SP101 .22LR

[Glupy]

Confirmed!!!

The August issue of Guns & Ammo has the gun, a test and a $645 retail price. It appears to be an 8-shot with a 4.3 in barrel.

Dave

 

[tulsamal]

I thought the 8 shots in the cylinder looked very nice. Just looked exactly size appropriate.

Gregg

 

[Palu]

Thanks for posting that, tulsamal. Everything looks right on that gun. I wonder if those wood inserts would fit my current SP. Looks better than the cheesy plastic.

 

[RonS]

I bet they could sell a couple trees worth of just the grip panels.

 

[Anonymous]

Check out the serial, -01054. It's not in production, huh? Nice that they went with the totally adjustable rear, instead of the windage only like on the .327.

Looks okay except for the totally cheesy peg mount grip design. Why, oh why couldn't they make it with traditional grips????? They changed the frame for the rear sight, they could have done the grip, too.

Who needs a recoil absorbing grip on a .22 anyway?????

Imagine it with Speed-Six grips. Then, and only then would I buy one. And I'd have to put a regular blade on the front.

That could have been my favorite Ruger. Looks like my Bearcats will stay my favorite, and they only made it with EWK's ejector rod housing.

 

[Palu]

You know you're allowed to change out grips and sights, right? I agree that something like the Hogue wood grips would make it look better. The stock one still isnt bad at all. Doesn't bother me one bit.

 

[Anonymous]

You know you're allowed to change out grips and sights, right? I agree that something like the Hogue wood grips would make it look better. The stock one still isnt bad at all. Doesn't bother me one bit.

Nothing will make that peg take two Speed-Six style grip panels with a screw between them.

Other SP models had a roll pin holding the front sight. This Hi-Viz is in a dovetail, looks like a GP-100 blade would replace.

 

[tomiswho]

Looks nice but I'll keep my S&W mod 34 thank you.

 

[Flash]

I agree, it does look nice. I'm sure other sight options will come along eventually. I heard about this from a good source back in late winter and I have to say it's on my bucket list. I never did like the first run of the 22 SP's and sadly, I believe their value will be down to the level of all the other models.

 

[gstan1919]

Ruger posted this on Facebook

Just to clear things up....
by Ruger on Thursday, June 30, 2011 at 3:57pm

An article on a Ruger SP101 in .22 LR was recently published in the August issue of Guns & Ammo Magazine, which just hit newsstands. This article was inadvertently run, as Ruger is not producing a SP101 in .22 LR at this time. This model is not available for sale and we are sorry that this article gives that impression. Both Ruger and Guns & Ammo Magazine apologize for any confusion.



Be sure to stayed tuned to Ruger.com and our Facebook page for the latest product launch information! When any new product is ready to hit the streets - you'll hear it from us first!



- June 30, 2011

I was planning this to be my next purchase after reading about it in G&A. I guess not yet.

 

[Jeff Quinn]

I think that G&A (Intermedia) jumping the gun on the release was neither accidental nor inadvertent. They did the same thing with the Ruger SR1911 with the publication of the Shooting Times cover. Once is an accident. Doing it again is either extreme incompetence or unethical. I suspect the latter. Ruger is very good about trusting media folks to keep their word and keep a secret. At least they were. After the very unprofessional way that Intermedia has abused this trust, I doubt that any of us will ever get a preview of new products again.

Ruger is one of the best in the industry about going to a lot of trouble and expense bringing writers and TV folks out to give them an early look at new stuff, and to violate that trust is unprofessional and unethical.

Some people just suck, and there is no getting around that fact.

 

[mohavesam]

Considering a babysitter, I'd rather trust a lawyer than any marketer/advertising person any night.

It's just a fact of modern America.

 

[seeker_two]

I'm not counting it out yet.....the "slip" may have been a "trial balloon" to see how much interest there is in the model before committing resources into manufacture....maybe they're learning their lesson from the lack of sales from the GP-100 & Blackhawk in .327Fed....check the interest....then make the product....

 

[Flash]

I'm not counting it out yet.....the "slip" may have been a "trial balloon" to see how much interest there is in the model before committing resources into manufacture....maybe they're learning their lesson from the lack of sales from the GP-100 & Blackhawk in .327Fed....check the interest....then make the product....

Where did you get this from?

 

[Jeff Quinn]

I'm not counting it out yet.....the "slip" may have been a "trial balloon" to see how much interest there is in the model before committing resources into manufacture....maybe they're learning their lesson from the lack of sales from the GP-100 & Blackhawk in .327Fed....check the interest....then make the product....

They don't do that. Sturm, Ruger is a publicly-traded company, and they are very careful about leaks. They trusted Intermedia, and the trust was violated. Simple as that.

 

[harley]

Considering a babysitter, I'd rather trust a lawyer than any marketer/advertising person any night.

It's just a fact of modern America.

what is this suspose to mean? I am an advertising person. What has advertising done to make you think we are bad people? Do you get mad when you are informed about something new?

 

[Kevin]

I just went to Barnes and Noble to read the article. Didn't buy the magazine, in fact I just skimmed the article. There are quotes from Ruger designers and other "insiders." They had to know it would come out in print. This article wasn't a mistake.

Regardless of if the company is public or not, intentional leaks happen. In fact, I could see where a public company would rather have such a leak. They have more to gain in terms of going forward with the project or not based upon consumer reaction.

 

[Kevin]

I also would edit my comments to say, it looks like a great gun, and I for one will buy. I think I'd change out the front sight though...

 

[RonS]

I think the article was written with the assistance and approval of Ruger about a product that they are committed to bringing to market.

I also think it was published prematurely in an effort to cash in on an "exclusive" by a short sighted and greedy publisher who wanted to generate magazine sales. I hope Ruger excludes them from all previews from here on out.

 

[seeker_two]

They don't do that. Sturm, Ruger is a publicly-traded company, and they are very careful about leaks.

I agree...that's why I don't think this was any type of "accident"....in fact, I think it's probably good business to see if this product is worth the cost of tooling up the factory....

....and, YES....I'm very interested in this handgun...and I'll probably delay my next .22lr purchase (which was leaning toward the Bersa .22lr semi-auto) in order to get this one....