|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
March 12, 2014, 12:24 PM | #126 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 15, 2011
Location: Virginia
Posts: 179
|
Just picked up a 5 inch GP a few months ago for 600 including tax. VERY nice so far. I would say they are every bit as good as NEW 686s...but as good as the older ones?..probably not. Stronger than a Python though for actual shooting and just as accurate. This 5 inch is CRAZY accurate after Wolff springs.
|
March 12, 2014, 02:16 PM | #127 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 24, 2006
Posts: 1,900
|
"Is the Ruger GP100 the Greatest Double Action Revolver Ever Made?"
lol |
March 12, 2014, 03:01 PM | #128 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
|
Quote:
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement U. S. Army Veteran Armorer My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon. |
|
March 12, 2014, 03:12 PM | #129 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 24, 2012
Location: South Texas
Posts: 2,126
|
It was featured on an episode of "Justified" last night!
|
March 12, 2014, 04:28 PM | #130 |
Junior member
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,320
|
A local shop near me just got 2 Colts in, a python and an Anaconda. Didn't feel the trigger was that fabulous.
I love S&W. Owned 3 66's, a 19, 2 686's, 2 65's, and a 13. All nice revolvers. All .357. Sold them all. Left with a Ruger Service Six. K frame size, but able to handle .357 much better than a K frame .357. Did the S&W's have better triggers? Sure. The paper target never knew. Blew out the center last month with my fixed sighted Service Six. So is the Gp 100 the "best revolver" ever made? Don't really know. But what i DO know is it is stronger than a S&W K frame in .357, cheaper than a 686, does not have the cheesy lock like the new S&W's do, nor the black hammer, trigger and cylinder latch on a stainless gun like new S&W's do, and will deliver .357 rounds all day long accurately. I'd take one over a new S&W all day. Last edited by Homerboy; March 13, 2014 at 03:26 PM. |
March 12, 2014, 06:58 PM | #131 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 24, 2006
Posts: 1,900
|
Yeah, none of these can hold a candle to the Ruger with its investment cast frame. |
March 12, 2014, 07:34 PM | #132 |
Junior Member
Join Date: March 10, 2014
Posts: 6
|
..
Last edited by Junior Lollipops; March 12, 2014 at 10:46 PM. |
March 13, 2014, 04:44 AM | #133 |
Junior member
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,320
|
If colts are so great why did they stop making them? S&W, Ruger, and even Taurus are still heavily into the revolver game. They must have stopped turning a profit, right? So either there are far too few discerning revolver buyers out there or people realized paying the extra money for something not much better wasn't worth it. I know I never felt the need for a colt
|
March 13, 2014, 05:38 AM | #134 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 21, 2009
Location: North Mississippi
Posts: 854
|
Quote:
|
|
March 13, 2014, 09:59 AM | #135 |
Staff
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,374
|
"If colts are so great why did they stop making them?"
Colt made a decision in the late 1950s/early 1960s that they were pretty much going to surrender the civilian and police handgun market (with a few exceptions) to Smith & Wesson and concentrate primarily on becoming a military contractor. Colt didn't back out of the handgun market overnight, but they certainly allowed it to decline through benign neglect. In the 1980s, when Colt once again tried to become a serious player in the domestic handgun market (the brought out guns like the new snake revolvers, the Double Eagle, and the AA2000), they were already in seriously degraded financial shape, and every decision they made in the handgun market seemed to be both half-hearted and made at the worst possible time. The snake revolvers were decent guns, but they simply couldn't keep up with S&W & Ruger and Colt apparently lost money on every one they sold. The Double Eagle was never the world beater that Colt thought it was going to be, and the AA 2000 was an unmitigated disaster that almost put the final nail in Colt's coffin. The one thing that truly kept Colt afloat was the market for the 1911, especially after the magazine capacity ban in 1994.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower. |
March 13, 2014, 10:23 AM | #136 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2006
Posts: 702
|
Quote:
Why doesn't a garden variety S&W J frame have the nice deep polished blue finish they used to have instead of the cheap looking matt finishes they use today? Same answer all around. People will put up with less quality to keep the price down. |
|
March 13, 2014, 02:53 PM | #137 |
Junior member
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,320
|
Ruger stopped with the Six series because they were expensive to make and they wanted a direct competitor with the L frame 686. The S&W K frames were getting a rep for not being able to handle hotter .357 loads, and people figured the Six would be in the same boat since they were the same size. The Average Joe never knew that it wasn't the size of the K frame, but the flat spot on the forcing cone, which the Six series did NOT have, that was the issue. But Ruger made the GP to replace the Six. What did Colt make to replace their Python and how well did it sell? The GP has been selling for nearly 30 years now. Sure, the newer S&W's might not be as "refined" as their older counterparts, but at least they still exist! Or was Colt too "proud" to take some shortcuts in the manufacturing of their revolvers?
And the Six sold very well. If the Colts were flying off shelves they would have kept making them. Ironically, "The Walking Dead" did more for the sales of Pythons then Colt ever did! Last edited by Homerboy; March 13, 2014 at 03:33 PM. |
March 13, 2014, 04:09 PM | #138 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 24, 2012
Location: South Texas
Posts: 2,126
|
I had a 4" King Cobra that was a really nice gun, kinda sexy, I often have wondered why they couldn't atleast hold their own with the Rugers and Smiths. If I remember correctly the price was also in line with the others too?
|
March 13, 2014, 05:47 PM | #139 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2006
Posts: 702
|
Quote:
Did Ruger ever have to decide if they should concentrate resources on Military contracts or the Civilian market? Answer is no they didn't. The trials and tribulations of the Colt company have been pretty well documented. The company hasn't always made the greatest decisions. To think Colt stopped making D/A revolvers because they were junk is a bit foolish in my opinion. The GP is a very good revolver at it's price point and a very good revolver in general. I don't think anyone will argue that, but it's not a pre lock 27, 586, Python or King Cobra. Also worth asking???? Does Ruger use expensive Union labor to build it's guns? When discussing why Colt's were so expensive, that probably needs to be factored in. |
|
March 13, 2014, 06:06 PM | #140 |
Junior member
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,320
|
[QUOTEApparently yes. They DO still make Single Action Army's and they are finely made revolvers.
Did Ruger ever have to decide if they should concentrate resources on Military contracts or the Civilian market? Answer is no they didn't. The trials and tribulations of the Colt company have been pretty well documented. The company hasn't always made the greatest decisions. To think Colt stopped making D/A revolvers because they were junk is a bit foolish in my opinion. The GP is a very good revolver at it's price point and a very good revolver in general. I don't think anyone will argue that, but it's not a pre lock 27, 586, Python or King Cobra. Also worth asking???? Does Ruger use expensive Union labor to build it's guns? When discussing why Colt's were so expensive, that probably needs to be factored in. ][/QUOTE] Well, I never said Colt made a bad product. I just said the price difference between it and the Ruger is not justified by whatever benefit loyal users claim. Is a slightly better trigger worth $300 more to me? Nope. I put the sight of my Service six (a fixed sighted gun), and hit what I aim at. As for being too proud to make an inferior product, I am calling BS on that one. Colt is a company that exists to make a profit. They stopped making those revolvers because they weren't making a profit. because more people were buying Smiths and Rugers. S&W won the police contracts more then Colt. When were they trying to get military contracts? 30 years ago? So when they didn't get them they could have turned their attention back to making quality revolvers. They didn't. I don't know why. Does Beretta not make any other handguns, rifles, and shotguns because of the M9 contract? Colts are sweet guns. But they are way more expensive than a S&W or a Ruger, and the average Joe couldn't justify their higher price for what he wanted to do with it. so they went away. |
March 13, 2014, 06:07 PM | #141 | |
Junior member
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,320
|
Quote:
As for being too proud to make an inferior product, I am calling BS on that one. Colt is a company that exists to make a profit. They stopped making those revolvers because they weren't making a profit. because more people were buying Smiths and Rugers. S&W won the police contracts more then Colt. When were they trying to get military contracts? 30 years ago? So when they didn't get them they could have turned their attention back to making quality revolvers. They didn't. I don't know why. Does Beretta not make any other handguns, rifles, and shotguns because of the M9 contract? Colts are sweet guns. But they are way more expensive than a S&W or a Ruger, and the average Joe couldn't justify their higher price for what he wanted to do with it. so they went away. |
|
March 13, 2014, 06:12 PM | #142 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2006
Posts: 702
|
Quote:
Quote:
The Army Special/Offical Police for over 60 years. The Single Action Army has been selling (with a brief hiatus around WWII) for over 140 years, selling every one they build with a waiting list these days. Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
March 13, 2014, 08:01 PM | #143 |
Junior Member
Join Date: January 6, 2014
Posts: 4
|
If it's not the greatest,it's pretty close.
|
March 13, 2014, 08:25 PM | #144 |
Junior member
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,320
|
The Python HAD a run for 45 years when the revolver was king. And it went away not long after semi auto's became more popular. When you add in the Six series to the Ruger line-up, the guns have been around for nearly 40 years, and they're not going away anytime soon. Ruger, S&W, even Taurus still make DA revolvers in a semi auto world. Colt no longer does.
Single Action guns are in a completely different class. They're not duty guns or self defense guns. They appeal to a very narrow niche, and Ruger makes a very nice single action, as well. The Official Police battled the S&W Model 10 and lost to it. The S&W 10 is still made (in stainless as the 64 as well as the Model 10 Classic). It has been in production for over a century. The Walking Dead has stimulated the market for the Python. Tex Shomaker holster is making a copy of the duty rig the main character wears on the show, and they are selling as fast as they can make them. The S&W 29 was around years before Dirty Harry came along. That movie put the gun on a 6 month waiting list. Colts are quality gun, there is no doubt. But they are WAY overpriced, there aren't as many gunsmiths who will work on them anymore, and the Ruger and the S&W that people say are inferior are still being made while the Colts have gone away. Last edited by Homerboy; March 13, 2014 at 08:34 PM. |
March 13, 2014, 09:26 PM | #145 |
Staff
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,374
|
"Or was Colt too "proud" to take some shortcuts in the manufacturing of their revolvers?"
What do you think the later snakes were, like the Anaconda and the King Cobra? They were far cheaper to manufacture than the Python and cut a LOT of corners in the manufacturing processes. They were decent guns, but Colt was simply in too poor financial condition at that time to make a concerted entry into the market in a way that would allow them to successfully compete with Ruger and Smith & Wesson.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower. |
March 13, 2014, 09:31 PM | #146 |
Staff
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,374
|
"Did Ruger ever have to decide if they should concentrate resources on Military contracts or the Civilian market?"
Colt didn't "Have" to decide on one or the other, either. They could have easily stayed in both markets and continued to do very well. They simply saw the military contracts market giving greater returns for far less effort and Colt's management VOLUNTARILY began to remove the company from the civilian markets. Everyone does realize that the firearms part of Ruger's business is the smaller part of their business, correct? Ruger's primary business is investment casting outside of the firearms industry.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower. |
March 14, 2014, 04:52 AM | #147 |
Junior member
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,320
|
I know the later snakes were less refined than the python. But they didn't sell well either. Why is that? That had nothing to do with colts financial situation. The guns were on the shelves. If they were being sold in great numbers colt would have kept making them. They would have gotten out of their financial hole. Apple was nearly dead but they came out with the IPod and look what happened. Knocked the PC off it's high perch, didn't it?
Is the argument that colt made a superior product but nobody bought them? Taurus, Rossi, and charter arms make a budget revolver and people are still buying them. S&W just brought back the 66, although I would still take an older 66 over it. The J frame is one of the most popular guns sold today. Ruger came out with the LCR, although I wouldn't touch that with a ten foot pole. Polymer and revolvers should never be in the same sentence. The Colt is a nice looking gun. Nice trigger, too. The backwards cylinder release always felt awkward to me, though. Actually, I think the Ruger push button release is superior to the S&W. I like how you can take a Ruger apart with a dime if that's all you have. makes cleaning, especially if it's gonna be a field gun, much easier. Truth is, if I was given a Colt today, I'd sell it to someone who had this need to buy the inflated priced product, then take the money and buy a Ruger and a couple hundred rounds of ammo. Finest .357 ever made? I wouldn't give that nod to the Ruger. But I sure wouldn't give it to the Colt, either. I'd probably give it to the S&W 27, although I've never owned one, just fired my friends a few times. Last edited by Homerboy; March 14, 2014 at 05:35 AM. |
March 14, 2014, 05:48 AM | #148 |
Staff
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,374
|
Colt had been our of the general revolver market for a long time when they tried to re-enter. People were not as familiar with them as they had once been. Smith was also able to undercut their prices handily.
They simply were not able to compete price wise so sales couldn't support the costs. |
March 14, 2014, 05:49 PM | #149 | ||||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2006
Posts: 702
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
S&W used to make some fine single actions too. A shame they don't anymore. A S/A can make a fine defense gun if you're willing to put the time in with one. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||||
March 14, 2014, 06:41 PM | #150 |
Junior member
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,320
|
Colts ruled the police departments before WWII? That was 75 years ago. So S&W rules the PD's for nearly 50years before the revolver fell out of favor. And what, 35 years before colts stopped with the DA revolvers?
I am NOT saying colts aren't great guns but am saying that it is hard to name colt the best .357 ever made when they stopped making them 30 years ago. Smith and ruger have continued to because the market still calls for them but if colts were really that stellar, they would have kept on cranking them out |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|