Ruger GP100 Match Champ

Just curious. I own both and have been eyeballing a GP100. Had a 686, wish I'd never sold it years ago.

Concerning modern Smiths, what is the consensus on quality? I have a very nice 29-2, and a Model 19 and a near mint 3 screw .44 so a bit of collectability would be nice to add to the safe.
 
pete2 said:
The frames are not the same size on the Ruger and the S&W, Rugers are always thicker because the cast isn't as strong as the forged frame on the S&W. They don't make them thicker just to make them heavier. As for timing, I've never had a S&W get out of time even after thousands of rounds fired double action. Where did you hear that? Ruger is a fine gun but it ain't good as a S&W, never will be. Have you ever seen a Ruger D/A at a match? I haven't. I've even seen old Colt revolvers but not Ruger.
Click to expand...



I’ve seen brand new Smiths with timing issues. I also had the experience of working for an indoor range while in college. I never saw a Ruger DA loose timing. I saw timing issues with plenty of Smiths.

The cast vs drop forge debate has been exhausted. Modern investment castings can be every bit as strong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Either gun would be a good choice. I have a GP 100 and a GP 100 match champion. Both are excellent shooters. I sent both cylinders out to TK Custom and had them cut for moon clips. Best of both worlds being able to shoot loose ammo, ammo loaded from a speed loader and ammo loaded in a moon clip. I also have S&W's, Colts and Taurus revolvers and all are a joy to shoot.
With some polishing and spring changes I have the 2 GP 100 trigger pulls down to 7lbs. in double action and they will light off factory ammo consistently.
 
2wheelwander said:
Just curious. I own both and have been eyeballing a GP100. Had a 686, wish I'd never sold it years ago.

Concerning modern Smiths, what is the consensus on quality? I have a very nice 29-2, and a Model 19 and a near mint 3 screw .44 so a bit of collectability would be nice to add to the safe.
Click to expand...



Both Smith and Ruger seem to go through quality control problems. I remember buying a used nickel plated 19-3 for a song. The timing was a little off on one or two chambers. I had my LGS send it to Smith to be re-timed. It was returned in no better shape. The LGS sent it back to Smith. It was returned marked repaired, with the timing no better than when I purchased it. The gunsmith from the LGS could hardly believe it. He called Smith & Wesson, resent my 19-3 again, and finally it was sent to me as it should have been.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I'm starting to understand the attitude of some people who've been on these forums for years. "Another Ruger vs. S&W thread?!?"

Both tend to be decent quality. In my personal experience, older models seem to have more attention to fit and finish. Some of the cost-saving measures like MIM parts on new guns aren't inspiring but haven't failed me. The lock hole on modern Smith and Wesson revolvers is still a major concern. Even if lock failure is radically rare, it can still happen. The fact that it is an extra and totally unnecessary system is where the real problem lies. The knowledge that it exists because of pressure from the anti-gun lobby makes it an on-gun reminder of the forces trying so hard to violate our rights.

I can't tell if the Ruger triggers have gotten worse from the factory of if I'm just getting older. In my personal experience, a new 686 definitely has a nicer trigger than a new GP100 and the LCR has a slightly nicer trigger than a new J-frame. I've heard that these Match Champ models have a better trigger out of the box. I haven't held one yet though so I don't know.
 
Cosmodragoon said:
I'm starting to understand the attitude of some people who've been on these forums for years. "Another Ruger vs. S&W thread?!?"

Both tend to be decent quality. In my personal experience, older models seem to have more attention to fit and finish. Some of the cost-saving measures like MIM parts on new guns aren't inspiring but haven't failed me. The lock hole on modern Smith and Wesson revolvers is still a major concern. Even if lock failure is radically rare, it can still happen. The fact that it is an extra and totally unnecessary system is where the real problem lies. The knowledge that it exists because of pressure from the anti-gun lobby makes it an on-gun reminder of the forces trying so hard to violate our rights.

I can't tell if the Ruger triggers have gotten worse from the factory of if I'm just getting older. In my personal experience, a new 686 definitely has a nicer trigger than a new GP100 and the LCR has a slightly nicer trigger than a new J-frame. I've heard that these Match Champ models have a better trigger out of the box. I haven't held one yet though so I don't know.
Click to expand...



Have to agree with most of your post, but I seem to find that most of the GP100s that I have purchased of late, have had pretty good DA triggers out of the box. I bought a Lipsey’s 5” .357 and a 5” 327 in 2018. The SA needs attention, but after working the action a little, the DA pulls are nice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I took him to the range and was very pleased with the trigger pulls. I have a tendency to stage in double action. This one seems eager to smoothly stage until just before release. Don't know how you could engineer that. The result though, is great accuracy, just about the same as single action. I'm not really a "shooter" though. As of now, I shoot this guy better in double action than any of my Smiths. I also shoot it better than my other GP100. Maybe there is something to the extra care supposedly given these Match Champions.
 
Guys, a new gun out of time ain't because the works are delicate, it's because of poor quality control. We get poor quality from a lot of firearms makers now days. This includes Ruger and S&W from my experience. I had a gun replaced by Ruger and then had to send the replacement back on warranty--for instance. I've also sent S&Ws back on warranty and Browning, repaired Kimber myself. The list goes on. As far as strength never blew up a S&W or a Ruger. I do re;late Ruger trigger pulls to Mattell cap guns. I've never owned a Ruger of any kind that didn't need a trigger job except my LC9, it is what it is but it is light and smooth. Most don't like it tho. I did have to file a burr off the firing pin to get a hitch out of it. I shoot Rugers and S&W but I get tired of hearing the Ruger is stronger and tougher, it ain't it's just bigger and heavier. If you blow up either one it's because someone did something stupid.
 
Right.
Back in the Good Old Days, Jeff Cooper said that in the only test to destruction he knew of, a Super Blackhawk blew up before a Model 29 but since it was approaching triple loads, he did not think it signified much.
 
Jim Watson said:
Right.

Back in the Good Old Days, Jeff Cooper said that in the only test to destruction he knew of, a Super Blackhawk blew up before a Model 29 but since it was approaching triple loads, he did not think it signified much.
Click to expand...



Today, there is no real reason to feel that either would self destruct shooting normal loads. Yet, on the comment of a Super Blackhawk vs a Mod 29, check with some of the older silhouette shooters. The 29s would shoot loose while the Super Blackhawks would keep shooting.

I’m not about to rid myself of my Smiths, but Ruger does make a pretty good DA revolver.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
pete2 said:
Guys, a new gun out of time ain't because the works are delicate, it's because of poor quality control. We get poor quality from a lot of firearms makers now days. This includes Ruger and S&W from my experience. I had a gun replaced by Ruger and then had to send the replacement back on warranty--for instance. I've also sent S&Ws back on warranty and Browning, repaired Kimber myself. The list goes on. As far as strength never blew up a S&W or a Ruger. I do re;late Ruger trigger pulls to Mattell cap guns. I've never owned a Ruger of any kind that didn't need a trigger job except my LC9, it is what it is but it is light and smooth. Most don't like it tho. I did have to file a burr off the firing pin to get a hitch out of it. I shoot Rugers and S&W but I get tired of hearing the Ruger is stronger and tougher, it ain't it's just bigger and heavier. If you blow up either one it's because someone did something stupid.
Click to expand...



Pete, a couple of things...
The majority of Smith revolvers I’ve seen out of time we’re not new. Most were shot, and almost all were dry fired a lot. Firing or dry firing a DA revolver means that the cylinder has to come to a rest after the torque. My 19s (all five) were timed from the factory to lock up just about the time the sear breaks. This can make for a really nice DA pull, also makes critical timing all the more critical.
While this lock up is nice for PPC shooting as was conducted years ago, it isn’t as relevant for constant faster pulls. Rugers lock up so fast, it’s almost impossible for one to go out of time, unless it becomes seriously worn. I’m not saying it can’t happen, it just isn’t as likely.

As far as Ruger being stronger because of its size, well the frame is larger, but the cylinder on a L frame has a greater circumference. This also explains why Ruger seems to be having problems with their 7 shot GP 100s.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
It seems there is trouble extracting cases. The case heads are very close together. With some ammo manufacturers’ standards, the case heads are touching. After firing, extraction becomes difficult. I realize there is a SAAMI standard, but there are variances that manufactures take.

Ruger GP-100, 7 shot Two threads merged
https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink?sh...orum.net/showthread.php?t=339378&share_type=t

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Arquebus, I've handled a Match Champion or two, and like them. The grips even fit me. I've owned several 686s since they were first introduced, and would have no qualms about shooting copious quantities of factory .357 ammo, to include Buffalo Bore, etc., through either the Ruger or the 686. As to any timing issues, been there, done that. As mentioned, that's just factory QC, not a delicacy issue. IF, I buy another medium frame DA revolver, it'll likely be one of those 10MM GP100s. If so, it will get used with the "real" 10MM ammo, with no concerns whatsoever about durability:)
 
rock185 said:
Arquebus, I've handled a Match Champion or two, and like them. The grips even fit me. I've owned several 686s since they were first introduced, and would have no qualms about shooting copious quantities of factory .357 ammo, to include Buffalo Bore, etc., through either the Ruger or the 686. As to any timing issues, been there, done that. As mentioned, that's just factory QC, not a delicacy issue. IF, I buy another medium frame DA revolver, it'll likely be one of those 10MM GP100s. If so, it will get used with the "real" 10MM ammo, with no concerns whatsoever about durability:)
Click to expand...
Are talking about one of the TALO exclusive ones rock185?
 
Last edited:
Silvermane 1, Don't know. Thought they were just regular production Rugers. Chambered in .357, 4.2" barrel, Hogue wood grips,etc. First I handled couple years ago IIRC, had fixed rear sight, more recent gun had adjustable rear sight.
 
I hate the wood grips on the match champion gp100 also, this is 10MM I went back to the original inserts from Altamont
DSC01315.jpg
 
I hate the wood grips on the match champion gp100 also, this is 10MM I went back to the original inserts from Altamont
Click to expand...
Do all the 10mm Match Champions look like that one? I thought that the beveling/tapering at the front of the cylinder was on all the Match Champions but I can't see it on that one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top