Brand New GP100 - a few issues, worth sending to Ruger?

No more than they do at the factory when hand finishing and polishing!

Hmmm. OK....so your saying you received it unfinished and polished and did it yourself to Rugers's engineered tolerance? The pics you posted are a bit misleading (to my eyes anyway). The "before" pic appears straight on....the "after" pic appears pointed to the right, possibly projecting an illusion the barrel is straighter than before. Even though I would not take meat away from the top strap, and I'm pretty sure Ruger would frown a bit also, understand it's just an observation.
 
Hmmm. OK....so your saying you received it unfinished and polished and did it yourself to Rugers's engineered tolerance? The pics you posted are a bit misleading (to my eyes anyway). The "before" pic appears straight on....the "after" pic appears pointed to the right, possibly projecting an illusion the barrel is straighter than before. Even though I would not take meat away from the top strap, and I'm pretty sure Ruger would frown a bit also, understand it's just an observation.
Not unfinished but having 3 of these I've measured the top strap from left to right and mine is still well within the range I had seen. My top strap is so unevenly finished that the front where I filed down is still wider than another spot further back!

Not trying to mislead with the photo. Was just trying to take a photo best I could. I can try again. Here's an after pic with the frame straight on more. As you can see, barrel is off but I don't think it looks as visually bad.

I accidentally trashed my before after measurements but I only ground off maybe 0.03" off the top strap if that.
 

Attachments

  • PXL_20250613_015406501.jpg
    PXL_20250613_015406501.jpg
    151.2 KB
I wouldn't be worried at this point what Ruger thought about it seeing as they couldn't get the gun right after the third try. I'd be demanding a refund at this point but it's your money 💰.
Going to test the revolver with a range rod and if it passes I'll keep her. If it fails I'll go the refund route and see if I can get Cabela's to order me a 5" GP100 as they're hard to find..
 
I've been following this a lot,, and one thing stands out. Very little about how the gun(s) actually shoot.
You have mentioned the 3rd one shoots pretty good for you,, but commenting you had to adjust the rear sight "too far to the right" for your liking.
And you've mentioned how you just recently filed the frame to "give the illusion" of it being straighter, and no more than what the factory polishing & such would have done.
Another comment,, was about how it appears how the hole in the frame may have been off center slightly. Causing the barrel to be off slightly.

If I may politely inject some of my observations of hundreds of guns over the last 50+ years.

I've seen canted barrels, where the gun shot very accurately.
I've seen & measured several guns, same models, from different makers, and NOT come up with identical measurements.
I've shot guns that by looking at them, they appeared to be very poorly assembled,, or finished.

But the final judge of a gun to me,, is the target. How accurate is the gun?
A perfect example is a Ruger Vaquero that I own. It's in .45 Colt. Looking at it,, the barrel is a little off in the way the front sight blade appears. Something not too uncommon in the shooting world when it comes to fixed sighted gun. A lot has been written & discussed about this for decades. Many people either "turn the barrel," or "bend the front sight" or whatever. Some have even had the barrels removed, the rear of the barrel re-cut & all then re-installed to where the appearance is "centered."
My Vaquero.
I tried several different loads, and it shot consistently "low & left." Yet,, it grouped VERY, VERY well. I took it to a good friend,, a member here,, (who currently can't get back on due to the computer upgrades & such a few years ago,) "sixshot" to shoot. I did NOT tell him what I was looking for,, but asked him to try it & see what he could do with it. He had zero knowledge of what I was truly looking for.
He too had it shoot low & left. Yet, at about 25 yds,, he had a small, one hole group. He wanted to buy the gun, has badgered me "gently" for years to get the gun. It's super accurate.
Instead of worrying about how it looked & trying to "fix" it, I did not want to possibly reduce the accuracy of the gun by any normal turning or bending.
I had my gunsmith gently open the rear sight channel just enough to center the groups. Then I worked on ammo to affect the point of aim/point of impact.
I can easily look at it & see it's "not perfectly aligned." And I'll NEVER send it back to Ruger or anyone to "fix" it's appearance.

I'll take accuracy & performance easily over looks anytime.

So,, in the case of your gun(s) I've constantly wondered; "What does the target say about the accuracy of the gun?"
 
Thanks @contender for weighing in! Can't remember if I mentioned, but I didn't even shoot the first GP due to the slew of issues and wanting to just send it in fast. Second one shot accurately, but spit lead at me often enough it was concerning. So far, 150 rounds in of 38 and 357, this third GP is shooting well! I might have misspoke: the rear sight is adjusted pretty far right, but not maxed out, and not far enough that it would look odd at first glance. I've had ARs in the past where for, whatever reason, you had to adjust the windage all the way to one side or the other and I hated that! Currently, I'm adjusted to the right that I don't have to twist my wrist much to align sights.

I love your philosophy here, you are totally right: I can get over the "look" of the crooked barrel, especially now that I filed a hair off the frame shape to at least appease my OCD to some extent. I haven't been able to group it on paper yet, but as I said I can hit a 10" steel target from 60 yards, with 38 specials Single Action, so to me that is accurate enough!

At this point, I am satisfied with the accuracy, and can swallow the visual looks. The only thing left for me is to confirm that it will have longevity: I am not sure if this crooked barrel will cause issues over time, and I want this to be a lifetime revolver. Hence, the Range Rod I have coming to be delivered this afternoon! To me, if it passes the range rod test (or hell, even if it rubs slightly but doesn't stick in the chambers), then that's enough peace of mind to me that the bullet is able to turn enough when going from straight chamber to crooked barrel, via the forcing cone. And if that is the case, I'll call it a day and start enjoying this gun.

(I still don't think this excuses Ruger from replicating the same issue 3 times in a row, but I'll live with it if it's safe, robust, and accurate!)
 
Just my opinion but I would not have accepted it or any other new gun with flaws like that. I don't care how it shoots. When I'm paying that much for something it needs to be without flaws. If that hole in the frame is off center it will never be right.
 
Just my opinion but I would not have accepted it or any other new gun with flaws like that. I don't care how it shoots. When I'm paying that much for something it needs to be without flaws. If that hole in the frame is off center it will never be right.
Normally I'd agree but it appears like Ruger can't make a revolver any better than what I have right now. They're claiming it's ok, and it's the best of the 3. I don't know what else to do
 
If people keep accepting this it will never get better.
I'd love to be the sacrificial lamb here but I'm tired and out of time and money to deal with this. At least with 3 different GP100s, Id think Ruger lost money here - no way they made a profit throwing out 2 revolvers and sending a firearm through insured mail 4 times over!!
 
Range Rod delivered and test complete. Drumroll...

She passed. Zero drag down any chamber, and the rod reached all the way back to the firing pin. Funny enough, when sticking the range rod down the barrel only, and letting the rod stick out like a pointer finger, it's clear as day the barrel is crooked - aim the frame straight ahead and it's pointing way to the left!

Nonetheless, I'm done screwing around here. If she passes a Service Range Rod test then I'd say she's safe enough to shoot and I've seen that she is accurate enough for me. Thanks guys for all the help...
 

Attachments

  • range rod 2.jpg
    range rod 2.jpg
    174.9 KB
  • range rod 1.jpg
    range rod 1.jpg
    185.9 KB
Maybe Ruger needs to go with the sleeved barrel on the GP like they did the Redhawk.
It's nothing new...this is a 1979 Security Six over tightened barrel I own. Adjusting the sights made it shoot accurately. I try not to look to closely at my Rugers, just shoot 'em.
20250613_133414.jpg
 
Last edited:
It's nothing new...this is a 1979 Security Six over canted barrel I own. Adjusting the sights made it shoot accurately. I try not to look to closely at my Rugers, just shoot 'em.View attachment 75227
Trying to look closely here...when you say over canted do you mean overtightened? Or the barrel is crooked and pointing at an angle like mine?
 
Boy, I just read through this thread and I sympathize with your plight. I recall several years ago I bought a new-in-box Colt 2nd Gen black powder 1851 Navy. The ones that would actually letter from Colt even though they were partially made overseas and fit/finished in Hartford.

A few days into owning it, not shooting it, I noticed the barrel was visibly canted, even mores than yours, as I recall. As the barrel on those is removable, I could verify by standing it on its end (on the forcing cone) and seeing it lean to one side. Mated to the cylinder squarely, so the forcing cone was cut at an angle to be able to do so. Made me suspect whomever assembled the gun knew the barrel was crooked.

Problem being, unlike your gun with adjustable sights, the 1851 Navy's sights are fixed, so there was no way in Hades that pistol was ever going to shoot to point of aim.

It was pristine and a beautiful gun, but I knew I couldn't like with that so I sold it on down the road as an unfired collector's piece. I could only wonder how many other black box 2nd Gens were like that. I never took a chance on another to find out.

Incidentally, I've owned three Springfield M1A (M14) rifles, and on two of them I've had to have the barrels adjusted as they were assembled to the receiver either too tight or too loose, causing a cant in the front sight. My OCD will not let me live with such, but I am lead to believe many of them are that way and most guys never notice.

We with OCD ... the struggle is real!
 
Trying to look closely here...when you say over canted do you mean overtightened? Or the barrel is crooked and pointing at an angle like mine?
Ya, I meant over tightened barrel. There's more frame metal showing on the left side of barrel, top strap area, than the right. Sorry I miss spoke.Good shooter though.
 
I'm all in with Contender…my SP101 .22lr 8 shot has miserable finish, a slightly canted barrel, quite a bit of end shake, and my rear sight is almost all the way to the left. That gun is an absolute tack driver with absolutely any ammo I put in it, I'm almost afraid to disassemble and clean it sometimes as it shoots so well. Anytime anyone gets some 22s their gun doesn't like I'm happy to take it off their hands. My brother and I both have Match Campions that shoot great and neither of them are show pieces.
 
Back
Top