GP100 Internal Rust

[UAV Dan]

Hi. I've had a stainless Ruger GP100 for the last 6 months that I've been using as my carry gun for when I'm working solo. Last month, I was working in Alabama near the Coosa River and after returning home found that the cylinder would barely turn and the trigger pull was extremely stiff, so stiff I didn't attempt to pull it all the way out of fear of damaging the internal parts. During the trip, when I had a chance, I was careful to wipe my sweat off, let the gun dry if it got wet and keep some oil on the exposed parts. Well I get to looking at it and there is rusty sludge coming out of the where the hand turns and behind the trigger. Currently, the guns back at Ruger and it sounds like they'll send it back to me having done nothing unless I pay them for a cleaning. My guess is the river water is what did it, and the local gunsmith says the smaller cheaper internal parts on these guns are prone to getting gummed up under wet conditions. To be clear, I wasn't dunking the gun in water and letting it sit, but there were a few times when I had to go knee deep into the water and some probably splashed in there.

So, can anyone recommend a stainless revolver that won't have this problem? I'm going to get the GP100 fixed and probably sell to a friend in need for cheap since I bought it without having looked at the Smiths first and after shooting a buddie's, it's clear what I should have bought. I know a Glock or equivalent would probably be better in these situations, but I shoot a revolver better and prefer 357 magnum for potential predator defense.

Also, are there any magic oils or something that would help prevent this rust accumulation in humid, wet environments?

 

[9mmepiphany]

Sorry you're not happy with your GP100, but a stainless S&W would have fared much worst. The Ruger is made to stand up to more abuse like what we are talking about

The rule of thumb is that the word is "Stain Less" not Rust Proof. The care you took concerning water/sweat obviously wasn't enough. When you're going to expose it to these kinds on conditions, you need to keep the internal parts lubed too. While there are many better lubes on the market today, I remember an old outdoors-man who used to spray down his blued revolver, both inside and out, with WD-40 until it dripped and his guns always looked great and functioned reliably...obviously if you're going this route, you're going to need to flush the internals periodically

 

[JohnKSa]

So, can anyone recommend a stainless revolver that won't have this problem?

There is no gun that you can wear in those kind of conditions for significant periods of time without performing frequent maintenance and then expect it to perform without issue. Even the really rust-resistant plastic semi-autos have internal parts that can rust with prolonged exposure.

The manual for the GP100 provides instructions for taking the revolver down to the point where one can blow out and relubricate all the internals easily. This procedure can be done easily with very minimal tools. I would recommend using something like Hornady One Shot Spray that flushes out any crud or water and then dries, leaving a non-gummy protective lubricant film in place.

I'm going to get the GP100 fixed and probably sell to a friend in need for cheap since I bought it without having looked at the Smiths first and after shooting a buddie's, it's clear what I should have bought.

Other revolvers tend to be much more complicated to take apart to the level that allows easy access to the internals, so if you're wanting to stick with a revolver, I would say a GP100 is your best bet. It's just going to require some regular attention.

Also, are there any magic oils or something that would help prevent this rust accumulation in humid, wet environments?

Only with regular attention. Even the best protectants will need to be maintained in harsh conditions.

 

[ColtPythonElite]

I'd keep the GP. On a regular basis, I would take off the grips and soak it in Ed's Red (without acetone) for a few hours and then let it drip dry on a towel. I doubt if you would have any rust problems with this routine.

 

[jdavis123]

Doesn’t sound like rust to me. The brown sludge dripping out behind the trigger seems more like river water and mud residue. Rust doesn’t drip but adheres to metal unless liquid solvent is applied to it to break it down. Even then “sludge” would be unlikely. You should either break the gun down and throughly clean, inspect, and lubricate the internals or have a gunsmith do so if you are afraid to do do so yourself. Once done, I think the Ruger will be fine. You should learn the tear down procedure and do it periodically since you seem to be in a situation that requires frequent maintenance for your weapon.

 

[Catpop]

I use the spray and blow method on internals.
Remove grips, spray with G96, work action a few times, blow out with air hose, wipe off, replace grips.

Works great on my Ruger BHs, SP101, and GP100 in NC woods while working! BH 357 has much experience bouncing around on a D6C busting out stumps! Prior to Rugers, my SW m60 was a daily carry when cruising timber and surveying. Lots of dust and debris finds it way down it those internals for sure!
Ah the good old days! Wish I was still able to do that

 

[Obturation]

I agree with others, a gp100 will take way more neglect and hard use than anything you'll find. If you're going through rivers and outdoors conditions with your revolver it should be cleaned once a month minimum.

the local gunsmith says the smaller cheaper internal parts on these guns are prone to getting gummed up

Find a gunsmith with a functional brain. My guess is he's a ruger hater , probably jealous of it's strength and good looks. As others have said, the ruger is BY FAR easier to disassemble and clean for maintenance than any other revolver. And much more robust, nothing small or cheap about a ruger- survives shooting that turns S&Ws into scrap- you won't find many who disagree (unless they're ruger haters too)

Your post amounts to "I didn't change my oil for 5 years and my engine blew up, crappy car. Took it to my mechanic who said -brand x- is made cheap and they're junk."

 

[edwardware]

I sounds like you used it in wet conditions, and then neglected to do the obvious maintenance. That's on you, not Ruger.

Watch a video on disassembly, and plan to do the maintenance from now on. It'll take 5-10 minutes.

Note: that doesn't mean you can just pour it full of oil. It needs to by dry (of water) and lightly oiled. Too much oil will attract boogers and crunchies.

 

[Biblethumpncop]

Have the gun completely hard chromed with Mahovsky’s Metalife. http://www.mahovskysmetalife.com/

 

[Sneakshot92]

Hi. I've had a stainless Ruger GP100 for the last 6 months that I've been using as my carry gun for when I'm working solo. Last month, I was working in Alabama near the Coosa River and after returning home found that the cylinder would barely turn and the trigger pull was extremely stiff, so stiff I didn't attempt to pull it all the way out of fear of damaging the internal parts. During the trip, when I had a chance, I was careful to wipe my sweat off, let the gun dry if it got wet and keep some oil on the exposed parts. Well I get to looking at it and there is rusty sludge coming out of the where the hand turns and behind the trigger. Currently, the guns back at Ruger and it sounds like they'll send it back to me having done nothing unless I pay them for a cleaning. My guess is the river water is what did it, and the local gunsmith says the smaller cheaper internal parts on these guns are prone to getting gummed up under wet conditions. To be clear, I wasn't dunking the gun in water and letting it sit, but there were a few times when I had to go knee deep into the water and some probably splashed in there.

So, can anyone recommend a stainless revolver that won't have this problem? I'm going to get the GP100 fixed and probably sell to a friend in need for cheap since I bought it without having looked at the Smiths first and after shooting a buddie's, it's clear what I should have bought. I know a Glock or equivalent would probably be better in these situations, but I shoot a revolver better and prefer 357 magnum for potential predator defense.

Also, are there any magic oils or something that would help prevent this rust accumulation in humid, wet environments?

My cousin lives in southern Louisiana and swears by Marvel Mystery oil in his pistols. Food for thought; If it's designed to keep the internals of compressed air driven tools lubricated and protected in wet conditions, why wouldn't it do the same for guns?

 

[9mmepiphany]

I sounds like you used it in wet conditions, and then neglected to do the obvious maintenance. That's on you, not Ruger.

Currently, the guns back at Ruger and it sounds like they'll send it back to me having done nothing unless I pay them for a cleaning.

The first quote explains the second quote.

Ruger is happy to fix their guns, on their dime, when they experience a parts failure. They usually charge when a gun fails to function due to lack of maintenance

 

[Zaydok Allen]

I agree with the others. Keep your GP100 but you need to step up your game on oiling internals and keeping it clean. I don't think a Smith would do better.

I also think a different holster might help. Diamond D Custom Leather makes great stuff at affordable prices, and they make cover flaps for their Alaskan Hunter Holster. Also their Guide's Choice chest rig would keep your gun up and away from water.

Ultimately though, with what you are exposing the gun to, it will be on you to take care of the internals properly.

https://www.diamonddcustomleather.com/collections/holsters

 

[.38 Special]

Though it's probably been rough on you, Dan, I think the folks here are telling you the truth. In your shoes, I would pay Ruger to fix the gun, watch a video on routine disassembly and maintenance of that model, and use a good anti-corrosive. (According to one thorough test, Hornady One-Shot is pretty effective.)

 

[straightshooterjake]

I also think a different holster might help. Diamond D Custom Leather makes great stuff at affordable prices, and they make cover flaps for their Alaskan Hunter Holster.

@460Shooter said pretty much what I was thinking. The other posts about maintenance also have many good suggestions, but I am wondering whether some modifications to your carry arrangement might give the pistol a lot more protection.

One thing I often think about is how holsters are misrepresented in Western movies. The holsters we always see are really speed draw holsters that were rarely used. The old cavalry holsters with a full flap over the pistol are better examples of what people really used back when a Colt revolver cost about a months pay. Speed of access does matter, but protecting the pistol so that it lasts, and also so it works when you need it, is very important.

Of course, you do need to consider draw speed and the rules which apply to concealed or open carry. But I am wondering if a more protective holster, or carrying the gun inside your outer garment, might also help with maintenance issues.

 

[Riomouse911]

The experts have spoken, and spoken well. Every time I worked in a downpour my sidearm was stripped down, wiped down and oiled up when I got home. Year after year they kept on ticking along with no rust issues inside or out.

The guys are right, have Ruger clean the GP and then get a cleaning routine down to keep it maintained and the GP will outlast you .

Good luck and stay safe!

 

[UAV Dan]

Have the gun completely hard chromed with Mahovsky’s Metalife. http://www.mahovskysmetalife.com/

Thanks for the actual helpful response. Their work looks good and I'm going to go that route with a new gun.

Sadly, from now on I'm just gonna have to ignore the virulent Ruger die-hards who've shared their discomfort with the idea that a Ruger product isn't absolutely perfect. Unfortunately, the GP100 hasn't met my expectations in areas other than rust-proofness. I never said a Smith and Wesson would do any better. It's a matter of taste and I have more confidence in the S&W product. After all, last time I checked few, if any, police departments/government entities have trusted their lives to Ruger products.

My work is in enough demand that it's of very little consequence for me to ditch the Ruger to pick up a Smith.

I'm having Ruger clean the gun and when it gets back it will be transferred to a disabled friend. I have no doubt it will be a serviceable gun for his uses since he is an at-risk individual. I'll be purchasing a 686 tomorrow and likely having it hard-chromed completely.

 

[BSA1]

I have often thought that a Hard Chromed Stainless Steel gun will be as rust resistant as is possible. However that is still no excuse for not performing maintenance on regular intervals. You can get by with only three items; a screwdriver, brake cleaner and oil.

Use the screwdriver to remove the grips, cock the empty gun and hose the inside of the action with brake cleaner letting the gunk run out through the grip frame opening. Once you have blown all of the gunk out of the gun spray the internal parts with oil. Rem-Oil is a little on the light side for me and no way use WD-40. A CLP works well and G96 is great for outdoor protection.

 

[Obturation]

I'm just gonna have to ignore the virulent Ruger die-hards who've shared their discomfort with the idea that a Ruger product isn't absolutely perfect.

No one at all said rugers perfect. You'll find any gun will suffer if you neglect it, no way around it. Your tone suggests you took offence to some of the replys, I'm sure no one meant to get you ruffled, I know I didn't . but if you think hard chrome will allow you to disregard maintenance, you're mistaken. If you think a 686 is is more immune to neglect, you're mistaken again.were all friends here, if you take issue with a response, address it individually. If you want to ignore the ruger guys when you're talking revolvers, you'll be talking to yourself a lot. If you weren't looking for opinions on your situation maybe creating a thread about it was a mistake. I hope you get the 686 and it fills your needs. Let us know how it turns out.

 

[Tilos]

Thanks for the actual helpful response. Their work looks good and I'm going to go that route with a new gun.

Sadly, from now on I'm just gonna have to ignore the virulent Ruger die-hards who've shared their discomfort with the idea that a Ruger product isn't absolutely perfect. Unfortunately, the GP100 hasn't met my expectations in areas other than rust-proofness. I never said a Smith and Wesson would do any better. It's a matter of taste and I have more confidence in the S&W product. After all, last time I checked few, if any, police departments/government entities have trusted their lives to Ruger products.

My work is in enough demand that it's of very little consequence for me to ditch the Ruger to pick up a Smith.

I'm having Ruger clean the gun and when it gets back it will be transferred to a disabled friend. I have no doubt it will be a serviceable gun for his uses since he is an at-risk individual. I'll be purchasing a 686 tomorrow and likely having it hard-chromed completely.

For most who answered here a gun is not a tool for work like you.
I would be searching for the best tool for the job after a failure too, but I would maintain that tool so that it performed it's best when I used/needed it.

The environment was the reason for the failure not the gun, anything you choose to carry will fail unless you change HOW you carry and maintain it.
Something to consider...
I use a totally enclosed across the chest/made for hunting holster with a flap closure when I'm in a harsh environment like that.
jmo,

 

[Riomouse911]

You’ll find the 686 is a very good gun. Let us know how the innards of the 686 hold up to the same treatment the GP went through .

Stay safe.

 

[UAV Dan]

No one at all said rugers perfect. You'll find any gun will suffer if you neglect it, no way around it. Your tone suggests you took offence to some of the replys, I'm sure no one meant to get you ruffled, I know I didn't . but if you think hard chrome will allow you to disregard maintenance, you're mistaken. If you think a 686 is is more immune to neglect, you're mistaken again.were all friends here, if you take issue with a response, address it individually. If you want to ignore the ruger guys when you're talking revolvers, you'll be talking to yourself a lot. If you weren't looking for opinions on your situation maybe creating a thread about it was a mistake. I hope you get the 686 and it fills your needs. Let us know how it turns out.

No offense taken from anyone, I simply found it strange that my simple question regarding rust prevention was responded to with so much enthusiasm against replacing the GP100 with a Smith. I'm simply trying to keep things on topic. My question wasn't should I keep the GP100, it was what steps can I take to prevent having this happen again.

 

[Obturation]

No offense taken from anyone, I simply found it strange that my simple question regarding rust prevention was responded to with so much enthusiasm against replacing the GP100 with a Smith. I'm simply trying to keep things on topic. My question wasn't should I keep the GP100, it was what steps can I take to prevent having this happen again.

Gotcha. The reason I think you got the push back is because in the firearms world the gp100 is widely regarded as a tougher than nail over built tank of a gun. Even the guys that don't like them still respect them for their rugged but sometimes unrefined characteristics. Boat anchors a common one, that's what makes many love them though. I have one and love it but it sees mainly just range use.

 

[straightshooterjake]

After all, last time I checked few, if any, police departments/government entities have trusted their lives to Ruger products.

A hard chromed 686 sounds very cool. Even though I respect the toughness of Rugers, I prefer a Smith for my own use. I expect a chromed 686 will serve you well.

I do want to comment on the above quote though. In order to get department contracts, companies need to compete vigorously on price, and also provide armorer training and a supply of spare parts. For most of their models, Ruger has declined to do any of the above. In particular, Ruger prefers to control quality by doing all repairs in their own factory. And they consider many parts "restricted," and won't even supply them to gunsmiths.

So I do not think it is fair to judge the quality of Ruger by their lack of government contracts. When other companies are competing to offer a big discount on large contracts, Ruger chooses to send their output to the civilian market at normal retail prices.

As an aside, the willingness to train armorers and supply spare parts is what really enabled S&W to dominate the competition market back in the days of revolvers. At one time, Colt revolvers were preferred by many target shooters, but Colt was not really interested in providing parts to gunsmiths. I hear people say that the S&W action has advantages for competition and is easier to work on. There is some truth to those statements, but those are not the only reasons that S&W came to dominate the competition and law enforcement markets.

 

[9mmepiphany]

last time I checked few, if any, police departments/government entities have trusted their lives to Ruger products.

The California Department of Corrections (66k+ officers) have Ruger products as one of their standard issued weapons

 

[JohnKSa]

Their work looks good and I'm going to go that route with a new gun.

Keep in mind that not all parts can be chromed. Springs, for example, will still rust if exposed to moisture even with the rest of the gun chromed.

Sadly, from now on I'm just gonna have to ignore the virulent Ruger die-hards who've shared their discomfort with the idea that a Ruger product isn't absolutely perfect.

Ruger products certainly have their warts. But a stainless GP100 is no more likely to rust, or to stop working due to rust than any other stainless revolver. It's not a perfect product by any means, but the idea that it rusted because of some flaw peculiar to Rugers or to the GP100 itself has no basis in fact.

Unfortunately, the GP100 hasn't met my expectations in areas other than rust-proofness.

Sure, there are lots of people who prefer other revolvers over the Ruger DA revolver offerings or who feel that the GP100 is inferior in one way or another to their preferred revolver brand. Nothing at all wrong with that. But the idea that you're going to see any kind of significant difference in "rust proofness" by going to another brand is pretty far-fetched. There are some problems with the GP100 design, but "rust-proofness" just isn't one of them.

No offense taken from anyone, I simply found it strange that my simple question regarding rust prevention was responded to with so much enthusiasm against replacing the GP100 with a Smith.

If you want a Smith, get one. They're good guns. What people are telling you is that you shouldn't expect significantly different results from the Smith if you give it the same treatment you gave the GP100. And pointing out that if you want to take it apart to get at the internals easily, the GP100 design definitely makes that easier.

After all, last time I checked few, if any, police departments/government entities have trusted their lives to Ruger products.

Ruger has definitely never made significant inroads into the military/government/police market. There have been a few contract purchases, but nothing like what you see with some other brands. There are a number of reasons for that, but the rust-resistance of the GP100 ain't one of them.