.357 Stainless under 40oz


PDA






T-Ray
July 29, 2008, 01:55 PM
I'm lookin for a revolver. Want it in .357mag so i can start with .38spl and move to .357. I really want it less than 40oz in weight. .38spl would be ok too, if i can't get one in 357. Minimum barrel length 4". Not sure exactly what size frame i want, will go to bass pro this week and find out what fits me, and possibly answer my own question there. I know s&w has some that fit the bill in j frame, but don't know if they're too small. It'll be for general plinking and possibly rabbits and as a sidearm for deer, hog, dove... Like i said, i'm goin to bass pro this week and will also determine exactly what weight i can handle. Does anyone besides s&w have a 357 less than 40oz with a 4" barrel or bigger?

Preferrably stainless w/ rubber grip

Price range would be hopefully under 600 closer to 500 but can go a little over if need be. hopefully i can find one that fits me good then order off internet for a better price.


I think that about covers it, i'll edit if i remeber somethin important i forgot.

it will not be used for cc.

If you enjoyed reading about ".357 Stainless under 40oz" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Virginian
July 29, 2008, 02:09 PM
You can get a Ruger or a Taurus without a hole in the sideframe for well within your budget. Go here and look around. I just got a Taurus 605, and am very happy, but I only wanted a 3" barrel.
http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/index.php
If I had wanted a 4" barrel, I would have gotten a used Smith 65 or a Ruger Service Six. No finer 4" 357/38s ever made, but I wouldn't put a steady diet of heavy 357s thru the Smith.

20nickels
July 29, 2008, 02:29 PM
This might not fit your criteria exactly, but I like the looks of the S&W Scandium 386's for those reasons. Good tools for serious work.

Schmidlin
July 29, 2008, 02:34 PM
For your price range there are some nice revolvers for that size and weight.

Taurus 66 ss 4" (http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/products_id/31456)

Taurus 627 tracker ss 4" (http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/products_id/31746)

Ruger GP100 ss 4" (http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/products_id/70258)


These are just a couple that ive been looking at. Im leaning toward the ruger, but i havent held any of them so i cant say.

T-Ray
July 29, 2008, 05:45 PM
what are ya'll's (?) thoughts on charter arms revolvers? I was lookin at the .357 with the 4" bbl. Would it shoot .38spl also?(probably a stupid question) I kinda (really) like that the msrp is below $500. I have heard many people reccommend them, but no real good or bad and why posts.

Schmidlin
July 29, 2008, 05:59 PM
If you do a search on the forums you will find alot of info about them

Oro
July 29, 2008, 06:32 PM
TRay,

The general consensus is that the two best 4" .357s out there are the Ruger GP-100, and the S&W 686. Both clock in at about 40 ounces. 40 ounces is pretty much the average weight of many "full size" handguns that are going to give the best durability and recoil characteristics. In your price range, I see NO reason to buy other than a Ruger or S&W and stay with a high-end, US made gun. If you want to save a few dollars, go used, but don't go down in quality.

You can search threads here to get opinions on both. Excellent used guns will run you $350 to $425, new ones more, but still within your budget.

Other used guns you might want to consider would be a an older Ruger Security Six, or A S&W 19/66 (19 is the blue model, 66 the stainless one) or a Model 28 (Highway Patrolman). All are widely available in 4" barrels, weigh 35 to 41 ozs, and will last a few lifetimes. Another "new" model S&W in this category is the 620, which I have no experience with but hear good things about.

Whether you go Ruger or S&W is up to you and your confessor. This is the subject of many silly arguments. Both are well made, well designed, and well supported by gunsmiths, the aftermarket, and the factory. Rugers are made a little more "Economy" style, S&Ws generally with more finish and forged steel instead of cast. The S&W costs 15 or 20% more on average because of that, but both approaches work. Both Ruger and S&W are a cut above any other major competitor on the market.

Grayrock
July 29, 2008, 06:37 PM
Buddy of mine has Taurus .357 Total Titanium that is electric blue. It has about a 3 inch barrel (+ or - 1 inch) with ports and the ribber grips. That thing is so light that you have to weight it down so it doesn't float off! Kicks a lil bit, but the ribber grips and porting make it not so bad. Don't think they make this one anymore, but they are out there.

Bearhands
July 29, 2008, 06:55 PM
yup..... exactly what kamerer said.
"the two best 4" .357s out there are the Ruger GP-100, and the S&W 686. Both clock in at about 40 ounces. 40 ounces is pretty much the average weight of many "full size" handguns that are going to give the best durability and recoil characteristics. In your price range, I see NO reason to buy other than a Ruger or S&W and stay with a high-end, US made gun.

Glockman17366
July 29, 2008, 10:05 PM
The Taurus Tracker 627. Personally, I own the stainless steel model with the 4" barrel.
Had mine for close to 10 years now with a couple thousand rounds through it.
Nice gun...weight is 36 ounces.

BigBlock
July 30, 2008, 01:07 AM
Ruger, Ruger, Ruger!! The GP100 is a beautiful gun, I almost brought one home from the gun shop today....it was only $400 in like new condition. The equivalent Smith and Wesson will cost twice as much and not be as strong.

Oro
July 30, 2008, 01:11 AM
The equivalent Smith and Wesson will cost twice as much and not be as strong.

Well, now that the chorus has chimed in, I think we'll have to take off the gloves.

A similar S&W 686 will cost you $25 to $50 more, and be equally strong and better finished. There is this fetish that thicker, cast steel from ruger is stronger than slightly less forged steel used in S&W construction. Forged steel and cast are not equally strong dimensionally, and this leads many who overlook the metallurgy to unfounded conclusions.

BigBlock
July 30, 2008, 01:20 AM
A similar S&W 686 will cost you $25 to $50 more, and be equally strong and better finished.

You couldn't be more wrong.
Smithandwesson.com 686 = $853
Ruger.com GP100 = $660

The Smith is always going to be a lot more than $25-50 more in the same condition. Don't even try and call a S&W "equally strong", we already had that arguement, and S&W lost big time. They may have their own special features, strength is NOT one of them. Especially since the OP wants to shoot magnums, Ruger is the stronger choice. It's not about the thickness or type of steel, it's about the fact that Rugers were designed for Magnum loads from the beginning, while S&W revolvers are still mainly based on early 1900s designs.

Edit: In a price range of "hopefully under 600 closer to 500", Ruger is an infinately better choice.

Shade00
July 30, 2008, 01:40 AM
Umm... I would start looking at used guns. IMHO you can get a used Ruger GP100 for $400ish, and just today I saw a used 686-something (can't remember the dash - had no IL, though) for $469. Beautiful gun.

ArchAngelCD
July 30, 2008, 02:16 AM
BigBlock,
All your arguments about the GP100 and S&W Magnum revolvers went out the window when S&W introduced the L frame revolver. While both the Ruger GP100 and S&W M686 are great revolvers the S&W's fit & finish is superior and don't forget about the Smith's superior trigger.

I find no fault with anyone who buys a Ruger but please stop with the "much stronger" bit. (BTW, I own a M686 and a Service-Six)

T-Ray,
Go to the store and handle both the GP100 and M686. When you decide which feels better in your hand buy that one and you won't be making a mistake with either. You will have to buy either used if you want to keep your budget as is. It is true the Ruger will cost you less.

BigBlock
July 30, 2008, 02:41 AM
I find no fault with anyone who buys a Ruger but please stop with the "much stronger" bit.
And then you try to claim the smith has a better trigger. :rolleyes: The fact is Rugers ARE stronger, especially if you are considering lots of magnum loads, (that's where the smith lockwork fails) and those are all important facts to point out to anyone who is new to .357's.

I don't care which he gets, but keep your facts straight, and your advice accurate. Smiths are nice for looking pretty and sleeping in your pocket, Rugers are for taking out shooting and blowing things up 'till your trigger finger falls off. Take your pick. Personally, I'm in the market for both.

T-Ray
July 30, 2008, 09:56 AM
ya, i kinda forgot about ruger, cause i was originally looking for a d/a .22, and smith & tauras were about the only brands that had them, and there's no question there. I'm goin to bass pro tonight (more than likely) and will hopefully handle both the ruger & the smith (if they have them...). I hear lots of complaints about the smith's internal lock...

Does ruger put the locks in their guns?

WOW.
i just did a quick search and was kinda, but not all that much, suprised to find that the rugers were a good 3-$400 less than the smith.:eek: The ruger also has a really nice lookin grip. That red wood just looks good in the rubber


:eek:Just looked again, and it looks like they don't make them with the wood inserts anymore :eek: I still like the fact that i can get a nib 6" ruger for under $500. Can't say that about the smith...

batmann
July 30, 2008, 11:16 AM
In actuall fact, you won't go wrong with either. Both are great in .357M.
Ruger changed to Hogue grips, but you can still get the 'old' style grips from Midway and go the Ruger forum to find some really unique inserts.

BigBlock
July 30, 2008, 04:33 PM
Does ruger put the locks in their guns?

They put a few here and there, but there aren't any on the GP100s.

ozwyn
July 30, 2008, 05:03 PM
I would mention that the lighter a revolver is, the more you will "feel" the power fo the ammunition, and not in a good way.

Lightweight revolvers are known for abusing the person shooting them.

Just in case you didn't know..

rantingredneck
July 30, 2008, 05:15 PM
Go Ruger.........:D.

T-Ray
July 30, 2008, 05:31 PM
Go Ruger..........:D

That's the way i'm leanin.

rantingredneck
July 30, 2008, 05:33 PM
I have two 4" GP100's if that tells you anything.

Edited to add: As a previous poster mentioned, if you like the wood in rubber look of the grips, you can pick up an original Lett grip (that's who made them for Ruger til they went out of business) from midway or from a gunshow (I see them for 15-20 bucks all the time). Then visit rugerforum.net and check out the work of a poster named "41 Magnum" He does great stuff and in a variety of woods. I have two sets of his grip panels in cocobolo.

Seven For Sure
July 30, 2008, 05:44 PM
I've got this 5" S&W 60. It's a very cool and unique gun IMO. I bought it for my girlfriend to shoot with .38's. The girl is gone but the gun is still with me. It's great if it fits your hands. I have pretty big hands and it's a bit small in the grip for me. It came with beautiful wood grips but they are tiny. I bought a large pair of wood S&W target grips which are o.k. but my favorite are rubber hogues that cover the backstrap. All give a full three finger hold. A 30 oz 357 with a 5" barrel is a lot of power in a very totable package. It's very thin also as are all J frames. I had a custom Mernickle cross draw holster made for it and it's perfect for a backup when hunting with a longarm or just hiking or camping with a knife strongside. It kicks with full house 357's which is all I shoot in it but it's over the twice the weight of a J frame scandium.

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10001&storeId=10001&productId=14756&langId=-1&isFirearm=Y

Seven For Sure
July 30, 2008, 06:03 PM
And after all that hot air, this 4" weighs 38 oz. That fits the requirements and holds two more rds. The rubber grips are excellent IMO. As much as the 5" 60 is cool and has a place, the 686+ is better for me at least. I have a 3" and a 6".

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&langId=-1&productId=12762&tabselected=tech&isFirearm=Y&parent_category_rn=

ArchAngelCD
July 31, 2008, 04:04 AM
BigBlock,
Hey, I can see you are closed minded so nothing I say will sway you so I'll say nothing more.

T-Ray,
I'm sure you will enjoy shooting the GP100 and even if you don't find the old style grips the Hogue grips are good grips. (although I do like the look of the wood panel grips too)

Good luck finding a Ruger at a reasonable price. Are you going to buy new or used? If you are going to order online Buds Gunshop has new Ruger 4" GP100's (http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/manufacturers_id/369/products_id/70258) for $487 and 6" GP100's (http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/manufacturers_id/369/products_id/70260) for the same price... They also have both in Blue for $443 each. They are actually a GP141 (http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/manufacturers_id/369/products_id/70257).

LA Rondo
July 31, 2008, 05:48 AM
S&W 620 is also a nice .357 with 37.5 oz of weight, just an ounce lighter than a 4" 686, but just as fine of a L-frame revolver. 7 shot.

HOME DEPOT GEORGE
July 31, 2008, 08:43 PM
I'm a ruger fan 100% that being said I think smiths are excellent guns but I am more partial to the ruggedness and pricepoint of the rugers. I do own a gp100 I bought used it has a decent amount of rounds through it and the trigger is great. There was a thread within the last week or two titled are Rugers really stronger and the consensus was (and it makes more sense than anything I've heard so far) is that the same quality parts that give the smiths the trigger and function they are known for is also their aquilles heel. The internals on the smiths are more fragile than that of the ruger and can possibly loosen up from an excessive amount of full throttle loads. This is only my opinion drawn from what I read in the thread.

MCgunner
July 31, 2008, 10:13 PM
I have a 3" Taurus 66 that's close to 30 ounces. Rossi's 972 is quite light and the 462 is light in 2", basically a 972 without adjustable sights. My 4" Taurus 66 is about 35 ounces. The old Smith K frames used, the M65 and M66, are well under 40 ounces. The old Security Six Ruger or Service Six used is about 35 ounces in 4" versions, the SP101 3" is 28 ounces. The titanium guns are WAY light and the Taurus Trackers in stainless are 30 ounces or so, though I hate ported barrels.

Plenty of under 40 ounce DA .357s available, some even new. Don't snub the Rossis, great little guns for a great price. No locks, either.

For concealed carry in a .357 magnum, hang the price, it don't get a whole lot better than a Ruger SP101 IMHO. Light, easy to carry, accurate, and about the lightest gun I can shoot well with full power loads. Oh, the M60 Smith ain't too light. I just don't like those Scandium things. I had an SP101. When I get another one, it'll have a 3" barrel. GP100s and 686s are WAY heavy for CCW. About as big as I'll carry IWB is a 2.5 or 3" K frame, Taurus 65/66, or Security Six.

If you enjoyed reading about ".357 Stainless under 40oz" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!