Best revolver manufacturer.

[rec999allis]

In your opinion, who is the best revolver manufacturer today. Which company and which model is the best of the best these days?:rolleyes:

[MS .45]

I personally prefer Rugers for thier toughness. S&W do have better triggers however.

[Smith357]

Since you specified "today" and did not have Colt or Freedom Arms listed I will say I think Rugers are the best of those to choose from. They are very rugged. Then Taurus, and finally S&W due to thier recent quality control issues.

[Tiny in Ohio]

Ruger for me please!!

[cbsbyte]

I would have to go with S&W overall even though I only own a Ruger Gp-100. Why, because even though Rugers design is considered more modern in the GP series, and they make classic cowboy style guns which S&W does not. Rugers tend to be very utlitarian in looks and function. In truth they are not as refined as most S&W's are often have that classic, well designed look to them. I also believe that Ruger has been having quality control issues lately. My new Gp-100 had marks all over the barrel from a machine tool. It should have never left the factory in that condition. I have friend who also had some issue with cosemetics. Most people I know own S&Ws, very few own Rugers. Then again I live in Mass home of S&W. They are the local favorite. No one bad mouths Rugers in quality of construction, except that the triggers often do need a lot of work out of the box. I have noticed in target shooting a Gp-100 is equal in accuracy as a 686, except in most cases a 686 trigger will be alot smoother and crisp.

[_N4Z_]

voted for Ruger having shot both SW and Ruger and cuz that's what I have.

think it's the best hand type shooter i've owned to date. (gp100 .357mag)

no experience with tauri.


but there is freedom arms which imo makes the best revolvers out there.

[rec999allis]

The reason I didn't put Freedom Arms on the list is because I forgot all about them and I didn't put Colt on the list because I don't know what they have for revolvers today. If you feel either of these two are better then what's on the list let it be known, or if you feel there is something even better let's hear about it. I want to know what's the best out there.:)

[dbarale]

Freedom Arms revolvers are great but not really a "production" gun. More of a custom gun and not accessible to most shooters.

As of today I would say Ruger 1st, S&W 2nd and Taurus 3rd. But Taurus maybe going up the list if nothing is done to improve QC at S&W (and Ruger).

[rec999allis]

cbsbyte, did you check out your GP before you bought it or did you buy and order it before you saw it.:confused:

[Savage.250]

Have to go with Ruger. They make some of the strongest wheel guns out there which is good for us reloading types!

I must admit, however, I am starting to see a down side. I do not care for all these Warninigs being scrawled all over the barrels of the new guns. It really detracts from the beauty.

I "miss the 4 click cock" too. Although I can see the "safety tang" system having it's place for those who carry with all six rounds in chamber.

Always been a Ruger fan!!! ;)

[Ala Dan]

I'm still in the Smith N' Wesson camp~!:D :uhoh:

[Kurac]

If Freedom Arms was one of the choices they would be #1

I don't own one but I did get the chance to handle a 97' in .44 special a few months ago and I was very impressed. I worked in the metal machining industry for many years and I know a tight fit when I see it.

My second choice would be S&W

Colts are nice too but you pay a lot extra for the name.

[wheelgunslinger]

Taurus has successfully forged ahead over the last 20 years with their product's durability and overall quality. The offer more caliber choices, and more different types of revolvers.
My vote goes to them. While I can pore through the Smith catalog and leer at seemingly hundreds of different permutations of the .357 revolver, and the Ruger catalog seems woefully understocked, Taurus always has something neato that makes me think "Hey, I'd like to have one of those." And, they have some stuff that leaves me saying "wow. that's too pimp for wheelgunslinger." Taurus' quality has not been an issue for me.
My vote for best maker goes to the most innovative.

[cbsbyte]

My Gp was a replacement for one that was destroyed by defective ammo. I never saw it since Ruger sent it directly to me from NH.

[Smokepole]

I see noone mentioned the Colts line. I know that they abandoned us civilians for the military market and not wanting to deal with the gun control issues and litigation, however, they have made some fine guns over the years. I have a Python that's so sweet to shoot! Maybe not as sturdy at the Smith (but close) or the Ruger (no question here) but very accurate and the prettiest gun ever made. I also have a Colt Anaconda in .45 Colt and 6 inch barrel. Another nice gun! Tough as nails, accurate, and that great Colt look (like the Python on steroids!)! My loads for this one are the same one's for my Ruger Blackhawk and it eats them for lunch! Exceeds the .44 Magnum loads. Blackhawks can be made beautiful if you spend enough on them. The Redhawk and Super Redhawk are great but uglier than a cinderblock! The Smith 29 is my favorite Smith but I let mine go 15 years ago and never had another. Their L frame guns are very nice too. Take yer pick! We talk about guns like we talk about our women! Some like blondes and some like redheads! Just remember they all function well in the masters hands!

[N3rday]

We talk about guns like we talk about our women! Some like blondes and some like redheads! Just remember they all function well in the masters hands!

Someone's kinky :scrutiny:

Anyways, I was just wondering why Taurus is pulling in so low in the rankings? It's got what, like...3 votes so far?

[Boats]

What is this I am reading about ugly Ruger warnings?

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=38981&d=1146029063

[Nashmack]

I've owned Colts, Smiths, Rugers, Ubertis, Taurii, and Rossis. I have MANY MUCH love for the Brazilians! Cases in point...Rossi model 35202, 5 shot J frame style, only with much much much better rubber pancake grips, and a lovely stainless finish. Digested every load I threw at it, never once needed to be timed in 12,000 rounds, 11,750 of which were plus P. Taurus model 608, 8 shot .357, ported 4" barrel. Most accurate wheelgun I've fired so far. Had to sell it for gas money. Have regretted it ever since.

[orangeninja]

I love Ruger revolvers, but they are big, they are heavy, etc. But they also look great and are tough as nails.

For practical carry I prefer the S&W designs, but for their price and quality control, I'd take the Taurus.

Lastly, I held a Raging Bull .454.........it was a thing to behold. If only Dirty Harry had one of these.:D

[Steve C]

I have both Rugers and Smiths and I'll let the Rugers go before selling any of my Smiths.

[Matthew748]

I had to go with S&W on this one. I have had major quality control issues with Taurus revolvers and, for whatever reason, I have never been able to shoot a Ruger revolver with anything approaching the degree of accuracy that I can achieve with S&W revolvers.

[Working Man]

+1 for the Rugers, they have served me well for many years.

[Stainz]

Rugers always need some work when new... they are delivered as a 'work in progress'. I still have a few SA's - and my SS .45 RH. S&W's are highly serviceable 'as delivered'. QC and customer service is far better with S&W, my hands down choice for #1,

Stainz

[Sport45]

I voted for Ruger because of their durability and ease of takedown. I only need to remove one screw to take the stocks off, and can then strip the thing to trigger group, hammer, and cylinder/crane without tools. It's equivalent to a Garand or 1911 for ease of takedown.

That said, I like my Smith triggers better and like the versatility of my Dan Wesson the best. If it had been a choice, I would have voted for Dan Wesson. The DW has the best combination of trigger, versatility and ruggedness.

[454c]

The word "today" in the question is what made the answer easy. RUGER.

[xring44]

I have a safe full of S&Ws, two rugers, so its obviously S&W for me.

[461]

Rugers have never let me down and the other two contestants have. Ruger for me.

[Cosmoline]

Twenty years ago it would have been different, but right now it's Ruger. Taurus gets points for innovation but they still have a ways to go to overcome their history of QC problems. S&W just seems to be heading off into la la land. Weird high-capacity wheelguns, garish designs, tiny ultra-light J frame magnums, absurdly huge X-frames and an end to their best lines such as the K frame .357's. None of it makes any sense to me.

[Surefire]

Sadly, at present day, IMO they all suck.

Having said this, assuming one gets a gun working out of the box, I prefer Ruger by a HUGE margin. Unfortunately, half of my latest Ruger purchases have NOT worked out of the box. My personal opinion is that quality control is at an all time low with both Ruger & S&W.

I really hope that this trend turns around. If Ruger can CONSISTENTLY put out quality guns like they once did, I'd be happy.

[sfhogman]

What Surefire said. TODAY is the operant word here. Although I love my Rugers, their QC is at a point where I'm not going to be purchasing one for a while. Those that I own that were made before 2000, have been just fine. The later ones all had issues requiring return. It's too bad. Their modular construction, ease of maintenece and toughness are all big pluses for me.

So for now, it's Smiff.

Jeff

[Surefire]

2000 is the same year that I noticed the difference for Ruger. I NEVER had an issue before 2000. Since then, half of my NIB Rugers have had problems out-of-the-box.

In regards to S&W, I consider 1996'ish to be the last consistent good year. Since then, it seems a lot more hit and miss. My 1996 bought S&W 686+ is a gem, with an action that feels like a gunsmith customed it. My newer 686-6 with the lock has an DA action that is so heavy/rough that it makes Rugers actions feel light.

[rec999allis]

Sfhogman, what problems did your Rugers have? Where any of them GP-100s?

[kevin387]

I like the anvil like toughness of a Ruger more than the smoothness of a Smith. You can adjust a trigger but I'm not sure how you'd make a Smith strionger other than trading it in.

[Cosmoline]

QC problems at Ruger is news to me, though admittedly almost all of my buys are pre-2000 used ones. I have a 2003 SP-101 in Target Grey that's been fantastic. What specific problems are they having now?

[sfhogman]

Allis,

First, I have a GP100 that has never had a problem. It was manufactured in 1994. Shoots like ringin' a bell- it's one terrific gun. Machine marks very evident compared to my Security-Six. The exterior is well-finished and beautiful. I would trust my life with it.

Here we go:
10/22: failed to extract over and over for my G/F's 9 year old son. The local gunsmith couldn't find the problem. I traced it to a badly stamped extractor. Replaced w/Volquartsen.

.45 Accusport Bisley: Crud in hammer plunger hole, tying gun up. I cleaned and polished the hole, replaced spring and plunger. Viola!

.22 Single-Six. Purchased before the .45, sent back to Ruger. It had exactly the same problem- crud in hammer plunger hole. Same fix.

Redhawk: Failure to fire in double action. Returned to Ruger on my dime. Repaired at factory, returned scratched up, letter mentions problem with cylinder/frame. Who knows? Personally I think it had the well-known short firing pin problem. I no longer trust this gun for anything but range use.

My 10/22. Same extractor problem. Volquartsen to the rescue. Those $10 extractors are a deal!

22/45: Refuses to lock slide back on last round. My older one operates perfectly. I could probably run it down myself, but I'm not gonna bother.

I looked at a new SP101 today at the local gunshop. The sight channel down the backstrap was clearly cut with a dull mill bit, which chattered. First thing you see when you pick up the gun.

Please understand, reporting the above gives me no pleasure at all. These are well designed guns, built in this country. I believe that the problem is systemic and has to do with cutting as many corners as possible. I hope I am wrong; the situation reminds me of Harley-Davidson quality control in the late Seventies/early Eighties.

I sincerely hope that Ruger's future is at least as bright as HD's.

It's late, I'm tired and hope that what I wrote makes sense.

Best, Jeff

Just one man's experience.

[10-Ring]

Me I have always like vintage S & W DA triggers and the ruggedness of Rugers :D

[MCgunner]

I like Ruger for stength of design. They're TOUGH and well built/fitted guns. I own all three, though at the moment I don't have a Ruger DA revolver. The S&Ws used to be about the most well fit guns on the market other than maybe some Colt models, but I'm beginning to have doubts just reading this board. I've liked the older guns I've owned, but don't have a current production gun built in the last decade, even last 2 decades. Quality of S&W, from what I've been able to gather just from others, has been up and down since the golden 50s. I ain't gettin' rid of my mid 50s M10, but I am not so sure a modern production S&W is so much more desireable, considering the price, as a Taurus or especially a Ruger. But, then, I even like Rossi revolvers, still own 2 of 'em and have owned 6 of 'em in the past. I will not rule out purchasing either Rossi, Taurus, Ruger, or Smith and Wesson in the future. I still consider them all good guns in one way or another. I will want to handle and inspect whatever gun I buy, though, no matter who built it.

[gopguy]

This is tough as I love pre 1940s vintage Smith and Wesson N Frames and I also love the Colt New Service..I am particularly fond of my S&W "Triple Locks".....However I am going to go with the vintage Smith and Wesson. They were more simple and were less likely to develop problems than the early Colts.

Never cared much for Ruger double action revolvers.

[Steve 48]

I also have a safe full of Smith & Wesson's but just a few Rugers. I also have a Taurus 454 which I also like a lot. S&W is my choice mainly for the triggers. Steve 48

[huntershooter]

You had no box for "none of the above".

[Matt King]

Like both the S&W and the ruger, but i'd have to say I like S&W better. As for quality issues, i don't own any revolver's made before 1997.

[Cosmoline]

Texas--for S&W and Ruger alike you'll do better if you ONLY own revolvers before 1997. S&W's greatest wheelguns were made during the P&R days, and now it sounds like Ruger may have started cutting corners. Colt's glory days were also long ago, of course. Back when genuine master finishers would stone each part into perfect fit. I've shot many vintage Colts and S&W's and few modern revolvers can compare with their smoothness and accuracy. My old Police Positive Special would shoot quarter size groups with 158 grain lead .38's. And it was a banged up old pimp special. They really *don't* make them like that anymore, and probably never will again. Nobody can afford to have that level of expertise anymore. It costs too much per hour.

[wheelgunslinger]

They really *don't* make them like that anymore, and probably never will again. Nobody can afford to have that level of expertise anymore. It costs too much per hour.
You can say that again. The average Joe who wants one like the ones in the good ole days has to either find a vintage piece or pay someone to polish his modern piece that only shares the name and look of the good old ones into a work of art. It can be done, but as cosmoline said, at great cost.
This is why I voted for Taurus. Their program has improved and they do build good weapons. The others have gone downhill and I really do believe that they are one of the best manufacturers out there for OTC wheelguns. My quality issues with Ruger and Smith have come to the point that I don't even buy their stuff anymore. Currently Czeska Zbrodjovka, Taurus, and Dan Wesson are getting my business for handguns.
I don't really care about tool marks. Just make it work properly!

[bowfin]

Dan Wesson is the next revolver I would like to own, if they get around to making them again in something smaller than a .445 Supermag.

CZ-USA is slowly bringing the lineup back, and if one wants an impartial judge of the ascendancy of the Dan Wesson revolvers, look no further than handgun silhouette shooting, and the DW revolvers' accomplishments there.

[Black Snowman]

I'd have to go with Dan Wesson. They're just getting back on their feet but CZ-USA has a real stake in their reputation and success. Every new example I've seen (which so far has been two) has made me drool and wish I had a lot of spare money, even though I have had absolutely 0 need for either of them. CZ-USA has been working hard to build their brands reputations, and more than making things flash that's meant making things work.

On top of that, my old Model 15 is a real tack driver. Those tension barrels keep shooting the same place again and again. Heat doesn't effect them nearly as bad as a conventional barrel; one of the big reasons for their success in silhouette. Of course, if you don't need a 445 SuperMag, you're out of luck right now in the new Dan Wesson market.

[.45man]

I have many of them all, but nothing tops a Freedom Arms Premier Grade Model 83!!!

[Deer Hunter]

I voted Smith and Wesson, simply because I've tried the triggers on all three and nothing is comparable to my Smith. A Smith N frame fits my hand perfectly, and I believe their quality is supurb.

They get my vote.

[woodsltc]

S & W . Nuff Said.

[Cosmoline]

I'm really glad to hear Dan Wesson is getting back together. I think they're one of the most underrated revolver outfits and still don't get the respect they deserve. CZ so far seems to have limited their production to some 1911's and big wheelguns in the .445 line. I'm not sure that's going to pay off, given the developments in big bore handguns and the fact that everybody and their cousin is making 1911's now. I'd rather see more .357's and something in the CCW line

[Ohen Cepel]

I think Freedom Arms might be the best out there now.

I really like Smith, but won't buy one with that lock on it. Therefore, I think I would go with Ruger.

[PITTMAN]

I HAVE TWO RUGERS. THE P89, AND THE P97. I GOT THE P97 USED AND HAD SOME LITTLE PROBLEMS WITH IT. BUT I AM SOLD ON RUGER. MY P89 9MM, IS SOO GOOD, IT MAKES ME WANT TO SHOOT MORE.

THE P97 45, SHOOTS VERY NICE AND RUGER STILL WAS PARTS FOR IT.

[PITTMAN]

TAURUS WAS A LIFETIME WARRANTY--ON THE GUN--NOT THE OWNER.
RUGER AND SMITH CAN'T BEAT THAT.

I HAVE A TAURUS MODEL 66 357. FIRES VERY GOOD AND WITH THE WARRANTY, TAURUS IS THE BEST BUY.
:cool:

[tuckerdog1]

Shot a friend's Python many times. Beautiful gun & smooth as butter.

Owned a Colt Trooper III. Should have kept that gun.
Owned an early S&W 686. Accurate & easy to shoot.
Owned 2 S&W 29s from late 70s, early 80s. Both fine shooters. Nice triggers & accurate.
Own Taurus 94. Never fails to go bang, but trigger is terrible.
Own 2 Freedom Arms. Model 83 Field Grade 454C & Premiere Grade 353. Both works of art in steel.

My vote goes to Fredom Arms.

Tuckerdog1

[Otony]

Freedom Arms and USFA are the best, hands down. Can't vote, inadequate poll!:D

[JohnKSa]

TAURUS WAS A LIFETIME WARRANTY--ON THE GUN--NOT THE OWNER.
RUGER AND SMITH CAN'T BEAT THAT.I don't know about S&W, but Ruger definitely beats that. I have never heard of a person being refused warranty service from Ruger just because they're not the original owner of the firearm. In fact, I've heard of Ruger servicing guns for free even when it was obvious that the gun was abused and the person sending in the gun wasn't the original owner. In addition, Ruger has a far superior reputation for excellent customer service compared to Taurus.

[13.45]

freedom arms (although as mentioned, they have far more in common with a custom revolver than with a production model)

[Richard.Howe]

None of the above -- Freedom Arms.

[fallingblock]

The GP-100 is without a doubt a fine modern revolver.:)


Having voted Ruger, I must say that if the Australian P.M.
wasn't such a raging hoplophobe I'd still
have my two 640-1 S&W's.:(

[tc300mag1]

Ill vote for smith right now

[Hammerdown]

Hello Rec99allis
If your poll would have included older Pinned and recessed Vintage Smith & Wesson's the responses would be over whelming, as they are The ONLY revolver's I own !. I have to agree with this previous responder totally.. Hammerdown.


/Quote/
S&W just seems to be heading off into la la land. Weird high-capacity wheelguns, garish designs, tiny ultra-light J frame magnums, absurdly huge X-frames and an end to their best lines such as the K frame .357's. None of it makes any sense to me /Quote/
__________________

[MCgunner]

S&W just seems to be heading off into la la land. Weird high-capacity wheelguns, garish designs, tiny ultra-light J frame magnums, absurdly huge X-frames and an end to their best lines such as the K frame .357's. None of it makes any sense to me

Change is probably inevitable, many times a good thing, but it's a sad, sad day when the K frame is gone. :( You shouldn't kill what got ya there, especially when there IS a good market, or seems to be. I understand MIM parts, cost cutting production methods, but killing the K frame is beyond my comprehension. I don't need no stinkin' handgun the size and weight of a carbine and I don't need no 9 ounce magnum. K frames are practical. Got nothing against the L frame, but I prefer the K. To be fair, Ruger did the very same thing with the Security Six and that WASN'T a weak design!!!!

I've got nothing against Taurus, though I like Rugers better. I own a couple of Tauri and I might buy more. I think they're good quality, servicable revolvers and offer stuff that Smith and Wesson seems to think won't sell, guns in the K frame range of frame size.:rolleyes: Used guns are fine. Got nothing against a good used gun, but I got nothing against Taurus, either. If S&W won't cater to me and Taurus will.....well....:D Been thinking "tracker" a lot lately.

[eagle24]

My vote was for Ruger, but I like the S&W's better. IMO Ruger DA's are ugly but I think they are a built stronger. I own more Smith & Wessons because I like the look and feel.

[kolob10]

I've shot many revolvers over the past 50 years. My favorites have been Ruger super blakhawk, Ruger blackhawk, Freedom Arms model 83 in 454 Casull, Freedom Arms model 97 in 44 special. Rugers are the best buy but Freedom Arms are the premier revolvers of choice for me. I saved for quite a while to purchase mine. Good shooting

[ceadermtnboy]

My vote goes to Ruger GP-100 for the best design. If they would only improve the frame by rounding off all of the square corners and give the blue models a polished finish like the older super blackhawks, and then polishing the lockwork for a smoother action. I would gladly pay a few hundred dollars more. Ruger are you listening? You guys are missing a great opportunity. Smith and Wesson also threw in the towel on nicely blued revolvers? Is anyone else out there fond of nicely blued revolvers and walnut grips? If we could only go back to Smith & Wesson models 19,27,29 and the colt python instead of the stainless & rubber wheelguns with huge warning labels and ugly locks! Progress?

[jjohnson]

Ruger gets my vote. I'm still mad at S&W for being the flagship of the Hillary Hole :barf: line, and at Taurus, for the quirky problems I've had with both of the revolvers I bought new with their logo.:fire:

[Gun 4 Fun]

I have owned every kind except Colt, I've owned Taurus, Rossi, Dan Wesson, I currently own Rugers, S&W, Springfield Armory and Freedom Arms. I disagree with Freedom Arms being custom guns. Sure they're pricey, but you get what you pay for. I like Rugers, I love S&W's, but without any question Freedom Arms are the finest and strongest guns made. You might be able to buy a custom revolver that is finished and fitted as well, but it won't be as strong. The materials used in Freedom revolvers is state of the art. IMO
Yeah, I know- Opinions are like asses, everyone has one and they all stink.

[Schofield3]

s&w .

[Johnboy53]

EASY - Smith & Wesson hands down. Nothing runs like a Smith!!

[bflobill_69]

All things considered - S&W...

K Frames are a real pleasure to shoot.

Bflobill69

[22-rimfire]

Smith & Wesson. Taurus... funny.

[jhco]

COLT

[Troy308]

Have a SP101, GP100, and Super Redhawk.

[earlthegoat2]

Yeah, Ill go ahead and go with Colt.

[Bigger is Better]

Ruger for me, without doubts! Smiths are very good guns but I don't love it; while Taurus' for me suck, but is only my own opinion.
If were Freedom Arms' among "candidates", you know, they would have my vote.
I'm half-agree with that you say about Rugers trigger: I had a lot of problems with my ex Super RedHawks but none with Super BlackHawks and my Vaquero. In my opinion Ruger single action's trigger is good and don't need after-market works. But, I repeat, is my opinion.

[Timthinker]

I interpret this poll as referring to mass produced handguns as opposed to customized or speciality pieces. With this in mind, I would vote for Smith. S&W make some of the best DA revolvers I have shot. Now, I have owned more Rugers than any other handguns, but the vast majority of those were single action revolvers. Nothing is wrong with SA handguns, but I believe this poll refers to DA revolvers.


Timthinker

[ShakyJake]

Kolob where on earth did you find this thread????:what::what::D
I don't even think they were making USFA, or just starting, when it was started in '06!!! :scrutiny: ;)
TaKe CaRe
Ted