Ruger GP100 44 special configuration
- Thread starter wild willy
- Start date
- Status
minutemen1776
Member
I cannot nitpick over this Ruger offering. It is darn near exactly what I've wanted. I generally don't prefer fiber optic sights, but this one looks quite nice. I love the barrel length, grips, non-fluted cylinder, and especially the chambering! Several years back, I had a S&W 696 I enjoyed. I got out of reloading and let the 696 go as well. When I finally looked around at getting another, they had become prohibitively expensive. A new GP100 will soon be its replacement, or at least that is my plan. I think it will be perfect. I already have a 6-inch .357 GP100, and I enjoy it more than any S&W or Ruger Six-Series revolver I've owned.
RealGun
Member
Relative to what? Compare it to Rossi 720, SW696, and Taurus 441. Same range. It is not a pocket gun.
RealGun
Member
I don't think everyone measures carry capability based on the standard of a 38 snub, nor are they talking the same mode of carry. We are talking 3" barrel here, which wouldn't be popular as strictly a fun gun for the range, where I see longer barrels prevailing, when more than just practicing with a carry gun.
I think it looks about perfect for my needs. I like the mid-length as well as the aesthetics of the unfluted cylinder.
I'd rather it have fixed sights as the on-the-fly adjustable ones that Ruger uses just don't look very robust. Now, I know they hold up fine. I have a 4" .327 on my hip that has never gotten knocked loose, and it's nice to be able to use a small screw driver at the range to dial in what I'm shooting. Then again, I'm shooting 4 different kinds of ammo through the SP. Fixed sights just seem to make more sense on a carry gun tossing a big ol slug...for me.
That said, the sights aren't going to keep me from buying one first quarter next year. I do plan on putting a more compact grip on it, though. My hands aren't huge, and that (admittedly comfy) long grip would just print even more. Still, it'd be a nice option to toss on when walking in the woods open carry in the winter with gloves on.
I'm hoping to order one of these up by the end of February.
I'd rather it have fixed sights as the on-the-fly adjustable ones that Ruger uses just don't look very robust. Now, I know they hold up fine. I have a 4" .327 on my hip that has never gotten knocked loose, and it's nice to be able to use a small screw driver at the range to dial in what I'm shooting. Then again, I'm shooting 4 different kinds of ammo through the SP. Fixed sights just seem to make more sense on a carry gun tossing a big ol slug...for me.
That said, the sights aren't going to keep me from buying one first quarter next year. I do plan on putting a more compact grip on it, though. My hands aren't huge, and that (admittedly comfy) long grip would just print even more. Still, it'd be a nice option to toss on when walking in the woods open carry in the winter with gloves on.
I'm hoping to order one of these up by the end of February.
Yup, Ruger nailed it with this one!!! Everyone wants a ccw that weighs 36oz's and has adjustable sights.
I guess people would want them for woods carry. But I'd much rather have the s&w Model 69 combat magnum chambered in 44mag.
http://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/model-69-combat-magnum
It's the same basic firearm as the gp100. The big differences are the gp100 & the s&w are:
L-frame is stronger
gp weighs 36oz vs 69 weighs 34.5oz
gp 3" bbl vs 69 2 3/4" bbl
The huge difference is 44spl vs 44mag.
I'd rather stick with my 22oz ca bulldog chambered in 44spl rather than switch to the 36oz gp100. The bulldog will do everything the gp100 can do and is darn near 1 # lighter.
I'd rather go with the s&w 69 combat magnum than the gp100 for a woods/carry revolver. Last I knew I could either leave the 44mags hot or download the 44mags to whatever level I want. But I can only load the 44spl's up so far. Couple that with better sights and a better trigger.
The S&W 69 Combat Magnum is several pay grades above the under powered gp100. That's pretty good considering ruger lists the gp100 @ $829 vs the 69 combat magnum @ $849.
I guess people would want them for woods carry. But I'd much rather have the s&w Model 69 combat magnum chambered in 44mag.
http://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/model-69-combat-magnum
It's the same basic firearm as the gp100. The big differences are the gp100 & the s&w are:
L-frame is stronger
gp weighs 36oz vs 69 weighs 34.5oz
gp 3" bbl vs 69 2 3/4" bbl
The huge difference is 44spl vs 44mag.
I'd rather stick with my 22oz ca bulldog chambered in 44spl rather than switch to the 36oz gp100. The bulldog will do everything the gp100 can do and is darn near 1 # lighter.
I'd rather go with the s&w 69 combat magnum than the gp100 for a woods/carry revolver. Last I knew I could either leave the 44mags hot or download the 44mags to whatever level I want. But I can only load the 44spl's up so far. Couple that with better sights and a better trigger.
The S&W 69 Combat Magnum is several pay grades above the under powered gp100. That's pretty good considering ruger lists the gp100 @ $829 vs the 69 combat magnum @ $849.
MikeJackmin
Member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2005
- Messages
- 1,604
I wasn't expecting anything else, but Ruger has a nice web form for submitting questions and I had to ask:
Comment / question:
I'm very pleased and excited to see your new GP100 in .44 special. Being that the .44 special is a frequently handloaded round, what is the maximum safe pressure that this new gun will be able to routinely handle? Is it comparable to the older blackhawks, or should it be strictly limited to the current SAMMI specs?
Thank you.
Response:
We are unable to advise you on a specific reloading data for your Ruger firearm. It is our suggestion that you contact Hornady Manufacturing Co at 308-382-1390. Ruger will not be responsible for the operation of or damage to your firearm caused by reloaded ammunition, or ammunition that is not manufactured to SAAMI (US) or CIP (European) Standards.
Comment / question:
I'm very pleased and excited to see your new GP100 in .44 special. Being that the .44 special is a frequently handloaded round, what is the maximum safe pressure that this new gun will be able to routinely handle? Is it comparable to the older blackhawks, or should it be strictly limited to the current SAMMI specs?
Thank you.
Response:
We are unable to advise you on a specific reloading data for your Ruger firearm. It is our suggestion that you contact Hornady Manufacturing Co at 308-382-1390. Ruger will not be responsible for the operation of or damage to your firearm caused by reloaded ammunition, or ammunition that is not manufactured to SAAMI (US) or CIP (European) Standards.
Blacksmoke
Member
It is that Ruger Legal Department again! While I can grasp their desire to avoid legal responsibility for the acts of stupid people, it does get annoying when they respond to legitimate inquiries with such drivel and add "Read the Instructions" to their fine guns.
As discussed repeatedly- not everybody wants a .44 Magnum version. 
If you do, go Smith.
If you can't abide the weight, go Smith.
If you need a built-in lock, go Smith.
If you believe the L-Frame is stronger, go Smith.
If you believe the Charter is better quality, go Smith.
If you just plain don't like the Ruger, go ANYWHERE else & allow those of us do find the new .44 Special interesting to enjoy it.
Denis
If you do, go Smith.
If you can't abide the weight, go Smith.
If you need a built-in lock, go Smith.
If you believe the L-Frame is stronger, go Smith.
If you believe the Charter is better quality, go Smith.
If you just plain don't like the Ruger, go ANYWHERE else & allow those of us do find the new .44 Special interesting to enjoy it.
Denis
RealGun
Member
The Smith 69 3" is rated at 34.4 oz. I am not so sure about that 36 ounces anyway, because my 41 Special is 34.2, same GP100 gun, and I don't see how the new 44 would be much different, as much as 36. How much difference is significant? The point is that it is not "heavy" at all in its class. My Taurus 441, another 3", 5-shot, 44 Special is an even 34 ounces. This is with certified postal scales. If the new gun is heavier than one would like to carry, that does not mean the gun is relatively "heavy" for what it is and compared to similar guns. It is just not the gun for you.
I was speaking a bit to your point about the 3" being primarily a carry length. It is just sort of in an awkward position. All the downsides of size and weight of a midsize gun, the same downsides in terms of capacity as a small gun, and no upside in terms of power like a magnum offers. For the weight and with the adjustable sights and high profile front sight, seems like it would make more sense as a 4"+ range gun.
As discussed repeatedly- not everybody wants a .44 Magnum version.
Denis
I agree.
For me, there is something special about shooting 44 Special in a gun chambered for 44 Special. (Same for 38 Special)
If the GP100 was chambered for 44 Magnum, I'd probably pass. I already have a S&W M69.
I'm assuming ruger knows how to weigh something, they posted 36oz on their website. If ruger can't even print the specs on a new firearm correctly, wrong sorta makes you wonder what else is wrong???
I'm glad a couple people discussed not wanting a 44mag revolver. I'm glad everyone doesn't want a 44mag revolver. If you like the ruger name than please by all means buy a gp100 in 44spl. If you like to pair cartrdiges with caliber specific firearms great, I'm glad all your ducks are in a row.
Myself, I'm just taking a good hard look at what available in the weight, capacity, caliber, revolver size of the gp100. I simply choose not to turn a blind eye simply because of a brand name. I absolutely did not see that S&W made a revolver that extremely close to the gp100 and automatically decide I'm buy the S&W. Unlike other people, I'm not firearm bias and will actually do head to head comparisons with different firearms. This is exactly what I did with the gp100 vs S&W 69 Combat Magnum.
Neither would be my 1st choice as a ccw, or a house sd revolver. But I could see the merits of a woods carry.
CCW:
A lot of people only use factory ammo for their ccw's (something about lawyers). All's 1 has to do is look around at the factory offerings & they will quickly realize that buffalo bore is the only game in town for the 44spl @ $1.50 a round and limited to 3 different bullet designs with 2 of them being in the 180gr/190gr range. Of they can opt for the bb anti-personal 200gr wc for $2.00 apiece. At the end of the day it's hard not to find a $.70 a round 44mag that doesn't perform to those bb "hot/heavy" 44spl loads. If you load your own 44spl's you still aren't going to get anywhere near the versatility of loading your own 44mags.
For those that keep saying there's nothing wrong with a 250gr bullet going 900fps in a 44spl, please tell me where I can buy that ammo at??? O my bad, you have to reload it!!! Well you can easily find 100+ different factory made 44mag offerings that will have a 240gr/250gr bullet doing around 900fps. All's anyone has to do is look at the cowboy action ammo. And all of the factory 44mag 240gr loads will easily do 900fps+ out of the short bbl's.What makes anyone think they can't load a 44mag down to any 44spl is beyond me. The other side of the coin is that you will never be able to load a 44spl up to even middle of the road 44mag loads. At the end of the day 44spl vs 44mag makes the 44spl look like a 1 legged man in a butt kicking contest.
Home sd:
To me any 5-shot firearm is a bad choice, plain and simple, but that's just me. If I did decide to go with a 5-shot revolver and looked at the gp100 I would also look at the S&W 69 Combat Magnum. Both pretty much the same size, same capacity/weight/etc. It comes down to 44spl vs 44mag. As for the reasons stated above, ammo selection would make my choice for me.
I guess some would gladly argue that they are worried about wall penetration and hurting loved ones. Well there's nothing that says what you use in a gp100 that can't be used in a S&W 69 Combat Magnum. Or you simply go with the better selection of ammo that is out there for the 44mag. If you load your own then it doesn't matter, both calibers can be loaded down but the 4spl can only be loaded up to low grade 44mag ammo.
Wood carry:
I almost liked the idea of a revolver the size of the gp100 for woods carry. But I also like to look at something other than the ruger logo when I'm trying to decide what to carry, the gp100 or the S&W 69 Combat Magnum. There both pretty much the same size, yada-yada-yada. Shotshells in either firearm doesn't matter with ammo like cci. But if you roll your own you get a lot more shot in a 44mag case than a 44spl case. And as usual, the 44mags can be safely loaded hotter. The 44spl's shotshells are around 1000fps and the the 44mags can easily be brought up to the 1200fps or higher velocities that most shotgun shooters are used to. Then there's the protection from the bear in the wood scenario. I guess if your a ruger fan the gp100/44spl is good enough. Others might want a 44mag for some odd reason.
Anyway, I'm not trying to talk anyone out of buying a gp100. I'm sure picking a gp100 over a S&W 69 Combat Magnum makes sense to some people. Things like:
Saving $75, right now gp100's can be found for around $600 and the S&W 69's for $675. You might be outgunned but you saved $75.
If you like using inferior calibers that have limited ammo selections at the store then the gp100 is for you.
If you like making poor choices with firearms that your life depends on, look no further than the gp100.
I can absolutely see loyal ruger fans wanting a gp100. I can see buying a gp100 for a range toy. Anything else the gp100 is easily outgunned by the S&W 69 Combat Magnum.
I hope the people that want a gp100 in 44spl buy's as many as they can. I hope all the gp100/44psl owners enjoy your range toy/toys. The only thing I see is ruger fans turning a blind eye to everything else that means anything other than the fact is that they are ruger fans.
At the end of the day there's nothing that a gp100 can do that the S&W 69 Combat Magnum can't do better. You want to be under gunned, buy the gp100. You want to drop down/lower yourself the gp100 levels, buy the s&w 69 Combat Magnum. You want to easily rise above the capabilities of the gp100, buy a S&W 69 Combat Magnum.
I'm glad a couple people discussed not wanting a 44mag revolver. I'm glad everyone doesn't want a 44mag revolver. If you like the ruger name than please by all means buy a gp100 in 44spl. If you like to pair cartrdiges with caliber specific firearms great, I'm glad all your ducks are in a row.
Myself, I'm just taking a good hard look at what available in the weight, capacity, caliber, revolver size of the gp100. I simply choose not to turn a blind eye simply because of a brand name. I absolutely did not see that S&W made a revolver that extremely close to the gp100 and automatically decide I'm buy the S&W. Unlike other people, I'm not firearm bias and will actually do head to head comparisons with different firearms. This is exactly what I did with the gp100 vs S&W 69 Combat Magnum.
Neither would be my 1st choice as a ccw, or a house sd revolver. But I could see the merits of a woods carry.
CCW:
A lot of people only use factory ammo for their ccw's (something about lawyers). All's 1 has to do is look around at the factory offerings & they will quickly realize that buffalo bore is the only game in town for the 44spl @ $1.50 a round and limited to 3 different bullet designs with 2 of them being in the 180gr/190gr range. Of they can opt for the bb anti-personal 200gr wc for $2.00 apiece. At the end of the day it's hard not to find a $.70 a round 44mag that doesn't perform to those bb "hot/heavy" 44spl loads. If you load your own 44spl's you still aren't going to get anywhere near the versatility of loading your own 44mags.
For those that keep saying there's nothing wrong with a 250gr bullet going 900fps in a 44spl, please tell me where I can buy that ammo at??? O my bad, you have to reload it!!! Well you can easily find 100+ different factory made 44mag offerings that will have a 240gr/250gr bullet doing around 900fps. All's anyone has to do is look at the cowboy action ammo. And all of the factory 44mag 240gr loads will easily do 900fps+ out of the short bbl's.What makes anyone think they can't load a 44mag down to any 44spl is beyond me. The other side of the coin is that you will never be able to load a 44spl up to even middle of the road 44mag loads. At the end of the day 44spl vs 44mag makes the 44spl look like a 1 legged man in a butt kicking contest.
Home sd:
To me any 5-shot firearm is a bad choice, plain and simple, but that's just me. If I did decide to go with a 5-shot revolver and looked at the gp100 I would also look at the S&W 69 Combat Magnum. Both pretty much the same size, same capacity/weight/etc. It comes down to 44spl vs 44mag. As for the reasons stated above, ammo selection would make my choice for me.
I guess some would gladly argue that they are worried about wall penetration and hurting loved ones. Well there's nothing that says what you use in a gp100 that can't be used in a S&W 69 Combat Magnum. Or you simply go with the better selection of ammo that is out there for the 44mag. If you load your own then it doesn't matter, both calibers can be loaded down but the 4spl can only be loaded up to low grade 44mag ammo.
Wood carry:
I almost liked the idea of a revolver the size of the gp100 for woods carry. But I also like to look at something other than the ruger logo when I'm trying to decide what to carry, the gp100 or the S&W 69 Combat Magnum. There both pretty much the same size, yada-yada-yada. Shotshells in either firearm doesn't matter with ammo like cci. But if you roll your own you get a lot more shot in a 44mag case than a 44spl case. And as usual, the 44mags can be safely loaded hotter. The 44spl's shotshells are around 1000fps and the the 44mags can easily be brought up to the 1200fps or higher velocities that most shotgun shooters are used to. Then there's the protection from the bear in the wood scenario. I guess if your a ruger fan the gp100/44spl is good enough. Others might want a 44mag for some odd reason.
Anyway, I'm not trying to talk anyone out of buying a gp100. I'm sure picking a gp100 over a S&W 69 Combat Magnum makes sense to some people. Things like:
Saving $75, right now gp100's can be found for around $600 and the S&W 69's for $675. You might be outgunned but you saved $75.
If you like using inferior calibers that have limited ammo selections at the store then the gp100 is for you.
If you like making poor choices with firearms that your life depends on, look no further than the gp100.
I can absolutely see loyal ruger fans wanting a gp100. I can see buying a gp100 for a range toy. Anything else the gp100 is easily outgunned by the S&W 69 Combat Magnum.
I hope the people that want a gp100 in 44spl buy's as many as they can. I hope all the gp100/44psl owners enjoy your range toy/toys. The only thing I see is ruger fans turning a blind eye to everything else that means anything other than the fact is that they are ruger fans.
At the end of the day there's nothing that a gp100 can do that the S&W 69 Combat Magnum can't do better. You want to be under gunned, buy the gp100. You want to drop down/lower yourself the gp100 levels, buy the s&w 69 Combat Magnum. You want to easily rise above the capabilities of the gp100, buy a S&W 69 Combat Magnum.
RealGun
Member
You apparently don't view this size gun as something you would carry, but I think we see that many value 357 Magnums in the same platform among multiple brand offerings and use them for EDC. At the same time, 44 Special, via other models, all defunct, has an established niche as a 3", 5-shot gun. It just wasn't something that could be sold in the numbers that law enforcement uses and apparently got squeezed out by the desire to minimize the number of cartridges supported. It also was not something easily carried using the casual sense of style in the wardrobe of today's younger concealed carriers. Perhaps it is primarily the older guys, who have the money and who are willing to dress to conceal a more serious weapon.
Again- if you're not interested in the Ruger, don't buy one.
Not necessary to incessantly point out that it's not a Smith .44 Magnum.
We know that.
We don't want a Smith .44 Magnum.
If we did, we might be discussing the Smith .44 Magnum in a Smith .44 Magnum thread.
Not necessary to incessantly point out why you don't want the new Ruger.
Doesn't matter in the slightest to those of us interested in this new Ruger.
Honest.
I pitched the idea of a .44 Special GP to Ruger three years ago & was told "We can't do it."
I pointed out Dave Clement could, did, and was.
Not claiming any credit for the new gun, just saying several of us have lobbied Ruger for it, it's here, and we like the idea.
If you don't, your time promoting your Smith might be put to better use in going off somewhere & shooting it.
Denis
Not necessary to incessantly point out that it's not a Smith .44 Magnum.
We know that.
We don't want a Smith .44 Magnum.
If we did, we might be discussing the Smith .44 Magnum in a Smith .44 Magnum thread.
Not necessary to incessantly point out why you don't want the new Ruger.
Doesn't matter in the slightest to those of us interested in this new Ruger.
Honest.
I pitched the idea of a .44 Special GP to Ruger three years ago & was told "We can't do it."
I pointed out Dave Clement could, did, and was.
Not claiming any credit for the new gun, just saying several of us have lobbied Ruger for it, it's here, and we like the idea.
If you don't, your time promoting your Smith might be put to better use in going off somewhere & shooting it.
Denis
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
Looks like our resident Ruger hater is hard at work again.
The fact that S&W offers the 69 in .44Mag should be kept in perspective. Ruger has always wanted a significant safety margin. While S&W has been producing .44Mag's of marginal strength for 60yrs. If the .44Mag was a good idea in the GP, custom gunsmiths would've been building them that way. The custom GP's that have been built have been five-shot .44Spl's but safe for the 1200fps Keith load.
Jeff Quinn said his hit the scale at 34oz so weight is a moot point. It's rare that advertised weights are 100% accurate. Another moot point if you've been around the block a time or two.
The Bulldog is a great lightweight carry gun but it will NOT do everything a GP will do. The Bulldog should be relegated to factory loads only. The GP has enough reserve strength to push it harder. The GP will survive a steady diet of those loads. Let's not pretend that the Bulldog is even in the same ballpark.
I'd love for you to list those 900fps .44Mag loads. You can't, they don't exist.
Too many judge the .44Mag by current 240gr at 1200fps loads. That is NOT a proper .44Mag load. That is a heavy .44Spl load and one that can be fired in the GP. A .44Mag load would be 1400fps. A .44Mag load is a 355gr at 1250fps. A load that is too long for the 69's cylinder. You're not really getting a full strength, fully capable .44Mag with the 69.
I'd love to know how you came up with the idea that the L-frame is stronger. Most authorities would disagree.
The fact that S&W offers the 69 in .44Mag should be kept in perspective. Ruger has always wanted a significant safety margin. While S&W has been producing .44Mag's of marginal strength for 60yrs. If the .44Mag was a good idea in the GP, custom gunsmiths would've been building them that way. The custom GP's that have been built have been five-shot .44Spl's but safe for the 1200fps Keith load.
Jeff Quinn said his hit the scale at 34oz so weight is a moot point. It's rare that advertised weights are 100% accurate. Another moot point if you've been around the block a time or two.
The Bulldog is a great lightweight carry gun but it will NOT do everything a GP will do. The Bulldog should be relegated to factory loads only. The GP has enough reserve strength to push it harder. The GP will survive a steady diet of those loads. Let's not pretend that the Bulldog is even in the same ballpark.
Gimme a break. Most manufacturers use nominal weights and don't weigh every single model and variation.
Do you really expect us to believe that nonsense??? Ruger has been the target of your derision at every opportunity. You weren't going to buy one regardless of configuration or chambering.
More nonsense. Nobody is going to do enough shooting with big bore revolvers to become proficient without reloading. Further, very, very few non-handloaders are going to get into the .44Spl. For those of us who do, your rhetoric is irrelevant.
I'd love for you to list those 900fps .44Mag loads. You can't, they don't exist.
Too many judge the .44Mag by current 240gr at 1200fps loads. That is NOT a proper .44Mag load. That is a heavy .44Spl load and one that can be fired in the GP. A .44Mag load would be 1400fps. A .44Mag load is a 355gr at 1250fps. A load that is too long for the 69's cylinder. You're not really getting a full strength, fully capable .44Mag with the 69.
If the GP is strong enough for a 250gr at 1200fps and the 69's cylinder won't allow any more than that, what are you really gaining with the 69? I'll tell you. You're gaining an internal lock, MIM innards, a two piece barrel that can only be serviced by S&W and questionable longevity.
Where are these blindly loyal Ruger fans you're referring to???
Congratulations, I now consider you merely a troll.
200Apples
Mojave Lever Crew
Well said, Craig.
And! Let's not forget this now-classic last line of Denis's most recent post:
As has been noted elsewhere, earlier... One either "gets" the .44 Special, or one does not.
Fwiw, I don't think any one who favors this latest Ruger and it's chambering is just a "one gun to do it all" guy. We have multifaceted arsenals...
And! Let's not forget this now-classic last line of Denis's most recent post:
...several of us have lobbied Ruger for it, it's here, and we like the idea.
If you don't, your time promoting your Smith might be put to better use in going off somewhere & shooting it.
As has been noted elsewhere, earlier... One either "gets" the .44 Special, or one does not.
Fwiw, I don't think any one who favors this latest Ruger and it's chambering is just a "one gun to do it all" guy. We have multifaceted arsenals...
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
And those of us who appreciate the .44Spl in all its glory don't need excuses or reasons to procure yet another.
200Apples
Mojave Lever Crew
...and another.
I could also add the fact that nobody needs to defend the choice of this Ruger over that Smith, but I won't.
You want either gun, you get either gun, the world continues to spin.
I don't try to talk anybody out of the Smith, I'm perfectly happy to not have anybody try to talk me into the Smith.
Denis
You want either gun, you get either gun, the world continues to spin.
I don't try to talk anybody out of the Smith, I'm perfectly happy to not have anybody try to talk me into the Smith.
Denis
I used to agree with the opinion that a .44 Special revolver was pointless and that one is better off getting a .44 Mag. That changed when I lucked into a S&W 4th Model Hand Ejector of 1950 (pre-24), and my opinion did a 180. There really is something "special" about a dedicated .44 Special revolver. I have yet to find anything that I enjoy shooting more than that 1950.
Now I would give up every single one of my .44 Mags before I gave up a single .44 Special. I have multiples of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, & 4th Model Hand Ejectors in .44 Special, and each one brings a smile to my face when I shoot them. I only have one non S&W .44 Special, and that is a Ruger Bisley Blackhawk. I have not had it long enough to put it through the paces, but I really like it.
I am glad to see Ruger bring out this revolver. If they do bring one out with a longer barrel, I won't hesitate to buy one. If it was a .44 Mag, I would pass. 44 Special is without a doubt my favorite cartridge, and I will be proud to own a GP100 in it. I have no doubt that a .44 Special will do everything that I realistically need it to.
Thank you!
Now I would give up every single one of my .44 Mags before I gave up a single .44 Special. I have multiples of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, & 4th Model Hand Ejectors in .44 Special, and each one brings a smile to my face when I shoot them. I only have one non S&W .44 Special, and that is a Ruger Bisley Blackhawk. I have not had it long enough to put it through the paces, but I really like it.
I am glad to see Ruger bring out this revolver. If they do bring one out with a longer barrel, I won't hesitate to buy one. If it was a .44 Mag, I would pass. 44 Special is without a doubt my favorite cartridge, and I will be proud to own a GP100 in it. I have no doubt that a .44 Special will do everything that I realistically need it to.
Thank you!
Last edited:
This thread has inspired me to put a handloader and some Lee .44 dies in my amazon cart.
I'm giving my lgs a call after the holiday to see the prospects of the GPS. I'm not in a huge hurry, but I would snap at the chance to get one.
My 2017 gun goals are modest: a .327 lever gun and the .44 special gp100.
I'm giving my lgs a call after the holiday to see the prospects of the GPS. I'm not in a huge hurry, but I would snap at the chance to get one.
My 2017 gun goals are modest: a .327 lever gun and the .44 special gp100.
so now you need at least a 44 magnum for self or home defense or you will be outgunned? 44 special is a poor choice for self defense? I usually read these chest beatings regarding using .22 or .25 caliber firearms.....now .44 special? haha.....this is a parody...right?
- Status
