Ruger GP-100 10 shot 22LR?

[Will Carry]

           Has anyone seen or shot the new Ruger 10 shot GP-100 in 22LR?  It weights in at 42 oz.

 

 

[Hozzie]

Haven't seen it or shot it. Not bad looking, but I think I would have to go for a Smith 617 if I was going for a 10 shot 22.

[hipower]

Seems like the GP100 is a lot of frame for a 22LR, maybe a 22 mag coming?

 

If I had a 617, I wouldn't think twice on the Ruger, even as much as I like Ruger revolvers. But not having a 617, I could get interested in one next year.

 

Like I need another 22. lol

[Joe357]

I saw that last week. I have a few of the gp100's in 357 mag, I just can't justify paying a couple of hundred more for a 22lr then the same gun in 357. I have the stainless convertible single six in 22lr/22mag which to me is an excellent shooter and two different calibers for a lot less money. Yes, I know the single six is SA and the GP100 is DA/SA but these are not IMHO self-defense gun's just fun range gun's. Sorry Ruger not this one. Edited December 16, 2015 by Joe357

[Oh Shoot]

I saw that last week. I have a few of the gp100's in 357 mag, I just can't justify paying a couple of hundred more for a 22lr then the same gun in 357.

 

Oranges to oranges to be fair, MSRP for the .22, which is in stainless with adjustable sight,  is $50 more than stainless adjustable sight .357 models.

 

- OS

Edited December 15, 2015 by Oh Shoot

[krunchnik]

Ruger has a better than $800.00 MSRP on these devils.I own a GP100 4 inch half lug that I only have $450.00 into.In my eyes they are a little steep price wise-but look heavy duty no doubt.

[Joe357]

Oranges to oranges to be fair, MSRP for the .22, which is in stainless with adjustable sight,  is $50 more than stainless adjustable sight .357 models.
 
- OS

You are correct, the 22lr vs the 357 is a round 50.00 difference in price, but the 22lr is more expensive, that just doesn't compute in my mind that the 22lr would cost more then the same gun in 357.

[Oh Shoot]

You are correct, the 22lr vs the 357 is a round 50.00 difference in price, but the 22lr is more expensive, that just doesn't compute in my mind that the 22lr would cost more then the same gun in 357.

 

Perhaps they seek to get back their R&D cost at a faster rate for a while on a new caliber, dunno. I haven't noticed over when other calibers are added to an existing line.

 

Oh, and also, the .22 is the only one in the line that has the fiber optic front sight. I see they charge 62.50 for a combined rear and front fiber optic set, so that's part of it I guess. Also the only one that's offered with the groovy wood inset grip, and looks like it might be the rare Magellan Coihue found only in remote regions of Tierra Del Fuego. ;)

 

- OS

[eRay]

Maybe it cost $50 to drill 4 more holes in the cylinder.

[Clod Stomper]

Maybe it cost $50 to drill 4 more holes in the cylinder.

I was going to say... What round it shoots is irrelevant. There is just as much machining, perhaps a bit more, in the .22 as in the .357. I'm guessing they use the same frames and probably heat-treated the same (in batches).

Plus there is the novelty. I'd like to have one. It should last several lifetimes.

[Steelharp]

http://gunblast.com/Ruger-GP100-22.htm

[Troutburger]

I imagine these will sell for quite a bit less than MSRP.

[Oh Shoot]

I imagine these will sell for quite a bit less than MSRP.

 

Best price is generally 25-30% less than MSRP on Ruger stuff. Though of course as long as demand significantly exceeds supply, you won't see them that cheap at local shops or maybe even anywhere for awhile on really hot items.

 

- OS

Edited December 16, 2015 by Oh Shoot

[JAB]

Also the only one that's offered with the groovy wood inset grip...

 

- OS

 

Really?  Huh...that wasn't always the case, as my .357 GP100 clearly shows:

 

 

Also, a now deceased friend of mine had an SP101 that also came with the wood insert.  I really want one like it to match my GP-100.  Now that I think about it, though, I think maybe I do remember that no longer being offered as a standard option but don't the ones they sell now have a removable rubber insert that can be replaced by factory aftermarket wood inserts?

 

Anyhow, as much as I like Ruger revolvers I really don't see paying GP100 prices for a .22LR, especially given that .22 ammo isn't nearly as ubiquitous as it used to be and may never be, again.  I have an old H&R  930 I bought a few years back (obviously used) that, while it isn't as cool looking as the Ruger, will slang them little pills just as well.  Of course, it doesn't have a fiber optic front sight but it does have an adjustable (for windage) rear sight.  If also 'only' holds nine, not ten but I paid less than a hundred bucks for it.  There is no telling how many owners it had (and possibly outlived) before me and I don't see it wearing out any time soon.  I also have a Heritage convertible but it is a single action so not exactly the same type of gun.

 

 

With the existence of such revolvers and prices out there, I just can't see paying Ruger full size revolver prices for a plinker.  Luckily, not everyone in the gun world likes the same things I like.

Edited December 17, 2015 by JAB

[dcloudy777]

Cool.

 

But I want the little LCRx 3" in .22LR even more.

 

Edited December 17, 2015 by dcloudy777

[hipower]

Cool.

 

But I want the little LCRx 3" in .22LR even more.

 

 

I was thinking about one of these as well, but haven't run across one yet.  Can't have both, so it may be a hard choice if I do run into one.

[Oh Shoot]

Cool.

 

But I want the little LCRx 3" in .22LR even more.

 

 

I was thinking about one of these as well, but haven't run across one yet.  Can't have both, so it may be a hard choice if I do run into one.

 

Well, they're not actually making that config in .22, right? Even rumored that they're going to?

 

- OS

Edited December 17, 2015 by Oh Shoot

[TrickyNicky]

I was thinking about one of these as well, but haven't run across one yet.  Can't have both, so it may be a hard choice if I do run into one.

I got to fondle one at Nashville Armory a while back and really, really liked it. I am waiting, possibly in vain for one in 9mm but I may just go ahead and bite the bullet on the .38 in 2016.

Now what I REALLY want is for them to make either with the smooth fixed rear sight typical to the LCR range. The adjustable is not a deal breaker by any means, but I wouldn't mind smoother fixed sights either.

[DaveTN]

I wanted a S&W 617 because it was a full size that could give me cheap trigger time for revolver practice. This will be a big hit with Ruger revolver shooters.

[Trekbike]

Is it just me or does this look more like the frame and barrel are based on the Security Six rather than the GP100?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[graycrait]

If I were going to pay the kind of money they think the GP100 .22lr is worth just because I wanted a well-made .22lr DA revolver I would just find a decent shape early S&W 17.  The only SP or GPs that had decent triggers are the ones I worked on at my kitchen table.Having done a few I would never put a Ruger DA revolver up against a S&W on the target range.  If I was carrying a revolver in the woods for weeks at a time I would go Ruger. 

[No_0ne]

Is it just me or does this look more like the frame and barrel are based on the Security Six rather than the GP100?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

If that's the case, just find a good used Security Six, in .357, shoot a manly gun ...

[DaveTN]

The Smith & Wesson 617 is a K-frame Model 66 just with smaller holes in the cylinders and barrel. The 66 isn’t made anymore, but the 617 carries the same MSRP as a 686. It uses the same grips and holsters as a K/L frame. I think it is a great choice for those that have K/L frames that want cheap trigger time or want to train with a full size revolver.

Ruger is doing the same thing for their revolver shooters, except I see the .22 barrel is .5” shorter than the .357 and .2” overall. So something besides the barrel is different. I also see they priced the .22 at $829, the same MSRP as the 617 and 686, but the .357 is $50 less. IMO they should have made it the same size and cost. But it still will probably be a hit with Ruger users.

[nightrunner]

Sounds like the same thing as when people scoff at paying that much for a 617. "That's too much for a .22!" Well you aren't buying a .22, you are buying a K frame S&W, and they don't give those away.

[JAB]

Sounds like the same thing as when people scoff at paying that much for a 617. "That's too much for a .22!" Well you aren't buying a .22, you are buying a K frame S&W, and they don't give those away.

 

To me, the platform doesn't matter - I'm not paying that much for anything chambered in .22LR.  I don't care if it is a full-sized copy of a Barrett 50 cal chambered in .22LR it is still a .22LR and not worth that price to me.  But that is just me.  I am not saying that the company shouldn't produce them or that people who would and do pay that much are wrong just that I wouldn't pay that much for one.

Edited December 18, 2015 by JAB