QC is how things like that escape the factory. All modern manufacturers are doing quality assurance (QA) now. QC is too reactive.

I saw a picture of the gun , sent to me as an ad from Ruger and the front site is proud in that picture as well

__________________
A Snider squibbed n the Jungle

It's possible the front sight is incorrectly manufactured. Since they replaced the barrel and got the same result, and since the sight blade may be from a subcontractor or outside vendor, I would seriously consider this. I would strongly doubt they are trying to "sneak" bad barrels out to customers. Still needs to be fixed.
Bill S

I was really interested in one of these GP100's...but then I came across this little gem....and...well....

Ruger pretty much lost me way back when they got awful wordie on their firearms. If I want to read a book I will get a book.

__________________
LEX ET ORDO

I'll stick with my 696, thank you.

__________________
Sure you did

Bill, let's hope that's the case.

I've purchased two new Ruger revolvers in the past three years. One had to go back right out of the box. The stainless finish was either polished on Monday morning or late Friday. The other had to have a D ring replaced or something like that, one cylinder trigger pull was about 37 lbs...

I think I'll stick with old school S&W's for a while.

__________________
Isaiah 41:10

I learned my lesson too. I've bought 4 new Rugers in the last 8 years. Will not buy another new one, ever!

#1 Ordered up a single 10... went to inspect it before filing out paperwork. Action seemed stiff & binding. Cycling the action, cylinder bound up on the second rotation. It went back, lgs calls me... try it out again... still horrible - I will not take this. LGS ordered a stainless model of same that I did keep.

#2 Stainless .45 convertable splits cases in one chamber...sigh... I checked this one out in person before buying. Didn't think to measure each chamber.

#3 I bought a short and a long bbl single seven .327. One gun has .015" cylinder gap.. the other .012" gap. Seems for a 40k psi cartridge .012" is max factory spec. hhhmmm. Send the .015" gap gun back. Comes back with .007" - .012"... why you ask?.... because it now has .005" of endshake... on a gun I've never fired. ***sigh***

And a blind man would have caught the Single 10 problem before leaving QC,

Sounds like Ruger QC is a blatant drunkard since that I see this. Not a care at all and may re think about getting a Ruger unseen next time around!

I've owned over twenty Rugers over the past 28 years, only five of which were purchased new. Only one, a Mark III Hunter had major factory issues which Ruger promptly fixed. I like to buy my Rugers and most Smith & Wessons used.

My LGS received two of the new GP-100 .44 Specials last week, both have the front sight gap. His distributor said that all of them are like that.

__________________
Virtue,Liberty & Independence

Yeah, who takes a chamber gauge to a new gun? Completely unacceptable.

His distributor should be all over Ruger like white on rice. This is unacceptable. Even if the gun shoots OK, this is a flaw that no one will accept.

If I were a manager at Ruger, someone would be getting fired over this. One, OK, but we'd fix it. Two, maybe, but now I'm getting bugged. ALL OF THEM??? No, time to stop the line and figure out what's going wrong.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

I am no machinist but, it would seem that a thin sight base could be fashioned and placed under the sight blade. If done properly, it would look as if it was intended to be that way. As a side benefit, Ruger wouldn't have to trash a large quantity of GP100 barrels.

Sad to say that Ruger's QC went bad quite a while back.
Several years ago I bought one of the new Flattop .44 Special Blackhawks. After the first two cylinders were fired, the rear sight pin walked halfway out. I was able to push it back in with just finger pressure. The right grip panel didn't fit properly and I could feel it shifting on the frame with every shot. What's worse is the damned thing shot patterns instead of groups.
I sent it back to Ruger and waited 4 months to get it back. Grip panel was replaced and fit fine. Replaced rear sight pin, same problem came back after firing a few times. Still wouldn't hit the broad side of a barn from the inside. Ruger said accuracy met the specs.
I traded it off at a big loss and was glad to be rid of it.

I like Rugers, but I won't buy another new one.

This is sad, I have always had good luck with Rugers, several revolvers over the years and a rifle or two, no problems with them. Bought the 1911 last year and the front sight fell off the first trip to the range, they did make right and turn around was two weeks. Has been fine since then. Having said that, I am having a little problem with S&W over a 1911 slide they replaced. I guess it happens with all of them. Pushing products out a little too fast maybe?

Somewhere along the way to modern CNC machining a bean counter figured out something the Detroit big three automakers have known for sixty plus years; build it as fast as you can and let the customers find the defects. Why pay a group of trained QC personnel when 90% of what you ship will be just fine? The other 10%, well about 50 of 100 customers will either ignore the problem or fix it themselves. Sad but true.

__________________
Virtue,Liberty & Independence

Sad but true.
Brand new Peterbilt went back to the dealer 2 in the first month.
Once under its own power.
Simple computer bios upgrade that should have been done before it was delivered.
Second time was a bad data cable that had to be replaced.Towing was about 1500.
Body fit and finish is not very good either.
Bad quality control is the norm it seems.

"We The People"

Are:

Today's Manufacturing "Quality Control Group"

__________________
Doesn't hasta call me Johnson

Reminds me of Remington returning 700's that patterned instead of grouped, and stating they met their accuracy standards. Um, since when is a 4 to 6 MOA "group" anyone's idea of an accuracy standard? Add to that the bolt handles that were falling off and Remington suddenly had their lunch being eaten by Savage. I remember growing up the Fudds would poo poo Savage as an entry level gun. But the simple fact is they were outshooting the Remingtons. And their bolt handles did not fall off.

My new 59th anniversary Remington 1100 bought new jammed. The store took out two more that jammed in the store. The fourth one cycled. Since the store wouldn't give me my money back I pawned it. I'm hunting birds in bear country. Two bird shot followed by three slugs. If the gun jams my head is over the Bears fireplace.

My '94 Remington 700 in 338wm will put two rounds in the same hole at 100yds using new Winchester super x ammo. The rifle is that accurate. I heard soon after Remington's quality has been going down hill.

As my kids were born in the 70's I purchased hunting rifles for them when they were a month old. Good quality guns.

Where is it legal to hunt with 5 rounds in the gun?

Really? I'd like to see that.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

I got mine a month ago and sold it today. Felt like a brick and I didn't shoot it well. As for .44 Spls I'm happy sticking with my two Charter Arms Bulldogs and my Blackhawk.

Lesson for today.

__________________
Sure you did

I thought Smith & Wesson was the only one who hired blind people to build their guns. Who would have thought. . ****ger too!

__________________
Dr. B

After zeroing it in I put two bullets through the same hole. I put four rounds in the 700 of 338wm. Four bulls eyes at 100yds. I stood up hand held and fired four shots in rapid fire as fast as I could run the bolt and pick up the center of the target. I was 1" from the center on four targets.

I been shooting 30-06's all my life before I purchased the 338wm.

My witness to my two bullets in the same hole was my older brother. He has passed on unfortunately. He was my spotter and mentor.

My biggest gripe is with the CAD systems of today there's a program we're we can design the parts and assemble them. We can also do stress analysis too. They don't take the time to check it out. Time is money vs no quality control.

Again, that's some amazing shooting. I'm a fan of all types of shooting and I appreciate a good shot. You're an amazing shot. I would sure love to watch you shoot.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

Just to let you all know that air gap is for cooling so the sight will not warp off of setting from heat of the barrel. Ripley's believe it or not? I don't know what all the hoopla is about because a little bondo will fill that gap. Just imagine if new guns come with a small tube of bondo.

I am pro Ruger but that is totally unacceptable. Ruger has had its share of problems with more than a few of new guns. Usually Ruger has like a one week turn around on warranty repairs but they have had some that went back more than once and some even were replaced with a new gun.

Sorry to say but it isn't just Ruger having QC problems as we have seen on this forum that S&W has had its defects also.

I have to say I have been lucky with my latest Ruger and S&W guns having no problems.

I was looking at one of the new .44 GP's last week. Front sight was good, no gap. Unfortunately one side of the barrel was covered in deep scratches. Looked awful. I had been anxious to get one, very disappointed. Think I'll keep looking for a 624 instead.

__________________
Wheel guns are real guns.

Close?

Police trade-ins.

Before Ruger these were made. 1927, still working great.
HDHIC

Attached Images

image.jpg (97.1 KB, 39 views)

Reference post #27 for the " before" photo's. I returned my GP 100 On Feb. 6,they received it on Feb 10. I received a phone call from Sturm Ruger on Feb 11 saying they had received my revolver and would fix it ( voice mail message). I received my GP 100 today. Let the photo's speak for themselves, the documentation that came with the gun said " new barrel". Much better than what it was. Impressed with their turn around time( two weeks from when I dropped it off at FedEx to when the big brown truck brought it back) and their response. Hopefully Karnivore will have the same luck.

Attached Images

	IMG_0146.jpg (37.6 KB, 102 views)
	IMG_0148.jpg (43.1 KB, 91 views)

Hmmm. I guess they just don't get it.
As a high ranking person would say...Sad

Well all this talk has made me go look at my own GP100 Match Champion. Here's what I found:

There is a tiny gap under the front sight.


Less obvious here.


There's even a small gap under the rear.


It's so small most wouldn't notice it unless really scrutinizing closely. I never noticed until now. Hmmm, do I care? No. At least not enough to send it back. The gun shoots true to POA so, it's not an issue.

If the gap were as large as the OP, yes, I'd send it back.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

When I spoke to the Ruger product manager initially he said that their specs called for .009 of a gap.....my revolver initially had a lot more than that( reference post #27).....he was not happy seeing the photo of my front sight.....so I am quite satisfied with it now......I have a bunch of pistols and revolvers with dove tailed front sights, what I have now is comparable and completely satisfactory to me.....no comparison to what I had in post #27. Having installed a bunch of dovetail sights in years past, a small tolerance is to be expected. Ruger listened to my concerns, acknowledged there was indeed a problem and resolved the issue in very timely manner.

Yes, post #82 is far better than post #27. I'd be OK with that too.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

If you're happy with it and it shoots ok, that's all that matters.

Gonna be nice here over the weekend, loading some 44 specials right now with Unique and my cast 429421's.....gonna see how this bad boy shoots.

Update from the OP:

After some negotiations with Ruger CS and after them telling me that the "WOW" front sight was within spec, we mutually agreed that Ruger would replace the GP100 with any other Ruger product that was of similar or higher value.

I picked the Redhawk .44 Magnum TALO edition. Received it today and I am pleased. Can still shoot the .44 Specials and also .44 Magnums. I love the Redhawk interchangeable front sight system.

I immediatly replaced the grip and added a Tyler-T that I had sitting around.

Overall, I am pleased with the outcome as Ruger stepped up and made it right for me.

Attached Images

FullSizeRender-140.jpg (75.0 KB, 54 views)

Why not? There have been a huge number of former S&W people who went to work for Ruger.

So, the company now run by the former S&W people: Different name, but same friendly service.

That is the worst QC I ever saw. Maybe "Bubba" was working that day. A blind hog could do better !

Rough translation: "We at Ruger are going to continue turning out guns with ugly front sights, so suck it up".

As they say in the South, "That's special!"

__________________
Release the Kraken

I have not seen one , but this is totally unacceptable. Bill Ruger must be rolling in his grave about this. I would never have purchased a gun with an obvious defect like that.To have to send a new gun back to the manufacturer for repairs is not acceptable. Shame on Ruger for allowing these guns to leave the factory like that.