DFW1911
Member
You really can't go wrong with either.
+1: you're in a winning situation with either.
Have fun,
DFW1911
You really can't go wrong with either.
So far, it's clear that I was wrong about that. SW has never been in the lead in this poll.Prediction: Your poll will get roughly equal numbers.
In post 5, I wrote:
So far, it's clear that I was wrong about that. SW has never been in the lead in this poll.
Currently, Ruger has 87 votes to 54 SW. (SW has only 62% the votes that Ruger does.)
Very interesting.
+1 on this! I have two 686P 3-inch revolvers, one has the Ahrends boot grip and is one of my "while wearing a coat" carry guns. My advice is to not worry about the lock....it is a little "ugly" but the Smiths are definitely nice pieces. I also own Rugers, and they are the more "utilitarian" of the two brands...me, I prefer the Smith forgings to the Ruger investment castings. Nothing wrong with the Ruger investment castings whatsoever...just a personal preference thing.S&W 686 with Ahrends grips is a real favorite.
But I do all my initial load testing in Rugers.
The GP100 has come up in my estimation. The new ones feel pretty good. I prefer Smiths.
Handle both, and get the one you like best. They are both good revolvers. A hundred bucks will be forgotten soon; how much you like the gun you got will never be.
If you don't mind blued steel ole' Colt police-type .357s are nice for HD and range use. Considering prices of sainted Pythons these ole' cop-type guns are surprisingly affordable. Colt came before S&W I'm not going to even mention Buger.Hey guys, first post here as I am brand new to handguns, looking for advice and heard this is the place to be!
Well about 6 months ago I didn't think I'd own a firearm - then I bought two shotguns: a Remington 870 (home defense) and Beretta 391 Urika 2 (trap).
Two months ago I didnt think I would ever own a handgun - now I have applied for a permit and am now deciding between two classic revolvers in .357: the Smith & Wesson 686 or Ruger GP-100.
All my research points to these as being not only superb beginner handguns, but excellent all arounders for targets, woods carry, hunting small game and even home defense (though Mr. 870 would be my first choice).
I've heard that the Ruger is tougher but the S&W is more "polished" and accurate? Hummer vs. Porsche...? I've also heard that a lot of S&W users do not like the newer hammer lock feature - is this really something to be concerned with? What is it exactly... couldn't find specifics?
I plan on firing both to feel them out and see which I prefer in that regard, but, I was just wondering:
price aside, if there are any points that really put one above the other?
Should I just go with whatever feels better in my hand and shoots better for me?
I'm pretty sure this is like a debate between Remington 870 vs. Mossberg 500 or Chevy vs. Ford but please keep the comments constructive and meaningful... Apologies in advance if this is a touchy subject
Not interested in hearing that I should really go for a Glock instead - I want to start with a revolver and like the simplicity and timelessness - I'm sure the Glocks will follow in due time.
I've just spent 10 minutes searching for similar threads but with no luck - if this has already been discussed to death, please point me in that direction!
Thank you very much for your help - appreciate it!
Yup its a -5. Really wanted to get a -4, but I know beggars cant be choosers and I was lucky to find a 7 shot -5 to begin with - I can't imagine the trigger being any sweeter anyway. I think a 640 or similar snubbie all steel revolver is next on my list - cant argue with the weight of my 642 for summer carry, but there is NO feeling like a solid hunk of steel - thinking the Ruger SP101 might do the trick.It's a -5, right? Internal firing pin, no lock, MIM lockwork? Mid/late 90's manufacture I believe. I have almost the same revolver but 6". It is fantastic, the trigger is phenomenal. I just picked up a 649-3, the shrouded hammer j-frame this weekend, the wife took it immediately, and it is almost just like the 686 but smaller, with regards to the trigger and calibre at least. I have a 340PD similar to your hammerless .38 there too, but it weighs even less. With mags, it kicks like a mule. I also have the mini glocks, but in 10mm and .40. So to say "nice collection" is kind of like tooting my own horn! Still, nice indeed. A 1911 is missing... Say we both get Ed Browns and keep the similarities going? Or is this where we part ways?
I've mentioned it before, but I'll say it again, I've shot five of seven 140gr. Hornady XTP handloads into a sillhouette at 300m on an Army range. Of course I had to fire a some rounds first to figure out where to aim, but still... The revolver is amazing and I feel those were some of the best ones to ever come out of their factory.
But alas, my 686+ is in need of a new cylinder and cylinder stop --it no longer locks up tight like it did. Too many full power loads over the years, you can see the wear on the cylinder in the stops. Doesn't always strike the primer dead on. Time to go back to its home to be repaired (and upgraded). But it took abuse that killed other revolvers, literally. All for just over $200 in '99!