[chaim]

As a companion to this thread, http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22799 , polling Taurus owners on the quality of their guns, I figure I'll do the same here for S&W and Ruger to get a decent quality comparison.

If you own, or have a lot of experience with, a S&W or Ruger what has your experience been? Is it reliable?

If you don't, or didn't, own one, please only post if you are very familiar with a particular gun. Don't post based on reputation. Only if you regularly shoot one and you are familiar with its care and maintenance.

[chaim]

Darn, I meant to post a poll and I guess I forgot to check the box (this is my second time so I rushed it- the first time THR window crashed just as I was sending it).

So I guess you'll need to state your catagory:
-Stainless steel or carbon steel S&W, no, or virtually no, problems
-Stainless or carbon S&W, a few problems but no big deal
-Stainless or carbon S&W with many problems
-Aluminum S&W with no, or virtually no, problems
-Aluminum S&W, few problems but no big deal
-Aluminum S&W with many problems
-Ti or Sc S&W with no, or virtually no, problems
-Ti or Sc S&W with a few problems but no big deal
-Ti or Sc S&W with many problems
-Ruger with no, or virtually no, problems
-Ruger with a few problems but no big deal
-Ruger with many problems


Moderators, if you can add a poll with these choices that allows multiple answers (to account for people owning more than one example that may fit in more than one catagory) it would be greatly appreciated.

[Rob96]

Had a S&W 686 back in '86. Would reliably bind up when using full magnum loads. Sent to S&W. Came back in better shape, but the problem would appear every now and then. Guy bought it off me as a range gun. Still does it, but not frequently.

Ruger GP-160- Flawless performance. Sold it when I went into the military.

Ruger KGP-141- Great gun, flawless performance. Still own it.

Ruger KSP-321X- Another great revolver. Probably my most carried gun.

[sm]

Newest smith was made in '82, everthing else is older. Metallurgy, fit , finish trigger..., dictates that I won't have anything newer than the '82. So I have bought and will continue to buy this way. Just had 6 model 10's come in varied in dates,IIRC '76-'79.

Newest Ruger is 4 yrs old, still like older guns , can still get blue, and security six's and such.

And I hate any safety lock system, regardless of maker.

[Stainz]

Ruger: BH .45 conv, SS Bisley .45 BH, SRH .454, OM Army SS .45BP, MKII - all flawless, save weak detents in one windage adjustment sight screw - replaced by mail

S&W: 296, 625MG, 625, 629MG, & 696 new, 24 LNIB - only 696 had QC problems - burrs - oldest manufacture date of new S&W's.

I would rate either as very high quality and dependable 'out of the box', with the SRH the smoothest of all 'as delivered'. The S&W's improve with age/use - the 24 is smoothest, 625 MG next. Basically, the Rugers appear to be more rugged.

I cannot afford many pieces - but they will all be either S&W or Rugers.

Stainz

[aug e. dog]

2 Rugers (SBH - blue; Single Six Stainless) - no problems
2 S&W's (Model 28 - Blue; Model 10 - Blue; Model 19 - nickle) - no problems.

Although my sample is small, I think the S&W's have a slight edge in overall quality. The triggers seem to be just a tad better, their tolerances seem to be just a hair tighter, and their accuracy seems to have a slight edge.

I like to shoot the Single Six the best though, as it is just plain fun, esp. since you can switch the cylinders.

I consider all to be high quality revolvers.

[chaim]

Oh, I forgot to answer my own question.

Mine fit under the Stainless or carbon S&W with no problems.

I have a S&W 65LS that is about 2 1/2 years old that is perfect (though I might have a trigger job). I then bought a no dash 586 last summer that has been perfect. Several weeks ago I got a P&R S&W 19 that has been wonderful so far.

[Neal Bloom]

S&W 547, 586, Model 28, and pre Model 28 have been reliable and very accurate. No work needed on them.

I put Wolf springs in the Ruger sp101 and Blackhawk. I put in a Belt Montain base pinin my Bisely Single Six. The Superblackhawk has been flawless. Rugers are tough but do need trigger work.

All in all I am satisfied with both.

[MJRW]

2 Smith Revolvers: 686-5 4" and a 637.
2 Ruger Revolvers: KGP-141F and Vaquero .22.

Thought I had a problem with the GP, turns out there was some cloth wedged under the extractor star and wasn't trying to give up. Thought I had a problem with the 686, chucklehead before me just went too light on the strain screw. Other than that, while they are different guns, I can't say either one is objectively better than the other.

I prefer my Rugers to my Smiths. Slight balance, operational, and aesthetic differences between my GP and my 686 make me prefer the GP. I prefer the bush button cylinder release to the sliding cylinder release. Also prefer the lug, finish, rounded area behind the cylinder (what's that called?), and the look of the hammer and trigger on the GP. The 686 does have a less substantial roll mark which I also prefer.

All that said, they all perform their tasks admirably. Unless you are talking about big bullets .45 and up, I don't think there are any differences in quality that will affect the user. At that point it is going to be a matter of preference.

[Meowhead]

Ruger with no, or virtually no, problems

That'd be me. Stainless long-barrelled Redhawk in .44 Magnum. Bought after it had digested ~500 rds, I've put ~1000 more through it. No problems at all ever.

[Ala Dan]

but as a friendly user of their product's! I own and shoot
two of the newer Smith & Wesson's; a model 686-5, 6"
barrel .357 magnum and a model 629-5, 5" barrel .44
magnum.:uhoh:

The only problem I can detect, is the fact that the 686's
double-action isn't as slick as I would like for it too be.:(
Otherwise, fit and finish are near perfect!:D

As for the 5" 629-5 .44 magnum "Classic", one could not
ask for a better revolver. It's double-action has been
"buttery smooth"; straight from the box, and heck it
ain't even a DX model!:rolleyes: :) Go figure~

To sum up, both are great shooter's. And since most of
my revolver shooting is done single-action these day's;
the 686 doesn't bother me one bit!

FootNote: I do own, carry, and shoot a 1979-80 vintage
Smith & Wesson 2" pinned barrel model 60 in .38 Special.
This little gem is magnificent in every respect. After all, it
should be; cuz the S&W model 60 was the very first hand-
gun fabricated entirely of stainless steel, way back in 1965.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

[foghornl]

Hmmmm

Ruger Blackhawks in .357 & .41 Maggy...both great revos

Super Blackhawk .44 7-1/2" square trigger guard...much better after I "rolled my own" ammo for it.

S&W Mdl 59. Never a problem with it, as long as I fed it Rem's 124 Gr FMJ. Was persnickety with ANYTHING else.

S&W OLD .22 kit gun. Liked just about any ammo, except the Fed plain lead solid. Oldest son now owns this one, says it shoot best with Fed jacketed HP's.

Ruger KP-90. 2500+ rounds w/only 2 FTF...both from same box of Rem/UMC ammo

Ruger "Sheriff's Model" .357 Vaquero. Most "Fun Gun" I own. Likes the Speer 158Gr Gold Dot best, followed very closely by the PMC brand 158 Gr Jacketed softpoint

[birdman]

I own and have owned many of each (S&W and Ruger). For overall quality S&W is the smoother bettermade product (I buy only pre 1980's stuff). I view Ruger as a work-in-progress. They are extremely strong handguns but lacking in the details. Buy a Ruger and go to work on it (cylinder throats; trigger job; refit grips; ect). Buy a Smith and go to the range. Fact is I'm happy with both just have different expectations when purchasing.

[Arub]

Ruger KGB141 (stainless, 4", .357mag) no problems.

Smith model 60 (stainless, 2", .357mag) never a problem.
Smith model 66 (stainless, 2 1/2", .357mag) too new to tell.
Smith model 686 (stainless, 4", .357mag) never a problem.

Unsolicited:
Rossi model 462 (stainless, 2", .357mag) POS.
Goes out of time on rapid DA fire. Two trips back to Braztech, still not fixed. Will be destroyed this weekend (sledge-o-matic).

[rock jock]

Own both Rugers and Smiths. Rugers are fine guns, more robust than Smiths, but not as pretty and slightly less quality.

[munk]

Rock Jock- I know what you mean. The Smith product has a level of refinement, a simplicity of design, I'm betting there is a Japanese word for wellness. Elegance- that's what I want to say. But I like Rugers very much.

As for this poll, it is almost meaningless from the get go. Which Smith? Which era? Bangor Punta assembled Smith's from parts lying around when they owned them.

All you guys decrying the loss of handfitting and worksmanship- I agree, but would bet today's CNC stuff is generally more accurate. I had a modern era 657 that was superb, and I mean at a gun show several dealers wanted it. "That's the one Smith made to prove they can still make a great gun." I was told.

munk

[caz223]

4 new ruger wheels, 4 new s&w wheels.
The ruger fixed-sight guns didn't shoot exactly to point of aim.
They were both sent to custom shops anyway, no problem. Cowboy guns.
One of the smiths was sooooo tight that it bound up when it got dirty.
.003 barrel/cylinder gap when clean and cold.
Local smith trued, recut, and filed 'till there was a consistant .005, voila, problem solved.
Waaaay less problems on all eight guns combined than my one Taurus.

[Art Eatman]

Blackhawks, Super Blackhawks, Redhawk, SP 101: All worked just fine.

36, 66, 28, 27, 63 and probably some others: All worked just fine.

The Smiths all have better stock single-action triggers than the Rugers. The Rugers can be made "plenty good enough", but maybeso still not as good as the Smith.

Art

[Standing Wolf]

No new Smith & Wessons for me, since I refuse to do business with companies that hopped into bed with the Snopes Clinton-Liar Gore régime. I've never cared for Ruger triggers, although I will concede the company is doing a much better job of finishing its firearms today than years ago.

[BlackJack]

S&W 686 Plus - excellent gun, no problems
S&W 10 - excellent gun, no problems
S&W 642 - excellent gun, no problems
S&W 38 - excellent gun, no problems
Ruger KGP-161 - excellent gun, no problems

Taurus 85 - cylinder release latch came loose, cylinder would bind up from time to time.

[The Mighty Beagle]

Ditto what Birdman said.

My experience is that I can't get a new Ruger revolver which is acceptable to me. Every one of the last 5 has gone back to Ruger, some for annoying sharp edges, some for jumping cylinder pins, and some for serious functioning issues. All had too-small cylinder throats. Just my opinion, but I think of the new Ruger as Taurus with a good service department. They are NOT bad guns, just hindered by bad or non-existent QC at the factory.

The new S&W's seem better to me, but I dislike their chintzy new features and manufacturing. Sure they're accurate, but my late-issue 686 isn't noticeably better than my '70's M19, so I'd choose the older Smith for its attention to detail and cosmetics.

For me, if it's not a Dan Wesson or a pinned/recessed Smith, it just isn't worth having.

[P95Carry]

Broadly --- Smiths have that ''sweet'' edge. Rugers are less 'sweet'' but built like brick latrines ..... the stronger choice.

Very early Mod 1917 Smith in .455 ... engineering that was incredible ..... but ergonomically not by fave!

Early 686 .... loved it ... tho losening a bit after countless rounds of competition use.

Early Redhawk ...... managed to smooth trigger somewhat .. gave great service and no real complaints . thi fitted own grips for comfort.

Early M27 ....... sweet as a nut ..... 5" barrel and never a problem

More recent ..... Super Blackhawk .. no complaints at all ... love it.

Very new Single Six in .22 ..... lovely piece.

M27-2 ....... a later model but every bit as sweet as my first one.

In essence no real complaints as such ... only maybe the distinctions between trigger feels ... Smith always comes out superior.

[JohnKSa]

My first gun was a Ruger GP100.

I've shot a few thousand rounds of full power .357 mag ammo through it with no problems whatsoever.

My only experience with a S&W .357 revolver is a friend's 686 that shot out of time twice in a few hundred rounds. After having it fixed the second time, he sold it to me and I gave it to my mom for self defense. Since she almost NEVER practices and uses only .38 Special in it, it should last her forever. I think she's shot less than a box through it in 10 years...

[keithernTN]

S & W 642 no problems, nice gun

Ruger GP-100 no problems, nice gun

[MikeJ]

S&W 4" nickel 586 no problems

S&W 2 1/2" 66 no problems

S&W nickel 37 (airweight) no problems

S&W 640 Centennial .357 no problems

Ruger 5 1/2" stainless Redhawk (44 mag) no problems

Ruger polished stainless Bisley Vaquero (44 mag) no problems

[kalibear45]

I've had reliability problems with a Ruger, and none (so far) with a S&W...

[Frenchy]

All of my Smiths that I have owned (10 in all), have experenced zero problems.

The same can be said for the 5 Ruger single actions that I've owned.

No experence with Ruger double actions.

[EJ]

I've had over 150 S&Ws with only minor problems that were easily fixed--
One Mdl #442 airweight had a busted Hammer Stud-- Repaired by S&W at no cost -- quickly--
I've had about a dozen Rugers-- No poblems

[Hkmp5sd]

I have blued, stainless & nickel plated Smiths and blued & stainless Rugers in assorted sizes and calibers. My preference is for the Rugers.

[TonyB]

Ruger GP100 : no problems,most accurate gun I ever shot.
Ruger SP101 : no problems,my carry gun,very accurate at SD distances.
S&W mod 38 : cylinder actually fell out once(just a loose screw),couldn't hit jack w/ it,but nice trigger and weight
Ruger MKII : great plinker, no problems.

I love Rugers,mostly because I grew up w/ my Dad and I shooting a RedHawk and Security six.
Smiths are great,but I like the tank like quality of Rugers,sometimes Smiths feel "weak" to me.:cool:

[Mark IV Series 80]

S&W Model 66 - No problems..... Extremely accurate (1 inch at 25 yards).

S&W Model 638 - No problems.

S&W Model 10 Police trade-in - Smooth and accurate - No problems.

These S&W's are all pre-MIM.

[444]

I own over a dozen of each. In Ruger I either own or have owned almost everything they make (Rifles, pistols, revolvers, blackpowder). I have never had any significant problems with any of them (Smith or Ruger). And I have shot most of them a lot; thousands of rounds each. If I was going to buy a new revolver today, it would be a Ruger. If I didn't already own one, it would be a 4" Stainless GP-100.
Some of my Smiths have better triggers, some of my Rugers have better triggers. My GP100 has a better trigger than the Smiths I have sent to the Performance Center. I have a Model 10 marked Royal Hong Kong Police that has an incredible trigger. So I can't make an generalizations about triggers. Don't know which is stonger. I never tried to blow either of them up. I guess you would first have to decide what frames were valid to compare. Doesn't matter to me.