22 rimfire ranges.

That said, I really like an accurate 22 rifle!
 
QUOTE: "... Generally (and there are lots of exceptions to this) revolvers are more mechanically accurate than semis,..."

I have to disagree with this assumption. I think 22-rimfire best explains why:

QUOTE: "...Most good semi-auto 22 pistols will out shoot a pretty good double action revolver.... semi = one chamber, revolver =6+ chambers..."

Plus, bullets from revolvers have to transition from the cylinder to the chamber, whereas bullets fired from semi-autos are already in the chamber. In a purely practical sense, there really is no difference between the two configurations in terms of intrinsic accuracy.
 
I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that one. 22 semis with a fixed barrel are scary accurate. But floating barrels in most semiautos means less mechanical accuracy than a fixed barrel revolver. Cylinder gap and all. Now a highly tuned 1911 with a great barrel bushing can overcome the problems with a floating barrel and a reciprocating slide. But on average (and like I said there are lots of exceptions) a stock revolver will outshoot a stock semi auto in machanical accuracy.
Next time you go to the range, bench rest test a glock against a gp100. Do it from a rest and try to take out all the human error that you can. See what kind of groups you get.
 
Some days I shoot my Buck Mark better. Some days I shoot my Single Six better. If either one of them is inherently more accurate, I'm not a good enough marksman to be able to tell the difference.
 
Radny97,
Just gotta' ask,
What is a semi-auto rimfire pistol floating barrel?
The barrel of every rimfire semi-auto pistol I've owned has been fixed to the frame/receiver.
Not like a centerfire pistol or conversion, although plenty of folks do use those.
Is that what you meant?
Purty sure even the rimfire conversion barrels are fixed to the frame via the cross piece that replaces the slide stop and holds it in place.
Yes??
 
Last edited:
Hello again. Yesterday, I ran another 220 rounds thru her. I am trying to learn it's abilities and tenancies. I have found that in double action, one chamber will fire "easier" than the other 9. I almost do double taps when I hit that chamber if firing fast. At this point, I don't know where in the order that chamber is, but it is there. This doesn't make me want to return it either. After I put a few thousand rounds, and possible a spring kit to reduce trigger pull, I will consider my next steps.
I can see that I shoot my other pistols much more accurately than this one, but I am far from completing my learning curve.

I have a Kimber 1911 which has been converted to 22lr ( using a Kimber conversion kit). I keep this gun permanently converted to a 22, being I have other .45s that I like more. Using my 1911, I am more accurate and repeatable. Then again, there is no comparison between a 1911 trigger and a revolver trigger.
Overall, I really am impressed by this gun. It has it's place, and so far, I feel that if I use it for it's best purpose( which I am still trying to figure out) , I will remain very happy with it. I also like the fact that Ruger does not use a side plate, and all components drop in from above or below. Very clever design. Like I said, this gun is so much overbuilt it will last for generations. At the range yesterday, (being I was at the rimfire range) a curious fellow asked to "feel" the gun. As he held it, he said, "wow, this is heavier than my .357 magnum". I said that makes sense as this family of pistol supports that caliber.

Like I said, I will run a few thousand rounds thru so I can adjust to it. So far, and overall, I think this is a good quality gun and I am very happy with it.

This place is terrific, someone here always has insight and experience. I appreciate everyone's input!!

Thank you

Rich
 
G.wilikers - I probably could have written that more clearly. It was late. I'm not aware of any floating barrel 22 semiautos either. I was referring to center fire semiautos when talking about the floating barrel.

Redlightrich - I have a set of Wolff springs for a few gp100s that I have so I tried switching out to some lighter springs in the 22. But I started getting light strikes. So then I tried using the stock springs from a centerfire gp100 since those were quite a bit stiffer but still less than what was in the 22 version. Still got some light strikes with those, so I went back to stock.
I will say that the trigger pull has lightened with use though.
 
What is a semi-auto rimfire pistol floating barrel?
Click to expand...

Do you mean a floating chamber (Carbine Williams) such as is on the Colt Ace? They do tend to be less accurate based on my experience, but the purpose of that chamber in the ACE is to simulate the recoil of a 45 Auto (1911) for training purposes.
 
Radny97,
Gotcha', thanks for clearing that up.
Lots of folks get overly concerned with how tight a centerfire pistol slide fits the frame.
Ignoring how tight and consistent that wobbly ole' barrel locks up to the slide that makes for accuracy.
One of the reasons .22 autos, with their fixed barrels, seem so much more accurate by comparison.
Has anyone ever duplicated the fixed barrel designs of the centerfire .25 in larger calibers?
Somewhere, someone must have, with all the variations in gun designs out there.
Lugers come close, but not exactly totally fixed, though.
Ahh, the Mauser Broomhandle!
Probably a little too weird for most folks.
 
Last edited:
QUOTE: "...Next time you go to the range, bench rest test a glock against a gp100. Do it from a rest and try to take out all the human error that you can. See what kind of groups you get..."

I've shot many pistols many times for well over fifty years, in all kinds of formats and venues, from Bullseye to "tactical" games and le qualification courses and I have never found any reason to believe that revolvers "...are more mechanically accurate than semis..."-quite the contrary, actually. And I feel no need to bench test a Glock against a GP100 to prove your point.

For the reasons already cited, I will continue to argue (and we can agree to disagree as you suggest) that, in most cases, a semi-auto pistol is inherently more accurate than a revolver, with the caveat that "there really is no difference between the two configurations in terms of intrinsic accuracy" in a purely practical sense.

And even in a center-fire semi-auto pistol, I'm not sure what you mean by the term "floating barrel". Barrels will move to accommodate a reciprocating slide but, as you must know, the barrel becomes locked in the end and isn't "floating" when the shot is triggered. If you mean that because the barrel is in transition at every shot, accuracy is compromised; I suppose you have a point, at least theoretically. So I will propose a test for you: Next time you go to the range, bench test a Colt Gold Cup or a Smith & Wesson Model 52/952 semi-auto pistol (to name a couple of examples) against GP100 revolver (or a Colt Officers Model Match or a Smith Model K-38 for that matter) and "see what kind of groups you get". ;)

I'll save you the suspense and ammunition if you trust my bench-rest shooting ability and my guns (I own and use all of the target handguns cited). Even from a Ransom Rest, you will find little practical difference in terms of accuracy between the revolvers and the semi-autos. But, when you do, in my experience the small differences in accuracy you might find invariably favors the semi-auto when all chambers of the revolver are fired and a full magazine is used with the auto. I will concede one drawback that you might encounter with some autos and that is, occasionally, the first round shot can be distinctly distant from the remaining rounds fired in the group.

With regard to the op's question concerning the "powder build-up" he is experiencing with his GP100 .22 revolver, I think some build-up at the forcing cone of any revolver over time and many rounds expended is normal. If I'm reading him correctly, he did not clean the revolver until after 500 rounds were fired. I would expect some powder residue on most any revolver at the junction of the chambers and barrel after shooting 500 rounds, more so than what you might expect to get from a typical semi-auto .22 pistol in my experience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top