Ruger Forum banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,356 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I was just thinking today, in the relatively short time I've been a GP100 enthusiast (since 2008) I've seen the various changes and own GP's made throughout the "changes"......in 2008 I bought my first GP, brand new. It has the old style "pinned" ejector, cross pin firing pin, and cast hammer and trigger. My next NIB one, a 2010, had the newer "box" ejector, the trigger still being cast. Again, then I bought a NIB 4" .38 GP100, with the MIM trigger, and box extractor.

Now, the latest "screw in bushing" firing pin has been added......

The GP had appeared to remain pretty much unchanged for 22 years, and then the various changed began.....

Am I one of only a handful of people with an interest in the "evolution" of the GP? Just a random thought, since the S&W fans go freaky nuts about any minute change in the guns, even noting the styles of the stamps on the barrel, or seemingly imperceptible engineering changes,but few Ruger fans seem to note these.

I've heard of S&W fans having to buy yet another example of say, a 19, because they found a model with a slight almost unknown variation like a change in the "&" symbol on the barrel. But I've never heard of a Ruger collector looking for such variations. Maybe because we're more into actually using the guns, instead of socking them away......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,528 Posts
I don't know about the changes unless they were for the best. I have a 2015 GP100 in 6" and it shoots just as well as my $1200 dollar PC 686 competitor. I Love my GP and prefer to shoot it over my 686.
 

·
Ruger Tinkerer
Joined
·
11,898 Posts
True Ruger collectors note these changes and they are documented to some extent in the RENE Reference of Ruger Firearms. Besides the Red Eagle News Exchange the Ruger Collectors Association (RCA) also pays attention to the subtleties of rollmarks, ejector styles and other nuances. So there are folks who notice, try to document and do care about such changes but I'm not one of those guys. I try to keep up to some extent but since I don't really collect Rugers in a serious fashion I don't attempt to stay totally up to speed.

Ruger is not an easy brand to collect with the same fervor as S&W. Unlike Ruger, S&W documents their engineering changes with all the dash number variants. There are still uncommon oddities that roll out of S&W including upside down rollmarks and such and there are serious S&W collectors who are all over that stuff like you said. S&W production numbers are easier to obtain, they will use unique serial number sequences for special editions and they have a company historian to help those researching their gun. A S&W letter really has detailed information about a gun. Ruger will not release any production numbers, lumps all models together in serial number, and a Ruger letter tells you nothing much beyond model, caliber and when it shipped - stuff you already know or can look up.

Ruger will also jump back and forth with the engineering changes you mentioned. They seem to be frugal in using up inventory of parts so things like the new firing pin assembly will appear and disappear in the serial number sequence as they use up parts. And they sometimes have clean-up guns with all the leftover parts of a special run getting assembled and flushed into distribution sometimes years later.

Ruger has never really cared much about collector interest in their products. This was true back in the day under the old man and is still true today. I find some of these changes interesting but not as a collector. I'm more interested in if the changes are for the better and why they were made.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,678 Posts
I tend to prefer the pre-mim cast trigger, as well as the pinned extractor. I do like the concept of the new screw in firing pin bushing. However, I wouldn't let any of these preferences stop me from buying the desired model of GP100 at the right price!:)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
650 Posts
Ruger will deny changes have been made. In 2013 Ruger totally reworked the LCP. Ruger didn't want to be stuck with all the pre 2013 LCP's in the supply chain. The post 2013 LCP has a better trigger, rounded slide and larger sights. Ruger says no changes have been made to the LCP. If Ruger will deny a change that obvious to the LCP, you know they are not going to make changes in revolvers public.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
650 Posts
I bet you could not tell the difference if someone took your magnifying glass away.
I bet at Ruger they have some guy that is virtually blind inspect the gun. If the virtually blind guy notices the change Ruger will make it public the change has been made. If the blind guy cannot see the change Ruger will deny any changes have been made.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,167 Posts
Ruger will deny changes have been made. In 2013 Ruger totally reworked the LCP. Ruger didn't want to be stuck with all the pre 2013 LCP's in the supply chain. The post 2013 LCP has a better trigger, rounded slide and larger sights. Ruger says no changes have been made to the LCP. If Ruger will deny a change that obvious to the LCP, you know they are not going to make changes in revolvers public.
Um... No, they do not deny the changes made to the LCP, nor any of the other models they have out.

Specifically, I've called them a couple times about getting my Gen 1 LCP's updated with Gen 2 triggers and slides (aka, sights), and they say they don't do that kind of work - they have never said that there has not been any changes; they acknowledged the differences and said if I wanted to change my Gen 1 into a Gen 2, I'd have to sell it and buy a new one.

They also readily acknowledge the production method changes and design modifications that they've made to different models. If they were trying to hide the fact that they changed the firing pin retaining bushing (replacing the recoil plate and retaining pin), why would they readily offer me a replacement bushing at their cost?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
I never really considered the engineering changes Ruger has made until your post.
I tend to think of GP100s as durable, reliable weapons that are very forgiving of neglect and abuse. Well made tools that will last lifetimes.
I will say that the trigger pull on my 20 year old 4" GP100 is still much heavier than my almost 2 year old WC GP100. That isn't a complaint, just an observation.

In other words, I don't care one bit about any engineering changes Ruger makes to the GP100 as long as they don't ruin a good thing.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
650 Posts
No, I really don't care about changes to the GP100. The only way i am going to buy another large revolver is if someone wants to dump a pistol in good working order for 30 cents on the dollar. It does get to the point that a man only needs so many guns. I am there now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,078 Posts
Guys, they're made to shoot. I don't care if it's Ruger or S&W. There are some collectable S&W guns, never seen a Ruger altho I'd like to have an old flat top to shoot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
283 Posts
S&W has been making revolvers a lot longer than Ruger. Stampings on the barrel and frame get talked about a lot because they are used to help ID the era the gun is from.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,295 Posts
I notice. I prefer the older solid hammers and triggers over those I see on the Net with what look like hollowed-out MIM ones. I think hollow triggers are bad even on BB guns and the Walther P-38. They just look cheap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,394 Posts
I think it's interesting. But I wouldn't go nuts over it. An FAQ or sticky with pictures of the different hammers, rollmarks, fitting pins, etc would be neat to see.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,356 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
I shoot everything I own, I just noticed while looking through some of my GP's that from my earliest GP (1989) to 2014 there have been some changes.

The GP's with the MIM triggers seem to have better out of the box actions but not by much.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
650 Posts
MIM is going to help manufacturers produce a smoother gun. MIM allows manufacturers use metals that are to hard to machine. We are going to start seeing critical parts that break a lot made of titanium. Yes, we are going to see more molding marks too. But MIM is it's infancy right now. In the near future you will not be able to tell the difference in a MIM part and a machined part that was stoned by hand. Right now MIM parts are 98% solid. That is on par with any form of mass production. The days of having to blow the metal shavings out of a new gun are passing.

Firearms manufacturers have the tools and technology to build better guns. In the near future I am sure they will improve quality control. In 2012 according to the NSSF 40% of all guns that came out of the factory were defective. The easiest way to improve the bottom line right now is to improve quality control. I am confident we will see a return of the reliability that we became accustomed to in days gone by.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top