Gp100-22

[mc1911]

Mine was sent back to Ruger for very hard ejection and a bogeyed up rear sight. It works fine now except for about once every 50 to 100 rounds I get a blast of something to my cheek.

I hate to send it it again . Any notions on a cause of this?

 

[contender]

Do you shoot double action? Are you a very slow firing shooter?

It's just a wild guess,,, but if you look at Rugers,, and you cock them very slowly, sometimes the slow movement doesn't allow the cylinder to fully rotate over & completely lock in. Try your gun in both single-action mode & double action mode VERY slowly,,, while EMPTY,, and observe the cylinder rotation.
If not completely locked in you may get a slightly off centered shot, that spits powder & residue out a bit as it aligns itself.

 

[mc1911]

Thanks for the response. Since it is hitting my left cheek it might be a slight over rotation?
I was wondering about having the forcing cone opened up.

 

[dingode]

I get that with mine too. I think it's the BC gap. I had to send my first .22 GP back and they deemed it unrepairable. That one had a very tight BC gap, around a .003. The replacment gun has a BC gap on average of a .006, on cylinder has an almost .008 gap. I didn't have the stuff hitting me in the face with the tighter BC.

 

[mc1911]

My gap seems generous too. A trip back to Ruger might be in order.

 

[dingode]

Please let us know if you do send it back for the BC gap. I'm reluctant to send mine back because it's pretty darn accurate with cheap Remmy GBs and Fed. Automatch the way it is.

How exactly do they close the gap up if you were to send it in?

 

[mc1911]

I called Ruger and they said to send it back.

I keep thinking that with my earlier extraction issue that they might have replaced the cylinder.
It could be shorter than the old one?

 

[dingode]

Glad to hear Ruger is going to look at it. I may call them after plate shooting season is over. I know my first one stayed fairly clean. The replacement get's pretty cruddy pretty quick. I think that's due to the large BC gap.

 

[Carry_Up]

Do you shoot double action? Are you a very slow firing shooter?

It's just a wild guess,,, but if you look at Rugers,, and you cock them very slowly, sometimes the slow movement doesn't allow the cylinder to fully rotate over & completely lock in.

The word you are looking for is "carry-up". Any modern revolver that fails to carry up, even at slow speed, is faulty and must be repaired. Somehow people tell themselves it will be fine if they just operate the action briskly. Well, it is NOT fine. It is a safety issue. In fairness to the cowboy action crowd, a Peacemaker can be intentionally adjusted so it will not carry up when operated slowly. These guns are made to be cocked very quickly, so carry up is not an issue. That situation does not apply modern DA revolvers.

In addition, a 10-shot cylinder should absolutely never have that problem simply because the cylinder doesn't have to move much to register the next chamber.

 

[Carry_Up]

I get that with mine too. I think it's the BC gap. I had to send my first .22 GP back and they deemed it unrepairable. That one had a very tight BC gap, around a .003. The replacment gun has a BC gap on average of a .006, on cylinder has an almost .008 gap. I didn't have the stuff hitting me in the face with the tighter BC.

You bring up an important subject that is little understood. All revolvers will spit to some degree depending upon the exact tolerances, the throat dimension, the bullet dimension, the forcing cone angle and depth, registration of the cylinder with the barrel extension, whether the chamber and barrel are on the same centerline, etc. etc. Everyone wishes his B/C gap was zero, but there has to be room for the expansion of the cylinder as it heats up. A .002" gap will close up to nothing after some firing and bind up the cylinder.

A 10-shot cylinder has its own troubles because the chambers on either side of the firing chamber overlap the barrel extension. Fire and hot gasses are partially forced into the adjacent chambers. The previously fired chamber, having only an empty case inside, will usually absorb some of the expanding gas and debris, then kick them out again either forward against the frame, or around the fired case directly toward the rear. This action can account for some of the spray from a 10-shot.

CU

 

[ditto1958]

.22 revolvers tend to spit occasionally. Seems like they also do it more when they get dirty. I'm not sure I'd send one back just because it does it once every 50-60 rounds.

 

[Carry_Up]

Mine was sent back to Ruger for very hard ejection

Assuming that you were using a good quality ammunition, the only possibility is that the chambers were not reamed to correct size. This problem is common with almost all brands because correctly reamed .22 chambers in stainless takes a sharp cutting tool and constant quality control. Enough said.

CU

 

[mc1911]

Its on its way back to Ruger. It did not have the spitting problem before the repair for hard ejection of fired cases.

I have had some spitting with other revolvers but this one gave me nicks on my cheek every once and a while.

 

[WAYNO]

My GP100/.22 had a couple machining issues that I corrected myself. The ejection also was terrible. I brushed the chambers over and over, which helped. I was able to then eject the empties with a sharp blow from the heel of my hand, and I could have lived with that. I've since sold the gun, and the buyer, who has much softer hands than me, is not able to eject the empties at all without outside persuasion, and is sending the gun back to Ruger. And yes, I did offer to buy the gun back.


These guns could/should be serious competition to the S&W 617. But to be in the running, Ruger needs to take these guns seriously, and spend a little more time in making sure they are up to snuff before they leave the factory, especially with such a sought after model that we've asked for since the days of the Security Six. I just never "got into" this revolver, any more than I got into the SP101/.22. Seems nothing (DA) compares to Smith's old K-22.

 

[mc1911]

It came back from Ruger. About an eight day turn around. New crane ,cylinder and forcing cone beveled. I will have to see how it shoots.

 

[mc1911]

Works great! It felt a little tight at first, like a new gun. After a lube and 100 rounds it smoothed out nicely.

It was well worth the return trip to Ruger.

 

[Carry_Up]

The ejection also was terrible. I brushed the chambers over and over, which helped. I was able to then eject the empties with a sharp blow from the heel of my hand, and I could have lived with that.

Gun manufacturers are counting on customers like you to be satisfied with a poorly made and/or poorly adjusted firearm. Ejection should be smooth, and not require injuring your hand to get the empties out. Your chambers were undersize and there isn't any excuse for it.

You mention brushing the chambers - would that mean using a bronze cleaning brush attached to a drill? Keep in mind that stainless is far harder than brass/bronze. The most you can do to a stainless chamber is to change the finish slightly - you would be talking a few tenths at most. Undersized chambers are running .001" to .002" sometimes more. Also remember that using brushes or sandpaper on a dowel will not maintain the roundness of the chamber.

These guns could/should be serious competition to the S&W 617.

Almost any 22 revolver is serious competition to the 617. They are built without concern for quality. Like some other brands, a lot of attention is placed on cosmetic appearance and none on function. It is truly a shame.

 

[WAYNO]

My GP100/.22 had a couple machining issues that I corrected myself. The ejection also was terrible. I brushed the chambers over and over, which helped. I was able to then eject the empties with a sharp blow from the heel of my hand, and I could have lived with that. I've since sold the gun, and the buyer, who has much softer hands than me, is not able to eject the empties at all without outside persuasion, and is sending the gun back to Ruger. And yes, I did offer to buy the gun back.


These guns could/should be serious competition to the S&W 617. But to be in the running, Ruger needs to take these guns seriously, and spend a little more time in making sure they are up to snuff before they leave the factory, especially with such a sought after model that we've asked for since the days of the Security Six. I just never "got into" this revolver, any more than I got into the SP101/.22. Seems nothing (DA) compares to Smith's old K-22.

update...

The new owner sent the gun to Ruger to remedy the stiff ejection. They replaced the cylinder with a new one that was machined much nicer. He shot the gun and said the ejection is now okay. In spite of the repair, he was now remorseful of the purchase, and bought another gun to continue his Speed Steel matches while the GP was being repaired, so I bought the gun back. (Always my guarantee). Ironic too, he was the only person shooting a revolver at these matches. The semi auto guys got a good laugh. I don't expect anyone at these matches will now rush out and buy a GP-100 .22.

Making him whole, and paying the transfer back to me cost 75-bucks. This was not one of my better deals. But now it should shoot as good as the factory target that Ruger sent it home with says it will.



This was the cylinder as it was first received from the factory.





This is the new, replacement cylinder.

 

[dingode]

It looks like the factory finally started to clean up the burrs on the extractor before they ship. I shot my GP at my clubs falling plate match last Saturday and I scored some respectable times with it. Still though, I think I'm going to send mine back, for a second time, after the shooting season is over to have them tighten up the BC gap. My original that they replaced had a much tighter BC gap and stayed cleaner and didn't spit powder back at me like this replacement gun does. The new gun has given me some light strikes too.

 

[WAYNO]

After my GP 100/22 was returned, with a replaced cylinder, the ejection was fine.

The new owner field stripped the gun to do a little polishing internally, and this is what he found...




I know folks can't stand to hear Ruger-bashing, nor can I. But this is just not acceptable workmanship, no matter how a feller spins excuses for Ruger.

The machining inspector just doesn't seem to have a problem shipping guns with a few extra burrs. But when the technician broke the gun down to replace the cylinder, I'm surprised he didn't see and/or correct this burr.