Anyone own Ruger sp101 .22lr?

[Rivers2k]

I know this a S&W forum but I wanted to see if anyone has the Ruger sp101 and how it compares to the S&W model 63.

I have wanted a model 63 with a 4 or 5" barrel for over a year but cant find one anywhere. My local dealer thinks they only come in 3" now.

Knowing I am smith guy he asked me to just "take a look" at a Ruger sp 101 in .22lr with a 4" barrel. I must say I loved it, it felt great! and for $200 less than a 63. This would be my only non S&W revolver and I kind of feel like I am cheating on them by even considering the purchase.

Any input is appreciated as I am about 2 hours away from laying down the money.

 

[WNC Seabee]

I had an SP101 .22 until about a month ago. When I bought it, I liked it so much that I (regretfully) sold off my 4" Model 34-1. The M34-1 just felt too small for me.

The SP is a great revolver, well made, accurate and feels good in the hand. You will HATE the trigger until you swap out the hammer spring for a lighter weight one from Wolff. I think I ended up with a 10# or 12# hammer spring and never had a misfire with several different ammo types. With the spring swapped and a few hundred dry fires, the trigger smoothed right out.

For me, the grips are too small. If you have larger hands, try the grips made by Trausch. They look a bit funky but fit the hand really well and feel a bit like a target stock.

I did end up selling the SP, but that was to fund the 6" no dash 617 I just picked up. I would not hesitate to own another.

 

[Rivers2k]

Thanks that is really good to know. I was planning on swapping the spring because of the reviews I have read. I have never had to put new springs in before so this will be a new adventure.

I do have bigger hands and the Ruger grips are ugly. So grips are fist on my list

 

[WNC Seabee]

Thanks that is really good to know. I was planning on swapping the spring because of the reviews I have read. I have never had to put new springs in before so this will be a new adventure.

I do have bigger hands and the Ruger grips are ugly. So grips are fist on my list

The spring swap is super easy, far easier than it would be on an S&W. No more than a 5 minute job, even for a newbie.

 

[Russell Cottle]

When my youngest 'borrowed' my K22 several years ago, I began the hunt for another .22 for the grandkids to shoot when they come for a visit. When the SP101, .22 came out, I picked up one to add to the battery. I like it and so do the grandkids.

 

[oliveview]

I have the original SP101, in 4". It has the full-underlug, and looks identical to its big brother, save but for the smaller caliber.

It is a very cool gun, and is so heavy that it literally has no recoil.
The stock grip was horrible, so I replaced it with a Hogue combat rubber grip. While the gun is fun to shoot, it does have some notable drawbacks. Mine has always shot a little low (even from a rest) and with the staked front sight, it isn't all the easy to just swap it out for one a hair lower, and one doesn't exist, anyway. That's not a deal killer, because once you learn to adjust your aim by a hair, it's fine. Just a little weird.

The bigger issue, and one for which I have never resolved, is after maybe a hundred rounds or so, the cylinder walls will build up with enough residue that it becomes a serious PITA to extract spent cases. Not sure the culprit. I don't know if that is still a problem on the resurrected model? Hopefully, not.

Despite the odd issues with the Ruger, I'll never sell it. It's still fun, and the fact that they don't make that exact model (the new one is really a security six) any longer makes it neat.

I don't own one myself, but I grew up learning to shoot my Dad's Smith 63. I never recall any issues, whatsoever, with that one. I wish Smith would make their current one in a short, or snub barrel. Just for fun. That might bring me to buy a lock gun.

 

[Rivers2k]

Thanks all for your reviews it makes me feel better about my purchase.

I don't own one myself, but I grew up learning to shoot my Dad's Smith 63. I never recall any issues, whatsoever, with that one. I wish Smith would make their current one in a short, or snub barrel. Just for fun. That might bring me to buy a lock gun.

You are in luck Smith does make it in a snub nose that is all I can seem to find now the new one is 2". I cant seem to find the 4" or 5" barrels.

I prefer a longer barrel because its for pinking with friends and by the end of the day it turns it to who make the hardest shot. I really want the extra sight picture the longer barrel offers.

 

[Rivers2k]

Just purchased one during lunch it has never been out of the box until me .

It takes a little less than a week to do the paper work (Good ol NY) I can't wait!

I now have my .22lr trifecta Rifle,Pistol,Revolver.

 

[Dpris]

Mine is an early one of the new 4.20-inchers from last year.
There was an initial problem with the way Ruger was cutting the forcing cones, which caused leading in the cone & it built up severely.
Since corrected in production.

Mine has 880 rounds of mixed stuff through it without cleaning, after I had the cone re-cut locally. Couldn't do that with the first sample I had.
Very stiff DA pull as you've noticed, but I didn't buy it to be shooting DA and I won't bother to risk ignition reliability by fiddling with spring replacements.
Sometimes that works in the SP, sometimes it doesn't.

I'm quite happy with it & the sights are a great improvement over the older windage-only versions.
Denis

 

[DS-10-SPEED]

I know this a S&W forum but I wanted to see if anyone has the Ruger sp101 and how it compares to the S&W model 63.

I have wanted a model 63 with a 4 or 5" barrel for over a year but cant find one anywhere. My local dealer thinks they only come in 3" now.

Knowing I am smith guy he asked me to just "take a look" at a Ruger sp 101 in .22lr with a 4" barrel. I must say I loved it, it felt great! and for $200 less than a 63. This would be my only non S&W revolver and I kind of feel like I am cheating on them by even considering the purchase.

Any input is appreciated as I am about 2 hours away from laying down the money.

I have mostly S&W's myself and bought an 8 shot SP101. It is very well built and accurate but I would recommend shooting one first to see if it fits you. The frame behind the trigger is wider than all my S&W's. For me anyway, the wide frame behind the trigger causes my trigger finger to hit the frame before I can get the gun to fire. The smaller S&W 63 does not do this and feels much better than the SP101 when shooting.

By ds10speed at 2012-04-29

 

[Dpris]

I immediately put Hogue wood on mine.
Fits my hand great.
The 4-inch .357 Version will be going that route too.
Denis

 

[larryofcc]

Hey Marine. I have owned both and I see no comparison. The sights on the SP are terrible, adjustable for windage only if I remember right. The grip is also no good and will require a set of aftermarkets. Double action is 15 lbs. and way too heavy. I had the old type with a 4" bbl. I now have a non pinned M63 from 1982. Lighter, better from the box trigger pull, fully adjustable sights, S&W combat grips fit my hand much better, and the M63 is more accurate as far as I am concerned. I was going to buy one, and bought a 4" M617-0 instead. Semper Fi. Big Larry USMCR (60-68)

 

[M3Stuart]

...The bigger issue, and one for which I have never resolved, is after maybe a hundred rounds or so, the cylinder walls will build up with enough residue that it becomes a serious PITA to extract spent cases. Not sure the culprit. I don't know if that is still a problem on the resurrected model? Hopefully, not....

There you go, now you're gonna get me started again. I'll just take a deep breath, go back to what I was doing, and not go ballistic about the extraction problem with the SPs, Taurus 94s, etc...

Well, at least I'm not the only one with that problem.

 

[Dpris]

Larry,
You're behind the times.
Fully adjustable rear, fiberoptic front.
Denis

 

[Stainz]

I have the last production 63, a 5"-er, as well as a current 63, the 3"-er. Also in the picture below is my 4" 651 (.22 WMR) which looks for all of the world like a 4" 63, which itself hasn't been offered in some time. The newer 63's are 8-shooters, while the original 63's are six-shooters. As they all had RB J-frame grips, I bought them their own 'Model 60 Pro' style grips - great feel in my medium+ sized hands. The 3" 63 came with a fo HiViz front sight - I added one to the 5"-er. Fast sighting 'aid' for 'mature' eyes.

An old friend paid a premium to own the first of the new SP-101 4" x8 .22's. My early production 3" 63 was ~$50 more - and from our A-Bing the pair, a great bargain! Mine had OEM springs - and was far smoother & lighter than his almost new SP. It does have a fully adjustable rear sight, not the weather-only adjustable rear sight of the old 4" SP in .22 (... or .32 H&RM, like mine! That was the absolute worst firearm I've ever owned for it's poor QC.). The current production 4" SP-101 in .22, an 8-shooter, is a decent firearm - with an attrocious trigger - probably remediable. Still, once burned on a horrid SP-101 in .32 H&RM, I am still trepidatious about owning a new one in .22. I looked at one locally for $539 new today just after lunch - barely a C-note less than the last local 3" 63 I saw - that's a no-brainer! My 3" 63 shot better groups, too. Just my opinion, but I'd get the 3" 63 - maybe some new grips(?).

Stainz, in S&W-only land!

 

[larryofcc]

Dpris, Those sights are the ugliest ever to be put on any firearm. I know the new SP's have them, and that's why I don't have one. I had the old model and didn't like it either. I already have the usual 22's. K22's K22 Magnums, M617's, and a really nice M63. I also have, put away, some very scarce Ruger Single Sixes. Nope, I will take my M63 every time, especially when riding my Quad or off road bike. Big Larry

 

[Dpris]

Larry,
I bought the new .22 four-incher SP for the 8 rounds, quick loading & ejection, the barrel length, and those sights.

I'm not a huge fan of fiberoptics, but I've gotten to where I just ignore the green dot. The sight picture presented is big enough & squared enough that I can use it as a normal front post & disregard the light pipe.
The profile doesn't bother me from the side, either.

I worked with the 5-inch 63 a while back, liked it, didn't want a lock. (Just me. )
Worked with the 317, same.
Both nice guns otherwise.

I have a minty S&W Model 34, like it a lot, too nice to carry, but it does get fired.
Have 3 Ruger Single-Sixes, including a $1200 Clements beauty.

I don't much care for the DA pull on the new .22 SP, but as I said- I won't be shooting it DA much at all.
Otherwise, very durable, very beefy, no lock, don't need to worry about the finish, more accurate than the 34, quicker to load & unload than the Singles.

I had El Paso Saddlery build me a Tanker holster for toting the Ruger in the ATV above the regular beltgun, also fits the new .357 SP four-incher.
Works great for my needs, I know other opinions vary.
Denis

 

[larryofcc]

A few years back I started a Ruger collection. Didn't work for me so I sold most of them off. Lost a few $$$ in the process. I have four highly collectables left. A rare original "Star" KS-4, an original "Star" KS-9 still in the original box,a fairly rare 9 1/2" blued "Star", and a N.I.B.KNR-5 convertible from 1975. I will be keeping these. The 4" KS-4 shoots right up there with my 4" M617-0. Just harder to reload. Big Larry

 

[Rivers2k]

Thank you all for the responses. I think there is some confusion between the old and new SP 101. I bought the new one with the adjustable sights.


I will stay clear of the old model read a lot of bad reviews but this newer model seems to have nothing but praise behind it. Thanks again for all your help. If I ever a see a new model 63 come up I may just have to buy that one too but I think I will be content with this.

Something that dawned on me last night. No lock to contend with.

 

[Dpris]

Another plus for the Ruger.
Denis