buck460xvr said:
And the most important thing is that he was extremely lucky.
A little background on his blown up 45 Colt here:
http://www.wideopenspaces.com/elmer-keiths-blown-revolver-cylinder-classic-reloading-safety-story/
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
What would Elmer Keith do - with a Ruger GP100 in .44 Special?
- Thread starter BluRidgDav
- Start date
And the most important thing is that he was extremely lucky.
A little background on his blown up 45 Colt here:
http://www.wideopenspaces.com/elmer-keiths-blown-revolver-cylinder-classic-reloading-safety-story/
BluRidgDav
New member
I'm reminded of when Ruger introduced their SP101:
- first it was chambered in .38 Special +P,
- later, it was approved for some .357 Magnum loads, but, not all of them,
- later still, it was authorized for any .357 Magnum ammunition.
Maybe that was evolving R&D, or maybe it was a marketing ploy?
Some guys, bought all three increasingly powerful versions of the SP101 as they became available.
Not for collecting purposes, but, because many customers wanted an unrestricted .357 in a small frame revolver.
Maybe Ruger will continue to upgrade the GP100 in the same fashion?
Or maybe I should just buy the mid-sized, 5-shot, S&W model 69 in .44 Magnum?
Since everyone "knows" that a S&W is more stout than a similar sized Ruger . . . Right?
- first it was chambered in .38 Special +P,
- later, it was approved for some .357 Magnum loads, but, not all of them,
- later still, it was authorized for any .357 Magnum ammunition.
Maybe that was evolving R&D, or maybe it was a marketing ploy?
Some guys, bought all three increasingly powerful versions of the SP101 as they became available.
Not for collecting purposes, but, because many customers wanted an unrestricted .357 in a small frame revolver.
Maybe Ruger will continue to upgrade the GP100 in the same fashion?
Or maybe I should just buy the mid-sized, 5-shot, S&W model 69 in .44 Magnum?
Since everyone "knows" that a S&W is more stout than a similar sized Ruger . . . Right?
My guess is ruger held off for so long making this gun because they feared some would see the name "Ruger" on the barrel and decide it was a mischambered 44 mag and then load it up beyond what it was designed for.
Exactly. Ruger has a reputation for making tough revolvers. And I would argue that reputation is deserved... but they are not invincible. Ruger has to be aware that there are misconceptions about how tough there revolvers are.
I've met many shooters who think they can load a Ruger HOT, HOT !
To be fair, there are recognized "Ruger Only" loads for their large frame revolvers in .45LC. To also be fair, this is the only officially recognized way you can exceed normal load data for a Ruger revolver. Oh and then there is Buffalobore's .44mag +p+ load for the Super Redhawk. At any rate, as others have said of Elmer Keith. He has already plowed that ground, and likely directly contributed to some of the calibers that we enjoy today. He was a pioneer because he had to be. Now we can enjoy more power than he ever could, in a safe controlled manner, because of him. That's probably what we should be thinking of in reference to Elmer Keith.
And the Blackhawk, Freedom Arms, Taurus Raging Bull, Colt Anaconda, Magnum Research BFR, Dan Wesson Revolvers, etc.Oh and then there is Buffalobore's .44mag +p+ load for the Super Redhawk.
Ruger is not the toughest kid on the block anymore.
When Keith experimented with the 44 Special there wasn't much else out there.
Now we have much stronger guns and chamberings. There is simply no point in hot rodding the 44 special anymore.
Jim
Last edited:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...3E749C97AE166DD780343E749C97AE166&FORM=VRDGAR
Great review by Hitckok45. AT about 30 seconds into the video he shows a close up of the forcing cone in the Ruger. You can see the thinness of the forcing cone.
With that said the following guns that I have the forcing cone measurements.
S&W 69: 0.095
S7W 629: 0.098
Bull dog 0.080
Maybe some one can measure a Ruger 100 in 44 special but saying that the 100 is a much stronger gun than the 69 is silly.
I wont argue that the Ruger is a very strong gun and is a perfect gun for the 44 special but I will also say that the Charter arms bull dog is as strong as the Ruger.
I say this since I have owned the one I have since the mid 80's and it has had over 500 factory Winchester silver tips (The gun was carried every day for 20 years and the round's I carried were fired every 4 weeks for new. I purchased a case of silver tips at the time and it was the only gun that fired them and they have been gone for years.) and a lot of 240 at 800 FPS and in all that it has never failed so it is as strong as the Ruger, or stronger since the forcing cone is thicker.
And saying that is just as silly as saying the Ruger is stronger than the 69 and makes about as much sense.
Great review by Hitckok45. AT about 30 seconds into the video he shows a close up of the forcing cone in the Ruger. You can see the thinness of the forcing cone.
With that said the following guns that I have the forcing cone measurements.
S&W 69: 0.095
S7W 629: 0.098
Bull dog 0.080
Maybe some one can measure a Ruger 100 in 44 special but saying that the 100 is a much stronger gun than the 69 is silly.
I wont argue that the Ruger is a very strong gun and is a perfect gun for the 44 special but I will also say that the Charter arms bull dog is as strong as the Ruger.
I say this since I have owned the one I have since the mid 80's and it has had over 500 factory Winchester silver tips (The gun was carried every day for 20 years and the round's I carried were fired every 4 weeks for new. I purchased a case of silver tips at the time and it was the only gun that fired them and they have been gone for years.) and a lot of 240 at 800 FPS and in all that it has never failed so it is as strong as the Ruger, or stronger since the forcing cone is thicker.
And saying that is just as silly as saying the Ruger is stronger than the 69 and makes about as much sense.
TruthTellers
New member
Exactly. The GP was built for being a tank of a revolver for shooting .357 Magnum and nothing larger. The renewed interest in .44 Special for that big bore concealed carry revolver is what led to Ruger making this, not a pocket rocket.Elmer would buy a .44 mag. There is a reason Ruger did not chamber the gun in .44 magnum.
22-rimfire
New member
I think Elmer would probably pass on this gun as he would already be shooting 44 mags and the larger bores. He certainly wasn't afraid of recoil.
If Keith owned the GP-100 in 44 Special, I think he'd view it as a urban carry gun.
If Keith owned the GP-100 in 44 Special, I think he'd view it as a urban carry gun.