Would like a report on the Ruger SP-101 in 32 Magnum.....

[Harry O]

Saw one in a gunshop today at a reasonable (but, not once in a lifetime) price. This SP-101 is with a 3" barrel and a windage adjustable rear sight.

I already have several .32 Magnums so I don't need it, but I want it -- provided they built it right. I have heard that they screwed up the .327 Magnum royally and had to quit making them until they figured out that oval chambers are not ideal. I own one of the Vaquero 44-40's they screwed up. Expecting a 0.427" bullet to squeeze down to 0.424" chamber throat and then expand up to 0.430" barrel is not going to work either. When they screw up things, they do it right.

How is this particular one? I would also like to know if it was made with the .38 Special frame or if it was the .357 Magnum frame? They were different sizes. The measurement of the cylinder (front to rear) would tell me that.

P.S. The length of a .38 Special frame size cylinder is 1.515" front-to-rear without countersunk rims.

[Green Frog]

If you don't get what you need to know here, you might try the Ruger Forum,

http://www.rugerforum.com/phpBB3/index.php?sid=f12baa9adc0c4ca4bcb1f569b74f1868

Those guys are a pretty active bunch and I've seen some discussion of the various Ruger SA & DA 327s over there.

Froggie

[reed1911]

I have one and love it. Heavy for what it is, but it sure soaks up the recoil and shoots well with everything from 77gRN to 140g FN. I was curious to see how it did with the 140's and was happily surprised that it shot very well. Pushing them about 900FPS.

[Gus Youmans]

Harry,

I thought that all SP-101s have built on the same frame, but this would not be the first time I have been wrong. In addition to the .32 H&R, I have an early 3" SP-101 in .327 and a current 4.2" SP-101 in .327 and believe that the cylinders are the same length as the .32 H&R. I will measure them tonight and confirm. I do not have a .38 Special or .357 Magnum with which to compare the various .32s.

I like the .32 H&R a lot. The only issue I had with the gun is that I had to go to a 120 grain cast bullet to get it to shoot to the sights. I could have filed down the sight but chose to take the more difficult route as a learning opportunity and an excuse to buy more molds.

Personally, I would buy the gun if it is in good shape and reasonably priced.

Gus Youmans

[Harry O]

Gus: All the frames are the same now. They were not always that way, however. The first SP-101 was in .38 Special. However, it was larger, heavier, and stronger than the S&W J-frames. So, some gunsmiths started rechambering them in .357 Magnum. The rechambered guns would only take light bullet .357 Magnum cartridges (110gr and 125gr) because of the length of the cylinders. This was written up in a number of gun magazines and it became a fairly popular (and inexpensive) conversion.

A while later, Ruger started making them in .357 Magnum. However, they lengthened the frame and cylinder by 1/10 to 1/8 of an inch so they could use any .357 Magnum cartridge. My belief is that they were all made with that frame after they started making the .357 Magnum, regardless of the caliber.

I have one of the very first SP-101's in .38 Special with the smaller frame. I compared it to a .357 Magnum version at the gunrange (owned by another person) many years ago. They are very definitely two sizes. The EXACT dimension, I don't know. I hope the .32 Magnum version was made before they changed over.

[Gus Youmans]

Harry,

All my SP101 .32s have cylinder lengths of 1.582.

Gus Youmans

[rockshooter]

Mine is 1.585. It is the .32 magnum. The only issue I have had with it relates to the throating- mine will pass a .310 bullet but not a .311 cast one. I have been sizing them to .311 and accuracy is better than with .312. I also had to go to a 120gr NOE bullet to get the elevation on. I really like the gun- I have an issue that I think is related to the Starline brass that I am using. It is really heavy brass, no split necks in many firings, but I am getting lead deposited in the cylinders, like mid-cylinder. It makes me think that the brass is not obturating because it is too stiff. It has replaced my .22s
Loren

[Petrol & Powder]

I can't speak to gunsmith's re-chambering early 38 Special SP-101's into .357 magnum's but Ruger certainly made some .357 magnum SP-101s on the early short cylinder SP-101 frames.

When the SP-101 came out it was chambered in 38 Special but the gun was very strong and it clearly would be capable of handling the pressure of a .357 magnum. Ruger produced some early .357 magnum SP-101's on those early frames and marked the barrels of those early magnum SP-101's, ".357 Magnum 125-grain ammo only" . Those early SP-101's had cylinders that were shorter than the later cylinders and the "window" in the frame was correspondingly shorter as well. Those early .357 magnum SP-101's would not accept some of the longer .357 cartridges depending on bullet style and overall cartridge length (hence the 125 grain limitation noted on the barrel). Ruger made about 3000 of those short cylinder/short frame, "125 grain only" .357 magnum SP-101's before they lengthened the cylinders and frames to the current dimensions.
So yes, there were two different cylinder lengths for the SP-101 but all of the current models now use the longer cylinders/frames.
I actually owned one of the early "short cylinder" 125 grain only, .357 magnums and foolishly sold it before I knew it would later be somewhat rare.

As far as I know, all of the current SP-101 models use the standard frames & cylinder lengths, including the 32 Mag.

[Harry O]

That's a shame (that the .32 Magnums are on the larger frame), but it is not a deal breaker.

Update: I went ahead and bought it today. Just got done cleaning it up. It is amazing to me how many used guns are not cleaned before they are set out for sale. Looks like the previous owner shot it a lot with .32 Long cartridges. The chambers were dirty where they would end to the start of the throat. It cleaned up easily, though. Handloaded cartridges dropped in and out easily. The trigger pull is pretty heavy. It was the same on my .38 Special version and I changed out the mainspring. Will have to do it to this one, too. I will be trying it out this weekend.

It is certainly bigger and heavier than my S&W SuperKitGun Model 632. I hope it shoots as well.

[Gus Youmans]

rockshooter,

I tried the NOE 115 SWC in my .32 H&R but the chambers were too short for that bullet when the bullets were seated for normal crimping in the crimp groove. I seated the bullets deeper and crimped on the shoulder but the bullets still hit somewhat low unless the velocity was kept very low. I had Tom at Accurate design the 31-120S specifically for my gun and it shoots to the sights at 25 yards. I considered sending the gun off to have it rechambered for .327 but realized doing so would probably devalue the gun and there was no real need to do so since there are two SP101s, a Single Seven, and a GP100 in .327 gathering dust in the safe.

Gus Youmans

[Harry O]

My first shooting report on this gun.

I went to the indoor range with a bunch of reloads. They duplicate (or perhaps a little more) the jacketed Factory .32 H&R Magnum load (5.6gr of HS-6 and an 85gr Hornady XTP). I get a little under 1,200fps from them in my 5-1/2" Ruger Super SingleSix. My guess is 1,130 to 1,150fps through this 3" barrel. It was nice to have an windage adjustable rear sight. I centered it (left and right) in three cylinderfulls. The vertical is about 1" low with this load. I will experiment with heavier bullets a little bit before doing anything to the front sight.

Accuracy looks promising. It is not as accurate as my Ruger Super SingleSix or my S&W Super KitGun Model 632, but it is not spraying lead either. I have been shooting the first for 15 year and the latter for 20 years. I am sure that practice will reduce the size of the groups with this gun, too. Funny how that is: the more I practice with a gun, the better it groups.

I will have to change out the mainspring and possibly the return spring. The trigger pull is way too heavy. Not surprising. I had the same problem with a .38 Special SP-101. A change to Wolff springs took care of that. I also may try some of the Hogue monogrips like the ones Ruger has been putting on the SP-101 recently. I little more grip to grab might help, too.

I have a load that I use in the Ruger Super SingleSix that gives about 1,350fps in its 5-1/2" barrel. It is way over factory pressures, but well under the famous Skeeter Skelton loads. I have been using them since I got the gun (many hundreds if not low thousands of rounds ago) without any signs if distress in that particular gun. Before I would try them in the SP-101, I would load up some stair-step cartridge loads between the factory loads and that load. I believe that this one will take it, too. I just don't know if I want to shoot them in such a short barrel. There is already plenty of muzzle blast from a 5-1/2" barrel.

Looks like it was a good purchase.

[Petrol & Powder]

Sounds promising. Most of the same techniques used to smooth out the action of a GP-100 will work on the SP101. Ruger does put some insanely heavy springs in their DA revolvers. If you haven't purchased your replacement springs yet, I can highly recommend "TriggerShims.com" for your springs and shims. http://triggershims.com/
They are good people to deal with and you can get shims and springs all in one place.

A little judicious polishing of some key components, a few shims and reduced power hammer/trigger springs will do wonders for that SP101.
Good Luck !!