357 GP100 7-shot ammo binding issue

[GKC]

I bought one today (GP100 2.5" barrel .357 7 shot) and the ammo I have (Critical Defense and Remington UMC) both fit with no binding or other issues. I don't know when this revolver was made, since there isn't a test fired shell envelope in the box anymore, but I'm going to call Ruger tomorrow to find out.

I haven't shot it yet, but the trigger in both DA and SA is very good...lots and lots better than my SP101, for sure. Very smooth, no grit, not at all heavy.

 

[Ale-8(1)]

Update:

The issue has been pretty thoroughly beaten to death, and Ruger has essentially acknowledged a problem exists. I'll not go into all of it here, but there is no "fix" for existing guns that display this problem.

A poster on the "other" Rugerforum has revealed that Ruger has accepted a request for a full refund for his seven-shot .357 GP100 as an option to the previusly-seen swap for a six-shot version they have been offering up to now.

Ruger has now made good efforts to satisfy those dissatisfied with their problem seven-shooter. I say good for Ruger for making the best of an unfortunate situation!

 

[DPris]

As I mentioned on that other forum, Ruger was on the issue within a week of my discussions with a product manager there.
They put an engineer to work & came up with a production modification to correct the situation.
This is an old issue, and a minor one.

I checked 73 different loads in inventory, about evenly split between .38s & .357s, with exactly two white-box Winchester loads & one premium Federal .38 load causing rimlock in my early 7-shot snub GP.

The percentages are so small I was & am quite happy to keep my "problem" 7-banger.
I just don't use those three loads, which aren't normally anything I'd use for defense in this snub anyway.

It's a great package, a good shooter, and I'm not trading it in for a 6-banger or a current 7-banger.
Denis

 

[Ale-8(1)]

Denis, if you're happy that's all that matters . . . to you, and anyone else with one of the "problem children".

Since Ruger has seen fit to acknowledge the problem and offer some form of compensation to those who so desire, I see that as a good thing.

I'd be curious as to what Ruger has done to resolve the design issue involved. Perhaps this info will eventually be made known.

 

[DPris]

There were actually three areas they could address, but they didn't want 'em discussed publicly.

May be interesting to also note that they have a sample 7-shot Smith L-Frame .357 & the "problem" GPs were using the same bolt circle dimensions.

With a 4% ammo "failure" rate among 73 different loads, in my gun it's just a matter of not using ammo I normally would not use in it anyway.
And even those three loads that did create rimlock would all seat fully, they just needed more oomph to extract again.

It was a minor issue addressed months ago by Ruger, and there's no need for concern about it.
Denis

 

[Ale-8(1)]

When a firearm that's supposed to accept SAAMI ammo won't always do that due to a design shortcoming it's a matter for concern. Pretending it's not noteworthy is not a solution. That Ruger has acknowledged the matter and addressed it is in their favor. Those with the guns in question will decide how great the concern is to them.

Guess we'll see how the "fixed" ones work out.

 

[DPris]

This is where I differ.

Rather than spend weeks posting about a couple loads that don't work, I just use those that do work.

There are lots of things in life that "should be".
When they aren't, we just decide whether we can accept them, work with them, and adapt to them.

In this case:
Proven rugged GP revolver- Check.
A favorite revolver caliber- Check.
Powerful enough for town or country carry- Check.
2.5-inch snub barrel for balance & concealability- Check.
Adjustable sights (already have fixed-sight versions)- Check.
Decent action out of the box- Check.
Runs fine with everything I'd want to shoot in it- Check.
Still shoots ammo that doesn't "fit" correctly- Check.
Already swapped factory sights for Bowens- Check.
Already swapped boringly blah grip inserts for a set of Chig's inserts- Check.
Is & does everything I want it to be & do- Check.
Great package overall- Check.
Ruger responded quickly & positively in correcting the minor issue- Check.
Extraction issues in my early gun with two Magnum loads & one .38 Special load I'd never use anyway- Could not care less.
Not an absolutely perfect specimen of the gun-builder's art- Could not care less.
Spend hours on the Internet griping, post diagrams, create YouTube videos- No thanks, I'll just shoot it.
Trade it for something else- Not on your Nellie.
Enjoy the hell out of it as it sits- You betcha.
Pretending anything at all about the gun- Nope.
Creating a personal perspective where the overall balance FAR exceeds a 4% ammo nuisance- Absolutely.
Denis

 

[Ale-8(1)]

The fact that you do not care that the guns would not accept all SAAMI ammo is purely your position, to which you are absolutely entitled.

That the guns should function properly with all SAAMI ammo is my position, to which I am presumably entitled.

That the info about how Ruger addressed the issue will not likely be forthcoming . . . so be it, that's Ruger's position.

 

[DPris]

You've never found a load that won't function 100% in a semi-auto?

I have.
I didn't make YouTube videos or make a fuss with ammo companies, or ask for a replacement pistol that would shoot everything made in the entire world.
I just didn't use that load in that pistol.
(Or those loads in those pistols, since it's happened several times over the years.)

It's a very simple equation for me.
Denis

 

[Ale-8(1)]

This is not a semi-auto issue. And the issues with non-feeds in semi-autos do not relate to SAAMI dimensional specifications for either cartridge or chamber, but invariably bullet configuration which is not covered by SAAMI. Rounds that do meet SAAMI specs invariably work just fine. If they do not, it's invariably a problem with the gun's feed ramp or something similar, which immediately gets pointed out and "fixed".

It's simple for me, too. The rounds either fit the chambers per the specs or they don't. Ruger has admitted as much by covering the good will of those with problem guns and admitting the issue exists and claiming a "fix". End of story, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[DPris]

Having worked with a hundred or so autos over the years, I'll disagree with you again.
I've had name-brand ammo in SAAMI specs (which can be a fairly wide range) fail to feed & fail to operate a slide, on several occasions.

I can categorically state, from experience, that rounds meeting SAAMI specs do NOT "invariably work just fine".

In another area- I like Garrett heavy .44 Mag loads for bear country.
They're too long for my Smith 629.
Don't fit.

Do I make a fuss with Garret & do I ask S&W to change the 629 to accept EVERY round made in .44 Mag?
Nope, I just use a Redhawk, fit the gun to the load/load to the gun.

I've got a CZ PCR in the vault right now that won't chamber a certain Speer 147-grain load.
Do I make a YouTube video?
Do I post charts & diagrams?
Do I ask CZ for a replacement that'll accept EVERY round made today?
Nope, I just don't use that one single load.

And so on.

In this case, I've got a great snub .357 that isn't going anywhere on a trade.
It shoots nice groups.
It fits my hand perfectly.
It's a great little gun.

It'll SHOOT any .357 or .38 load I've got here, with only 4% of those needing some extra steam to eject.

And the current ones shouldn't even have that 4% "problem".
The gun's good to go, no need to worry about a new one.
Denis

 

[Ale-8(1)]

I've had name-brand ammo in SAAMI specs (which can be a fairly wide range) fail to feed & fail to operate a slide, on several occasions. Did you figure out WHY they failed?

I like Garrett heavy .44 Mag loads for bear country. They're too long for my Smith 629. So, which is not to spec, ammo or gun?

I've got a CZ PCR in the vault right now that won't chamber a certain Speer 147-grain load. Do you know WHY it won't chamber?

In this case, I've got a great snub .357 that isn't going anywhere on a trade. The gun's good to go, no need to worry about a new one. I'm glad you are satisfied. Some folks aren't.
Denis

I'm happy Ruger has addressed the issue to the satisfaction of those who aren't. That's all we can ask. I'm still curious, but I'll await further developments, if any.

 

[DPris]

Denis