SwampWolf
Member
Years ago, after my agency made the switch from revolvers to semi-autos, I gave my oldest daughter my now retired service revolver, a Smith Model 65 (which had replaced a Model 13 previously) as a Christmas present. I have always intended on replacing it with another but, by the time I got around to getting one, of course, the Model 65 was discontinued. Model 65s in excellent to new condition fetch $500.00 and up in these parts so I started looking around for an equivalent alternative in the same price range and began seriously looking at the Ruger GP-100 (in the 3" barrel, fixed sights configuration).
The intended uses for the proposed new revolver is concealed carry on an occasional basis and for having a sturdy, durable, rust-resistant revolver for carrying while camping/hiking/canoeing; one that is lighter and more compact than the Smith Model 686 plus, 4" barreled revolver that I own. I do require the new revolver to be chambered in .357 Magnum and having at least a six-round capacity. Both of the aforementioned revolvers come close to what I have in mind.
As best as I can tell, at 31 ounces, the Model 65 is approximately five ounces lighter than the 36 ounce GP-100-a decided plus for my purposes. Too, I'm very acquainted with K-frame Smiths and have always liked their trigger pulls. Subjectively, I also prefer the looks of the Smith revolver over the Ruger revolver. On the other hand, the Ruger appears to be the more robustly constructed between the two and much easier to field-strip for cleaning in the event the canoe turns over or if I should step into a hole deeper than my waders when trout fishing. The Ruger will be easier to find and, because it will probably be new, the warranty (I'm aware of Ruger's "non-warranty warranty") should be easier to invoke. I have no experience with the GP-100 trigger but, if it's anything like my Redhawk revolver, it will suffice.
I'd appreciate getting any advice/input on which revolver to get from people experienced with one or the other or both. Thanks in advance.
P.S. What would be a good price for a new GP-100?
The intended uses for the proposed new revolver is concealed carry on an occasional basis and for having a sturdy, durable, rust-resistant revolver for carrying while camping/hiking/canoeing; one that is lighter and more compact than the Smith Model 686 plus, 4" barreled revolver that I own. I do require the new revolver to be chambered in .357 Magnum and having at least a six-round capacity. Both of the aforementioned revolvers come close to what I have in mind.
As best as I can tell, at 31 ounces, the Model 65 is approximately five ounces lighter than the 36 ounce GP-100-a decided plus for my purposes. Too, I'm very acquainted with K-frame Smiths and have always liked their trigger pulls. Subjectively, I also prefer the looks of the Smith revolver over the Ruger revolver. On the other hand, the Ruger appears to be the more robustly constructed between the two and much easier to field-strip for cleaning in the event the canoe turns over or if I should step into a hole deeper than my waders when trout fishing. The Ruger will be easier to find and, because it will probably be new, the warranty (I'm aware of Ruger's "non-warranty warranty") should be easier to invoke. I have no experience with the GP-100 trigger but, if it's anything like my Redhawk revolver, it will suffice.
I'd appreciate getting any advice/input on which revolver to get from people experienced with one or the other or both. Thanks in advance.
P.S. What would be a good price for a new GP-100?
Last edited:
But still...
