Ruger Forum banner

1 - 20 of 43 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,576 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Can anybody here provide the height and length dimensions? Could a K-frame cylinder fit in an SP101 frame?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Can anybody here provide the height and length dimensions? Could a K-frame cylinder fit in an SP101 frame?
Sort of an apples to oranges comparison. The K frame is a medium frame revolver with a 1.446" diameter cylinder and larger frame dimensions.
The SP101 is a D frame sized revolver (Small frame Colt) just with a 1.35" diameter cylinder, instead of the typical D frame 1.40" diameter cylinder.
The SP101 is 4.5 inches high and the K frame is a little closer to 5 inches in height.
A four inch SP101 is around 9 inches long and a 4 inch K frame is about 9.8 inches long.
A four inch SP101 weighs 29 ounces and a 4 inch model 66 weighs 37 ounces.
I just pulled this info off of Gunblast and the S&W site.

Ruger made a mistake by going with an abbreviated frame height and a 5 shot 1.35" diameter cylinder instead of a true D frame sized, six shot 1.40" diameter cylinder. The Ruger is otherwise nearly identical in dimensions with other D frame sized revolvers. Most holster makers even market D frame holsters for the SP101. With the Taurus 856, Charter Police Undercover, Kimber K6s, Colt Cobra, and Colt King Cobra on the market, Ruger needs to offer a six shot .38/.357 SP101. A second frame revision (first was to allow longer than 125 grain bullets in .357) would definitely be worth the investment costs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
743 Posts
can you shove a small block chevy in a ford? Yes, but with modifications. In the case of the chevy in a ford it may be an improvement, but why put a K frame cylinder in a Ruger? for 6 shots? The timing would be off, the advance pawls are different, star on the back of the cylinder is different... the size is not the only issue
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,576 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Sort of an apples to oranges comparison. The K frame is a medium frame revolver with a 1.446" diameter cylinder and larger frame dimensions.
The SP101 is a D frame sized revolver (Small frame Colt) just with a 1.35" diameter cylinder, instead of the typical D frame 1.40" diameter cylinder.
The SP101 is 4.5 inches high and the K frame is a little closer to 5 inches in height.
A four inch SP101 is around 9 inches long and a 4 inch K frame is about 9.8 inches long.
A four inch SP101 weighs 29 ounces and a 4 inch model 66 weighs 37 ounces.
I just pulled this info off of Gunblast and the S&W site.

Ruger made a mistake by going with an abbreviated frame height and a 5 shot 1.35" diameter cylinder instead of a true D frame sized, six shot 1.40" diameter cylinder. The Ruger is otherwise nearly identical in dimensions with other D frame sized revolvers. Most holster makers even market D frame holsters for the SP101. With the Taurus 856, Charter Police Undercover, Kimber K6s, Colt Cobra, and Colt King Cobra on the market, Ruger needs to offer a six shot .38/.357 SP101. A second frame revision (first was to allow longer than 125 grain bullets in .357) would definitely be worth the investment costs.
Thank you for providing a somewhat informative to my question. So, if you had an apple and an orange, and I asked you to measure the circumference and weight of each, would that be an "apples to oranges comparison"?

I like the S&W K-frame six-shot .38 Special revolvers (Model 10, Model 15), and I was wondering how easy would it be for Ruger to produce a six-shot ..38 Special with the existing SP101.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,576 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
can you shove a small block chevy in a ford? Yes, but with modifications. In the case of the chevy in a ford it may be an improvement, but why put a K frame cylinder in a Ruger? for 6 shots? The timing would be off, the advance pawls are different, star on the back of the cylinder is different... the size is not the only issue
cranky, go back to bed. I only asked if a K-frame cylinder could fit in an SP101 frame. That's all. Not install and function. Not installing a small block Chevrolet engine in a Ford. And yes, a six-shot revolver based on the SP101 frame is my thought. I don't have a K-frame nor an SP101 easily available to me, so that's why I asked the simple question here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Thank you for providing a somewhat informative to my question. So, if you had an apple and an orange, and I asked you to measure the circumference and weight of each, would that be an "apples to oranges comparison"?

I like the S&W K-frame six-shot .38 Special revolvers (Model 10, Model 15), and I was wondering how easy would it be for Ruger to produce a six-shot ..38 Special with the existing SP101.
In hindsight, I should not have used the phrase "an apples to oranges comparison." I apologize for that.

A six shot .38/.357 SP101 is what I would like to see most from Ruger. Since the SP101 is a D frame sized revolver, with J frame capacity, folks have been asking for this for years. I think the best way to go about this would be to go with a slightly taller frame and a true 1.40" diameter D frame size cylinder. That is only a 0.05" difference and most holster makers already market D frame holsters for the SP101. Hopefully, recent offererings from other companies will finally push Ruger to do this.

All the best
 

·
Retired Moderator & Gunsmith
Joined
·
17,128 Posts
Yes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sr40ken

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,576 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
I don't quite understand how it would be thought of as goofy, unless there were a lot of assumptions on the part of the person reading it. I thought it was a simple question, just asking for frame window dimensions and if a K-frame cylinder would even fit in an SP101 frame. Nowhere did I state that I was looking to build an SP101 with a K-frame cylinder. In a recent thread about "what new Ruger DA revolver would you like to see"?, I posted that a six-shot .38 Special, in the image of the S&W Model 15 would be nice. After that, I was wondering how just how difficult would it be for Ruger to do that with mainly existing components.

Is the post of someone stating that they'd like to see a GP100 in .45 Colt a goofy post?
 

·
Retired Moderator & Gunsmith
Joined
·
17,128 Posts
firescout. I read it the way you wrote it ....obviously different than you intended.
Could a K-frame cylinder fit in an SP101 frame?
.... totally different crane, cylinder latch, ratchet column, frame-to-bore spacing, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
400 Posts
firescout , JWintergreen
This is not a new thought . It is a perennial concept whenever there is a "wish list" thread.
There's more to engineering a long lasting revolver than cylinder size and the measurements can't be just jiggled about . Unfortunately something in the geometry makes a 6 round .357 not fit in the SP-101.
Maybe it's the cyl. axis to bore as mentioned , maybe it requires that the cocking notch to not be centered over the chamber so odd numbers are used.
Who knows ? Not me but Ruger does.
If it was doable Ruger would have done it long ago. If it was doable the high dollar pistol smiths would have tackled it . None ever have .If it could be done Lipsey's would have already ordered a couple of thousand , because the would sell.
With a slightly smaller diameter bullet they make it work with the 327 . This tells me they have to parts to time a 6 shot SP-101 and if they have not reworked the 357 yet it can't be done without redesigning the frame.
And when they have the workhorse GP that's not gonna happen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
firescout , JWintergreen
This is not a new thought . It is a perennial concept whenever there is a "wish list" thread.
There's more to engineering a long lasting revolver than cylinder size and the measurements can't be just jiggled about . Unfortunately something in the geometry makes a 6 round .357 not fit in the SP-101.
Maybe it's the cyl. axis to bore as mentioned , maybe it requires that the cocking notch to not be centered over the chamber so odd numbers are used.
Who knows ? Not me but Ruger does.
If it was doable Ruger would have done it long ago. If it was doable the high dollar pistol smiths would have tackled it . None ever have .If it could be done Lipsey's would have already ordered a couple of thousand , because the would sell.
With a slightly smaller diameter bullet they make it work with the 327 . This tells me they have to parts to time a 6 shot SP-101 and if they have not reworked the 357 yet it can't be done without redesigning the frame.
And when they have the workhorse GP that's not gonna happen.
It will certainly require a new frame. There is no getting around that. The SP101 is identical to other D frame size revolvers, with two exceptions. The height of the frame is just a hair shorter and the gun uses a 1.35" diameter cylinder instead of a 1.40" diameter cylinder (like on other D frame sized revolvers). The SP101 is otherwise in the D frame size class in terms of weight, length, and holster fitment. Ruger has changed to SP101 frame once before to allow for heavier bullets in .357.

A six shot .38./.357 SP101 would not canniballize the GP100 lineup. The GP is a heavy medium frame revolver that is actually comfortable to shoot with magnum loadings, and they now have seven round options to compete with the 686 Plus. On the other hand, you have the J frame sized LCR lineup wich fills the niche for five shot pocket revolvers, and ultra light kit guns. This has left a major gap in the Ruger lineup, that the current SP101 does not really fill. It was a mistake from the beginning to create a D frame size gun with only five chambers. With the current Ruger offerings and Taurus, Charter, Kimber, and Colt offering six shot .38/.357 D frame sized guns, there is no longer any excuse to not do a second frame revision.

The major attraction of a D frame sized revolver is that they are far easier to shoot with most factory .38 + P ammo than most pocket revolvers, only slightly bigger than a J frame, much easier to conceal than a medium frame revolver, and they are still true six shooters. With the current market conditions, now is the time to address the elephant in the room and make the SP101 the six shot ,small frame .38/.357 it should have been from the start.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
400 Posts
Well I see your point but not so sure as to it being an elephant in the room . Or even of interest to most SP owners and certainly not me.
The Sp-101 is a HUGELY successful platform as is. Many many are satisfied with it, as is . They sell as many as they can make . As a small frame it is well suited for .357 sized and down calibers and THAT is it's design parameters.
I hear more complaints about weight than I do about shot capacity . As a whole SP owners are content with 5 for a pocket class gun . S&W set that bar a long time ago. It barely fits as a pocket class gun now due to weight now and any increase would not play well.
Recently they did cast a new frame for the SP with provisions for the ADJ. sights. If there was any thought of up sizing the frame that would have been the time to do it.
The simple frame change you suggest would require MILLIONS in expenses . New casting molds . New machining jigs. A whole round of safety and function testing all at the expense of a very successful existing product . All to add 1 more round ? Plus it might alienate many of the existing customers that like it just the way it is.
My thoughts , if you need six shots , get a bigger /different gun. You want D frame ,get a Colt ,,,,,,, but they really don's sell as well as an SP-101.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Well I see your point but not so sure as to it being an elephant in the room . Or even of interest to most SP owners and certainly not me.
The Sp-101 is a HUGELY successful platform as is. Many many are satisfied with it, as is . They sell as many as they can make . As a small frame it is well suited for .357 sized and down calibers and THAT is it's design parameters.
I hear more complaints about weight than I do about shot capacity . As a whole SP owners are content with 5 for a pocket class gun . S&W set that bar a long time ago. It barely fits as a pocket class gun now due to weight now and any increase would not play well.
Recently they did cast a new frame for the SP with provisions for the ADJ. sights. If there was any thought of up sizing the frame that would have been the time to do it.
The simple frame change you suggest would require MILLIONS in expenses . New casting molds . New machining jigs. A whole round of safety and function testing all at the expense of a very successful existing product . All to add 1 more round ? Plus it might alienate many of the existing customers that like it just the way it is.
My thoughts , if you need six shots , get a bigger /different gun. You want D frame ,get a Colt ,,,,,,, but they really don's sell as well as an SP-101.
I respectfully disagree. Ruger should not rest on their laurels.
The problem is that the SP101 is already a D frame sized revolver and Colt is no longer the only game in town when it comes to this class if revolvers. I use the term "D frame sized revolver" to describe an entire class of guns. On the budget side of things Charter has the Police Undercover and Taurus has the popular (and growing) 856 lineup. Kimber has the K6S line and Colt has both the Cobra and King Cobra lines. There are even rumblings of a new Diamondback. Most revolvers in this class have a cylinder that is only 0.05" larger and offer similar dimensions, heft, and overlap in accessories. As I have pointed out, most holster makers just offer D frame holsters for the SP101.

You are correct that the SP101 is a good selling revolver. However, Ruger could capture an even greater portion of the carry revolver market with this long requested offering. Whenever the topic of the SP101 comes up, there are always potential buyers that are turned off by this. I have heard, and read, countless revolver fans say that they chose another revolver for this reason. Hearing "For its size, The SP101 really should be a six shot" or "why do other companies offer this and not Ruger", is a very common occurrence. This is truly an elephant in the room and Ruger should not continue to ignore this.

Revolvers have made a great comback, and there have been more new offerings in the last decade than we have seen in many, many years. Ruger can increase its market share and make the SP101 a far more size efficient firearm. We are only talking about a 0.05" difference in cylinder diameter and a slight height change. The weight difference would be negligible, this new frame would still work in SP101 holsters (most are D frame holsters anyway), and still use readily availiable SP101 grips. Things like this are important for people considering a new carry gun. This would also be another great option for new gun owners with small hands that want a true six shooter.

Frame changes are nothing new to Ruger. The original SP101 was replaced with a longer frame to allow the use of greater than 125 grain bullets with .357 Magnum versions. It seems that Ruger has also quietly modified the GP100 frame to fix the rimlock issue on the seven shot versions. S&W did not "set the bar" with this revolver size. The J frame is a different category. Colt did long before the Chief's Special ever saw the light of day. The J/D frame sized guns are the ying and yang of carry revolvers. The D frame size is MUCH easier to carry than a medium frame gun and very comfortable to shoot with .38 + P ammo. The only area that the J frame has an advantage in, is pocket carry. However, (being a D frame sized gun) the SP101 is not a good choice in this area to begin with. A 0.05" larger cylinder is not going to harm its packability at all, when it comes to IWB or OWB carry.

This offering will not harm other Ruger models, it will allow Ruger to have a direct competitor to others in this class, it will increase the SP101's market share, and it will make the SP101 a more size efficient firearm. I cannot imagine anyone being upset with a 20% capacity increase and a new offering that still uses old SP101 accessories. With the comback in D frame sized carry revolvers, now is the time for Ruger to finally listen. It would be worth their time and investment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
Yes, a S&W cylinder will slip right-into a Ruger Frame, (and vice-versa) and it will work perfectly without any modifications to the cylinder.

However, a single simple modification that requires no special skills or tools is required first.

Here it is:

Exchange the Ruger frame and internals with a S&W frame and internals.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Yes, a S&W cylinder will slip right-into a Ruger Frame, (and vice-versa) and it will work perfectly without any modifications to the cylinder.

However, a single simple modification that requires no special skills or tools is required first.

Here it is:

Exchange the Ruger frame and internals with a S&W frame and internals.
I agree, this has already been covered. If one wants a medium sized K frame esque Ruger, you should just hunt down a Six Series gun.

The SP101 is a small D frame sized revolver. The answer to the .38/.357 6 shot SP101 request is raising the frame height a hair and going from a 1.35" diameter cylinder to roughly a 1.40" diameter cylinder.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,943 Posts
I agree that Ruger should come out with a 6 shot .38/.357 frame. I already have a 5 shot SP101 .357 and would not be upset at Ruger for coming out with a 6 shot but in fact would make a new sale for Ruger. In the interim I acquired a Colt Cobra and may acquire a Kimber K6s to fill the void. If Ruger had a 6 shot D frame product I would have bought that and been happy. A 6 shot frame probably would also allow a 7 shot .327. If when the SP was introduced as others have noted it was a bit smaller and lighter for pocket carry one could have justified it being 5 shot. Right now Ruger has a hole in their product lineup compared to others offering the 6 shot D frame size.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
400 Posts
Over on the other Ruger Forum there is a long running thread demanding Ruger provide a 41 mag in the mid frame flat top single action. It has gone on about 4 years and is supported and bumped on a regular basis by about 4 diehards . Apparently knowing more than the engineers at Ruger they often point out how easy it would be and how foolish Ruger is for not doing it.
Ruger generally knows what they are doing and what their market is. If they miss a marketable possibility that will surely be caught by Lipsey's . Happens all the time . Cool guns get built if they can be built .
.
Right now they cannot keep up with demand for stuff they make now.
Right now they are trying to get Marlin leverguns to the market .
And we all know they have a much larger market in semi-autos than they do in revolvers.
But we wants what we wants . Just afraid your in for a long , disappointing wait .
 
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Top