Ruger Forum banner

21 - 40 of 149 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,207 Posts
Several lengthy threads took place here and elsewhere during which there was first silence from Ruger, then sorta denial,then more silence, and then eventually it became known that Ruger would exchange a "problem" sevenshooter for a new sixshooter if requested. This latter development was the obvious tipoff that Ruger knew they had a problem. How long they kept the faulty sevenshooters in production after the problem was known to them is something we'll likely never know.

All most of us care about now is that they have acknowledged the problem and addressed it in a couple of ways and offered to make good on the faulty ones in the only way they could in the interim, by swapping even up for good sixshooters. If they are now swapping for "good" sevenshooters, so much the better. Don't know what else we could expect from them.

It's all a shame, but they'll survive, and I for one have no problem remaining a fan of Ruger guns. All JMHO, of course. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
sure a lot of frustrations and headaches to get one more round of ammo into a revolver

hopefully they've worked it out, i personally like Ruger, every revolver i've bought has been problem free and will last 100 years
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
One heck of a stab in the dark. Maybe you could use some engineering skills and take some measurements and then it would't be an opinion.
Being an engineer, I took this as a fun challenge. I measured my 6 shot Gp100 to calculate a diameter of the center of the chambers. Assuming Ruger maintained the bore axis and using the formula for a heptagon, the distance between the center of the chambers is 0.4547" on a 7-shot GP100.

For average rounds, the clearance is 0.02". For rounds at SAAMI max, the clearance is 0.01". The 6-shot GP100 has a clearance around 0.06".

It seems like 0.01"-0.02" should be doable, but maybe tolerance stacking and a little grime is enough to cause problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,207 Posts
I did all the same and came up with 0.4338" center/center on seven-shot chambers, so maybe 0.434" rims MIGHT fit depending on the tolerances of case diameter and chamber diameter. At SAAMI rim max of 0.440" though, no.

My numbers are based on a 1" diameter "bore circle", measured on my GP100 and then doing the necessary geometry and trig to calculate the center/center distance. You used the arc length for seven chambers on the 1" diameter, but the actual spacing involved is the straight chord length between any two holes.

Similar manipulations indicate that the "bore circle" would have to be at least 1.014" for just barely rim/rim contact on SAAMI-max cases.

Small numbers . . . and I'm betting that Ruger did NOT make the "bore circle" to that odd 1.014" diameter. There would have been zero reason to do so when designing the original gun for six chambers.

Whatever, it was a "calculated" (or not) decision, and as a designer myself I can only hope the engineers explained the potential problem but marketing said "Ahh, what's a few thousandths? SELL 'EM!"

JMHO

:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
Ale-8

Your calculation is correct. I did the geometry correct, but I tried to do the math on my phone and had rounding errors.

I searched the web afterwards and found a calculator online. Enter bore radius in Circumcircle radius (rc) and Edge length (a) will be the maximum diameter of the cartridge base.

https://rechneronline.de/pi/heptagon.php
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
620 Posts
Took my 7shot out past Friday and picked a box of Winchester white box out of my inventory and fired them, no issues, to date i have had NO issue with ANY premium defense ammo and have only had one brand of target ammo that i don't remember brand that was "tight" when loaded with 7 rounds, i sure wish i could say same with my auto loaders.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Good thread. I bought My GP 100 model 1771 new in January 2019, and it is now at Ruger for the same problem that is being discussed. I received a e-mail from the CSR Friday afternoon 2-8-19 stating that they would replace it with the same model.

I tried to call the CSR and got a recording. Unless they have fixed the binding problem which from reading threads here, I doubt that they have. I do not want another 7 shot,

The problem is according to the Ruger website is they do not make a identical model in 6 shot as mine except the match grade.

Will call tomorrow 2-11-19 and see what I can work out

Been a loyal Ruger customer for a big part of my 77 years, hope I can continue being
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
The problem is according to the Ruger website is they do not make a identical model in 6 shot as mine except the match grade.

Ruger replaced my 1771 with a 1762 Lipsey's Distributor Exclusive which has the identical features of the 1771 except it is a 6-shooter. One of the reasons I got the 7-shot was that I liked the grip and sight it had, so I was glad to get a 6-shot with those same features.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Good thread. I bought My GP 100 model 1771 new in January 2019, and it is now at Ruger for the same problem that is being discussed. I received a e-mail from the CSR Friday afternoon 2-8-19 stating that they would replace it with the same model.

I tried to call the CSR and got a recording. Unless they have fixed the binding problem which from reading threads here, I doubt that they have. I do not want another 7 shot,

The problem is according to the Ruger website is they do not make a identical model in 6 shot as mine except the match grade.

Will call tomorrow 2-11-19 and see what I can work out

Been a loyal Ruger customer for a big part of my 77 years, hope I can continue being
I would push back on Ruger. I sent back the exact same model on December 1st and got a 6-shot back on Jan 9th. While the "big picture" was disappointing I ended up with a gun that I love. Maybe it's the fact that I had to put so much personal effort into it...

Apparently I haven't posted enough messages for the forum to allow me to post links. You can look at my final post in the "Ruger GP-100, 7 shot Two threads merged" thread for a summary of my experience.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Have you experienced certain brands or loads that the rims bind at all in yours?
I just bought a GP 100 7 shot and first time I shot it I had this problem. I was using Federal 38 spl. I then tried some new starline cases that I bought for reloading and they fit just fine. So did the Federal 357. I checked the rims on the 38 with a caliper and they were out of round between .440 and .436.
So use quality brass and you won't have any problem.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Just an educated guess obviously. I did measure the rim diameters of all the brands I had on hand. Winchester was running to a max 0.438, the max SAAMI spec is 0.440, so they are in spec but on the high side. Remington came in around 0.434, hence the lack of an issue, underwood states starline is 0.432-0.433. If everything is correct about the closed thread and geometry didn't allow for the max SAAMI spec, then it is definitely an engineering flaw, you never design on an average, you design on what the accepted SAAMI allowable spec is. Some said it can't be done with the current cylinder due to the axis and bore alignment. The guy that said he had a contact within Ruger, says there are 3 areas they can address to correct this issue, but could not give details for whatever reason. So obviously there is a fix they can do but can not apply the fix to a prior production run. That makes one think they had to move the bore alignment and open the cylinder up a few thousands, change their mold for the frame slightly. But again, this is just me speculating and adding 2+2.

Now here is the funny part. I was curious, I called Ruger again yesterday and talked to a guy named Dewayne. As soon as I mentioned the model of subject, he instantly said "so you are experiencing rim lock", I said yes, and gave him the run down of my experience with measurements of the ammo. His response was as such: "Yes, we have a fix for that now, but it will require switching the gun out for one of our new production models, so please send it to us". I told him that the person I had spoken to before told me that my revolver was a november run, he said "yes, that was still the old run that had the issue, we changed a few things and fixed the issue since then", the never said if it was done in december or at the 1st of the year. So obviously they knew, took a whole year to work up a change and just now implementing the change in current production. So there you go guys, if you want to buy a 7 shot, DO NOT BUY IT WITHOUT KNOWING THE TIME OF PRODUCTION. I will respond back to all this when I get the "fixed" model and test it.

Jason

So are you saying that they will do a free exchange of the gun for a newer fixed one?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
Discussion Starter #34
Just an educated guess obviously. I did measure the rim diameters of all the brands I had on hand. Winchester was running to a max 0.438, the max SAAMI spec is 0.440, so they are in spec but on the high side. Remington came in around 0.434, hence the lack of an issue, underwood states starline is 0.432-0.433. If everything is correct about the closed thread and geometry didn't allow for the max SAAMI spec, then it is definitely an engineering flaw, you never design on an average, you design on what the accepted SAAMI allowable spec is. Some said it can't be done with the current cylinder due to the axis and bore alignment. The guy that said he had a contact within Ruger, says there are 3 areas they can address to correct this issue, but could not give details for whatever reason. So obviously there is a fix they can do but can not apply the fix to a prior production run. That makes one think they had to move the bore alignment and open the cylinder up a few thousands, change their mold for the frame slightly. But again, this is just me speculating and adding 2+2.

Now here is the funny part. I was curious, I called Ruger again yesterday and talked to a guy named Dewayne. As soon as I mentioned the model of subject, he instantly said "so you are experiencing rim lock", I said yes, and gave him the run down of my experience with measurements of the ammo. His response was as such: "Yes, we have a fix for that now, but it will require switching the gun out for one of our new production models, so please send it to us". I told him that the person I had spoken to before told me that my revolver was a november run, he said "yes, that was still the old run that had the issue, we changed a few things and fixed the issue since then", the never said if it was done in december or at the 1st of the year. So obviously they knew, took a whole year to work up a change and just now implementing the change in current production. So there you go guys, if you want to buy a 7 shot, DO NOT BUY IT WITHOUT KNOWING THE TIME OF PRODUCTION. I will respond back to all this when I get the "fixed" model and test it.

Jason

So are you saying that they will do a free exchange of the gun for a newer fixed one?
That's what was said to me, before it seemed from what I have read, that they would not offer a replacement 7 shot last year but would offer a 6 shot. That alone tells you they didn't want to replace a problem with another problem. What I thought was interesting is this Dewayne guy said this was gonna be a new production run 7 shot that has the fixes in it. So if you aren't happy about the binding, call em. They do what's right in the end. I figure it will be a week before they contact me back to give me my options, so I will let you guys know what they tell me and if indeed a "fix" has been applied. Really they would have to change the height of the bore if they change chamber spacing outward. Might have been what they did I guess we will
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
Discussion Starter #35
Have you experienced certain brands or loads that the rims bind at all in yours?
I just bought a GP 100 7 shot and first time I shot it I had this problem. I was using Federal 38 spl. I then tried some new starline cases that I bought for reloading and they fit just fine. So did the Federal 357. I checked the rims on the 38 with a caliper and they were out of round between .440 and .436.
So use quality brass and you won't have any problem.
Mine was the same way, but here is the way I see it. A gun half the price didn't have this issue. If you spend your hard earned money for what these things cost, there shouldnt be an issue to begin with. Dang things sale for 700-800 depending on your exact model, thats not a small chunk of change for any gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
Discussion Starter #36
My opinion is they were designing the chamber clearances based on an industry average instead of the industry standard. The problem with the average is there are too many variables between runs of brass and between ammo companies, just forming an opinion as to what may have gone on. Too many 7 shot's have this issue, some a lot worse than mine. If it does well and doesn't give me a fit with ammo I know drops in well, I will probably keep it, but if it extracts rough at the range from brass expansion, well I guess you know what the answer is going to be at that point. I honestly didn't research issues etc before I bought it, who would expect one in an GP100? Once I did and researched, found it is fairly common, which says design flaw, as least to me. I hunt with mine and hike, so 7 shots isn't a big deal to me, 6 high powered killers is good enough for that.
One heck of a stab in the dark. Maybe you could use some engineering skills and take some measurements and then it would't be an opinion.
No need to act smart and act like problems don't exist. Most here have pretty good back ground in firearms and education, including myself, so you are welcome to take some measurements yourself, I'm not doing rugers work for them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Mine was the same way, but here is the way I see it. A gun half the price didn't have this issue. If you spend your hard earned money for what these things cost, there shouldnt be an issue to begin with. Dang things sale for 700-800 depending on your exact model, thats not a small chunk of change for any gun.
This is my first revolver so when the very first time I fired it I had to use a hammer on the ejector rod to eject the casings I thought it was because it was new. I definitely want a replacement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
Discussion Starter #38
Mine was the same way, but here is the way I see it. A gun half the price didn't have this issue. If you spend your hard earned money for what these things cost, there shouldnt be an issue to begin with. Dang things sale for 700-800 depending on your exact model, thats not a small chunk of change for any gun.
This is my first revolver so when the very first time I fired it I had to use a hammer on the ejector rod to eject the casings I thought it was because it was new. I definitely want a replacement.
Exactly. This is my 4th, I have a 44 charter arms bulldog, taurus 605 blued 357 (will not shoot 357 outta that gun), taurus 66 7 shot 357 strong enough to handle a steady diet of 357 ammo, and this new ruger. I can tell you first hand that the same ammo I had issues with on the GP100, caused no problem whatsoever with the cheaper taurus 66. No one should settle for an issue like this with a widely known tank like the GP100 for the price. If they offer me a 6 shot, I may very well accept if they can give me the the same sights, grips on a 6 inch model. When I bought it, I wanted the 6 inch, FFL didn't have a 6 shot 6 inch on hand, had this 7 shot that was beautiful and nice sights. The 6 shot 4 inch they had didnt have the nice sights, so I paid 700 instead of 650 between the 2. Never expected a ammo problem. If ruger makes it right like they have with others, good for them and in my good graces. I don't suspect it will be anything else otherwise. Dewayne said they had 3 name brands on hand that cause the issue, so it should be nothing for a tech to do a 5 minute test.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
I called ruger this morning and they gave me a RMA. It's already on its way back. The lady i spoke to said that the tech will inspect it. She asked me to leave a note in the box explaining the problem. I did better than that. I loaded the cylinder with the problem cases and it was so bad that i couldn't close the cylinder. He should have no problem figuring out out.
Before anyone says anything, i did not ship live ammo with the gun. I pulled them and removed the primers as well.
 

Attachments

·
Retired Moderator & Gunsmith
Joined
·
16,694 Posts
Time for a reality check. In past years, Ruger has always been a big supporter of the Small Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute (SAAMI), in fact Bill Ruger himself was on the Board of Directors for several years. As such, Ruger always prided themselves for making firearms that met SAAMI standards and would function safely and reliably with SAAMI spec ammunition. This somehow changed when the 7-shooter GP100 came on the market. If cartridges with SAAMI max-spec rim diameters are used, there's just no way to defy geometry and make them fit. If cases with rim diameters less than SAAMI max specs are used, the cartridges will chamber. This non-compliance with SAAMI specs is totally unlike the Sturm Ruger Company of the past.

Here's the geometry: the centers of all chambers (6 or 7 round cylinders) have to be in a 1" circle so the throats will align with the bore (cylinder-to-bore alignment). One would think a slightly larger cylinder would work but it doesn't because it would NOT allow the cylinder chambers to align with the bore. The only real fix is to make a slightly taller frame with the barrel mounted a bit higher and a larger cylinder where the chambers are spaced farther apart. This would allow for proper cylinder-to-bore alignment and provide enough space between cartridge rims where all 7 rounds can be chambered without binding.

So far, Ruger has NOT made a taller GP100 frame so there is absolutely no way to defy the laws of geometry and solve the problem until they do. I think its a shame that a lesser gun manufacturer like a Taurus made a frame for a 7 shooter but Ruger can't (or won't).
 
21 - 40 of 149 Posts
Top