My Ruger SP101 4.2" 327 magnum

I have several 32 H&R magnum revolvers and a 32 long. The idea of the 327 sounded even better, so I talked myself into one of the new 4.2" SP101's when they came out recently.

The frame is smaller than medium-sized. The original grips are on the small side for my extra-large hands (so I got some larger wooden grips that fit me better). It is nice and solid without being too heavy. The sights are good. The single-action trigger is longer and heavier than average. The double-action trigger is heavy but smooth. You have to push down hard to cock the hammer. It balances okay, but is a little nose-heavy.

The stainless steel was polished, but not until the polishing marks were completely gone. There were no scratches or dings. The area near the back of the crane on the left looks a little crude. Overall the revolver is finished to the level of a quality product, but not a superior quality product, imho.

I have taken it to the range three times. I fired 100 or so rounds each time, reloads and various kinds of factory ammo.

I fired a box of factory 327 magnum ammo that felt kind of snappy. My FiL's milder 327 magnum reloads were easy to shoot. The various H&R magnum loads were mild. The S&W long had no recoil to speak of. The little revolver is stout and has a sizeable barrel with lug, so it is heavy enough to soak up some recoil compared to a 2" snub.

I could probably shoot it better if the trigger wasn't so uninspiring. The single-action is not so great. The double-action is smooth, but pretty heavy. Cocking it back for single-action starts off hard and gets worse as the gun gets hot and dirty. By the time I had shot a bunch of rounds through a bunch of handguns and broken a sweat, I used the double-action more because: a) it is smooth b) cocking the hammer is obnoxious with tired sweaty hands.

I can hit a paper plate every time at 7 yards with any ammo, no problem. But so what? Any handgun should be able to do that, really.

At roughly 10 or 15 yards I could keep them all on the smallish square paper targets, but that was about it. The spicier 327's seemed to be the most accurate. My FiL's mild 32 long loads were sort of centered on the paper target... sort of.

Overall I am mildly disappointed. I had hoped for better accuracy: brand-new, from a major manufacturer, nice heft and a longish barrel, and it was not what I call cheap.

So yeah, it shoots fine. The problem is that it really shoots no better than my Charter Arms, Taurus, or New England Firearms (H&R) 32 magnum snubs. In fact, the old NEF revolver that I got for $148 has such a superior trigger that I can easily shoot it better at most ranges, even with the little notch sights

I had hoped for more of a belt/range/plinking gun that was pretty accurate out to 25 yards or so. Maybe the trigger will improve over time. I will probably get more used to it. Your mileage will doubtless vary.

Here are some before and after pictures:

I am a cheapskate and spoiled by excellent handguns with great triggers that I got inexpensively. If I pay over $500 for a handgun, I expect a good trigger right out of the box. If it ends up needing springs and fluff & buff to have a good trigger, it wasn't a good deal for "full price", imho.

Doubtless I will find which ammo works best with it. Perhaps my expectations for accuracy with 32 SW long were overly high. But my 44's and 45's and 357's have not had extremely noticeable dropoffs in accuracy when using shorter cartridges.

It is probably accurate enough on its own. Doubtless the problem is with me. It is such a handy size and caliber that I may have the trigger and springs taken care of eventually.

The grips are from eBay. They are some of the foreign exotic hardwood grips that are IIRC from Thailand. I paid $40 for them. This is the third set of Thai eBay grips I have bought. The first two were perfect. This set needed a few bumps with a dremel to fit just right.