WHAT IS THAT KNIFE MATE IM GONNA GO INSANE ITS SO SEXY AGHHHHHH
I don't know, I honestly don't give a shit about knife brands and currently carry a cheap kobalt pocket knife, which honestly I never even carry because I'm not a box cutting warehouse worker.
yeah just look at that great set of sights for accurate shots its such a better carry option they dont give you rear sights to clutter your vision and you can just guesstimate where the front sight goes
If I may interject, your use of "accurate" and "precise" is incorrect, it should be the other way around; the gun may be precise but he will have difficulty using it accurately.
But the snubbies do actually look cool, in a weird way. The 3" is disproportionate and ugly. They should have just kept the 3" the same but longer, and it would have been kino.
I've always been eyeing a Ruger GP100 when I've been more of a S&W guy. I'm trying to find a revolver that has the following critera :
4-5" barrel
Blued
7 shot
.357 mag
Don't care about grips I will replace them anyway
Anyone have any ideas?
Ruger has this weird issue where they don't understand flush or taper. The Toklat is the worst offender IMO. >pieces behind cylinder on either side of the cylinder release look like an afterthought >random seam under grip >awful grip position and angle >non-flush rear sight notch for no reason >weird scope ring notches instead of a simple fricking rail >weird dip in the frame under the barrel >what the frick is that barrel
It's like if an AI designed a revolver.
>GP100 fugly
They're not that bad, but part of it is that Ruger has almost always been a function-over-form company. For example...
https://i.imgur.com/If9VmXl.jpg
Ruger has this weird issue where they don't understand flush or taper. The Toklat is the worst offender IMO. >pieces behind cylinder on either side of the cylinder release look like an afterthought >random seam under grip >awful grip position and angle >non-flush rear sight notch for no reason >weird scope ring notches instead of a simple fricking rail >weird dip in the frame under the barrel >what the frick is that barrel
It's like if an AI designed a revolver.
>Super Redhawk
Now, this actually fugly number has a reason for being. The reciever extends so much so that the barrel has more space to thread into it, as Redhawks were known to literally shoot their barrels off for a then unknown reason (turns out it was a production issue, not a design issue). It also allowed scope rings to be mounted on the frame itself rather than the barrel, which is more ergonomic (rails weren't really a thing at the time of design). The grip frame was abbreviated into a peg to allow for much greater customization of grip contours...which hasn't really happened, but it was also cheaper. The rear sight looks like it came straight off a Blackhawk, so that's cost savings.
The GP100, upon which the Super Redhawk was based, is cheaper, has a better trigger, and is stronger than the Security Six series it replaced. The Super Redhawk, a scaled up GP100, was supposed to replace the Redhawk, a scaled up Security Six, but it was so fugly that they decided to co-produce them to this day.
>every single ugly part has a direct reason for looking bad
I immediately forgive them for everything I hate about the gun, but I still don't have to like it.
A thin WML on a 4" barrel seems possible if manufacturers went for it. Having to carry a flashlight in your free hand to see what your shooting at is a PITA
I like it pretty good, I'll say its nice.
I think, personally, that getting the regular full lug 4 inch would be just fine, especially if the price was significantly lower and you didn't care about switching out the grips.
There was a deal on one for 750 used* and so the Match Champion was the better deal, but I don't think that's going to happen for you as it was luck.
*dude said he'd never even fired it and after looking at it closely, I think he wasn't too far off it was pristine.
In addition to manufacturing firearms, Ruger is renown for their precision casting. They make parts for a wide variety of industries, Ruger is considered top of the line for metal castings.
The metallurgy in a Ruger is likely superior to a 686. Casting is a technique, and not all castings are equal.
that pawn shop has an absolutely firm price rule on firearms so no good.
I've never had problems with used guns before, and what do i care how much a pawn shop preys on the needy. I just wanted a K6s but dont know if its worth the squeeze or not.
It's too much used. Just wait. About 3 years ago a shop near me had two used and they were $600 or so. I'm still kicking myself. They got bought about 1 and a half ago when the gun panic went nuts.
Yeah
Yes
I don't see why not
Yeah the Match Champ is pretty damn good, especially for how good the trigger is for being a Ruger.
Sp101 is a better carry piece.
I want the 2.25 sp101 so bad. No I do not care about the ballistics.
what knife
I don't know, I honestly don't give a shit about knife brands and currently carry a cheap kobalt pocket knife, which honestly I never even carry because I'm not a box cutting warehouse worker.
Ok man reading may be difficult for you but the brand is probably printed on the knife itself. Now, what knife?
Can't you read? He carries a cheap kobalt pocket knife now. Buy one.
WHAT IS THAT KNIFE MATE IM GONNA GO INSANE ITS SO SEXY AGHHHHHH
What makes it better?
yeah just look at that great set of sights for accurate shots its such a better carry option they dont give you rear sights to clutter your vision and you can just guesstimate where the front sight goes
Doesn’t sound precise at all anon, the gun may be accurate but you won’t hit shit without a lot of practice with sights like that.
If I may interject, your use of "accurate" and "precise" is incorrect, it should be the other way around; the gun may be precise but he will have difficulty using it accurately.
Are you not familiar with trench sights?
Just learn your gun.
Yes
And the LCR is even better
Now that's just ogre. A monstrosity
They aren't supposed to be pretty.
But the snubbies do actually look cool, in a weird way. The 3" is disproportionate and ugly. They should have just kept the 3" the same but longer, and it would have been kino.
I've always been eyeing a Ruger GP100 when I've been more of a S&W guy. I'm trying to find a revolver that has the following critera :
4-5" barrel
Blued
7 shot
.357 mag
Don't care about grips I will replace them anyway
Anyone have any ideas?
Oh, and forgot - Fiber optic sights
How can the gp100 be so ridiculously buttfrick ugly? Solid revolvers, though.
Ruger has this weird issue where they don't understand flush or taper. The Toklat is the worst offender IMO.
>pieces behind cylinder on either side of the cylinder release look like an afterthought
>random seam under grip
>awful grip position and angle
>non-flush rear sight notch for no reason
>weird scope ring notches instead of a simple fricking rail
>weird dip in the frame under the barrel
>what the frick is that barrel
It's like if an AI designed a revolver.
>GP100 fugly
They're not that bad, but part of it is that Ruger has almost always been a function-over-form company. For example...
>Super Redhawk
Now, this actually fugly number has a reason for being. The reciever extends so much so that the barrel has more space to thread into it, as Redhawks were known to literally shoot their barrels off for a then unknown reason (turns out it was a production issue, not a design issue). It also allowed scope rings to be mounted on the frame itself rather than the barrel, which is more ergonomic (rails weren't really a thing at the time of design). The grip frame was abbreviated into a peg to allow for much greater customization of grip contours...which hasn't really happened, but it was also cheaper. The rear sight looks like it came straight off a Blackhawk, so that's cost savings.
The GP100, upon which the Super Redhawk was based, is cheaper, has a better trigger, and is stronger than the Security Six series it replaced. The Super Redhawk, a scaled up GP100, was supposed to replace the Redhawk, a scaled up Security Six, but it was so fugly that they decided to co-produce them to this day.
>every single ugly part has a direct reason for looking bad
I immediately forgive them for everything I hate about the gun, but I still don't have to like it.
I completely understand. Redhawks sell for a reason, anon.
That said, the Super Redhawk Alaskan has an almost inexplicably slick aesthetic. It's the snubby Gumby would use.
>Super Redhawk Alaskan
I wish there was a 3 or 4 inch version of the alaskan. Its gorg.
The 5in blued GP100 is my soulmate.
It's ruined nearly every other double action revolver for me.
shame ruger makes approximately none of them
>shame ruger makes approximately none of them
Huh
Based.
I just personally haven't had any luck in finding one
Yes, they're pretty sweet.
Get a redhawk
How about Colt King Cobra?
I like my GP100.
Same here
I want a 7 shot .357 for a home defense gun. Full stout jhp.
are you a traveling man by chance?
yes
Wish they still made the royal phoenix
you mean a security six?
No, the product improved version, that’s made to fire an unlimited amount of full house .357 magnum loads.
How hard would it to be to remove the under lug?
Not a wheel gun guy but why doesn't the gp100 full lug have accessory slots?
Because it would be ugly and bulky as frick with them, the barrel is only half as wide as a pic rail
A thin WML on a 4" barrel seems possible if manufacturers went for it. Having to carry a flashlight in your free hand to see what your shooting at is a PITA
It would offend the types that but Ruger
I like it pretty good, I'll say its nice.
I think, personally, that getting the regular full lug 4 inch would be just fine, especially if the price was significantly lower and you didn't care about switching out the grips.
There was a deal on one for 750 used* and so the Match Champion was the better deal, but I don't think that's going to happen for you as it was luck.
*dude said he'd never even fired it and after looking at it closely, I think he wasn't too far off it was pristine.
Why buy a Burger GP100 when you can buy a 686 and have a superior gun?
Just a reminder, Ruger guns use cast barrels, let that sink in.
>Ruger guns use cast barrels
4 real?
Proofs?
Ruger generally uses cold hammer forged barrels. Also their castings are top notch.
In addition to manufacturing firearms, Ruger is renown for their precision casting. They make parts for a wide variety of industries, Ruger is considered top of the line for metal castings.
The metallurgy in a Ruger is likely superior to a 686. Casting is a technique, and not all castings are equal.
>Ugly ass asymmetrical safety lock hole on the side of the frame
>Superior
My 686 doesn't have a "safety lock hole" and it was built by whiter people than who built your rugerer ball shooter
Bros theres a Kimber K6s at my local pawn shop for 899. Thats pretty much MSRP but the gun's in great condition.
Should i cop y/n
hmm i would not pay msrp for anything used especially from a pawn shop where they bought it for $250. offer them like $500
that pawn shop has an absolutely firm price rule on firearms so no good.
I've never had problems with used guns before, and what do i care how much a pawn shop preys on the needy. I just wanted a K6s but dont know if its worth the squeeze or not.
just buy one from an actual gunstore
It's too much used. Just wait. About 3 years ago a shop near me had two used and they were $600 or so. I'm still kicking myself. They got bought about 1 and a half ago when the gun panic went nuts.
Call the owner a Black person and remind him that his job is to sell shit.
The trigger on these is amazing
I really wanted to get one of those Ruger French train security 38's but now they are $100 more then just 6 months ago.