I am looking to get a .357 Mag revolver in Stainless with a 4-6" barrel. Not sure about frame size. Anybody have any recommendations on Taurus vs Ruger vs S&W (or anybody else) in .357 Magnum Revolvers? Any particular models recommended or to be avoided? Thanks.
.357 Magnum Revolvers
- Thread starter zuiko
- Start date
- Status
KONY
Member
Ruger Security-Six if used is ok. GP-100's and 686's are good as well, new or used.
Reed1911
Member
Model 65 and 66 can be purchased on the cheap. Both are great guns
WarMachine
Member
Another vote for the GP100 or 686.
Ala Dan
Member in memoriam
A good used (LNIB) S&W model 19 would be nice; but you don't see them
floating around everyday; as is the case with S&W's model 586. Therefore,
you might be forced to look for a used (but not abused) Ruger Security-
Six; or a new (or used) Ruger GP-100 or Smith & Wesson 686.
floating around everyday; as is the case with S&W's model 586. Therefore,
you might be forced to look for a used (but not abused) Ruger Security-
Six; or a new (or used) Ruger GP-100 or Smith & Wesson 686.
cxm
Member
Answer?
This one is easy... S&W... probably a 686 which can be had at very reasonable prices and are top quality revolvers.
To me you can have a S&W which is the BMW of revolvers to me... Ruger is sort of the Ford and Taraus the Yugo.
The .357 is a really great choice... good power, great track record and can shoot cheaper .38 Spl ammo.
FWIW
Chuck
This one is easy... S&W... probably a 686 which can be had at very reasonable prices and are top quality revolvers.
To me you can have a S&W which is the BMW of revolvers to me... Ruger is sort of the Ford and Taraus the Yugo.
The .357 is a really great choice... good power, great track record and can shoot cheaper .38 Spl ammo.
FWIW
Chuck
Reed1911
Member
What makes you call Taurus the Yugo? IF we call S&W the BMW, Ruger would be the cadillac (pretty close in quality, smoother operation, just not quite as sexy and not as easy to handle at high speeds), and taurus as the Ford/Chevy mid-priced sedan.
Coltdriver
Member
Depending on what you want to do with your .357 you might want to take a look at either a Ruger GP100 in a four inch barrel or any of the Smiths in a 586, 686, 581 or 681 in a four inch barrel.
I recently picked up a Ruger GP100 in a four inch barrel and I must say it is darn near perfection. I shoot full house .357 rounds with it and it is both comfortable and controllable. The smith would be the same way.
The above are what smith calls an "L" frame. The earlier "K" frame smiths are also fine guns, but they are not as heavily or strongly built. If you don't intend to shoot a steady diet of full house .357 rounds, then the smith K frames are fine pistols.
Just my two cents worth. You may find a small "J" frame to be painful to shoot even if it is easier to conceal.
I recently picked up a Ruger GP100 in a four inch barrel and I must say it is darn near perfection. I shoot full house .357 rounds with it and it is both comfortable and controllable. The smith would be the same way.
The above are what smith calls an "L" frame. The earlier "K" frame smiths are also fine guns, but they are not as heavily or strongly built. If you don't intend to shoot a steady diet of full house .357 rounds, then the smith K frames are fine pistols.
Just my two cents worth. You may find a small "J" frame to be painful to shoot even if it is easier to conceal.
Thanks for the tips.
What exactly is the difference between a 686PP and a 686? There is also a 686P but it looks like that is a 7 shot vs 6 for the other two.
How do typical retail prices compare on a 686 vs the GP100? I am definately leaning towards one of those two.
What exactly is the difference between a 686PP and a 686? There is also a 686P but it looks like that is a 7 shot vs 6 for the other two.
How do typical retail prices compare on a 686 vs the GP100? I am definately leaning towards one of those two.
rwschill
member
S&W 686PP
I believe the PP means "Power Port" which is a ported barrell. I have a 6 inch 686PP and like it. It has very little barrell flip even with the 357 mags but maybe a little more flash, but not significant.
I believe the PP means "Power Port" which is a ported barrell. I have a 6 inch 686PP and like it. It has very little barrell flip even with the 357 mags but maybe a little more flash, but not significant.
_N4Z_
Member
gp
nuther vote for the ruger gp100
i prefer the heft of the 6" myself.
nuther vote for the ruger gp100
i prefer the heft of the 6" myself.
DSRUPTV
Member
Let me add another vote for the 686. I really enjoy mine and it shoots very well.
S & W 686 PP
I have a S & W 686 PP 6" and a 686 4". I bought the 6" PP first and I agree it has "Soft" flip/recoil with .357 full loads. When I bought the 4" 686, I was actually surprised that I did not notice a much greater difference in flip/recoil between the two revolvers. Maybe it is there and I'm just missing it, but it seems minor really. That is not to say the 686 PP 6" is not a sweet gun to take hunting, or use at the range, for it most certainly is. My #1 pick for that purpose. Either with, or without the PP, the 686 is a nice revolver.
Hook686
I have a S & W 686 PP 6" and a 686 4". I bought the 6" PP first and I agree it has "Soft" flip/recoil with .357 full loads. When I bought the 4" 686, I was actually surprised that I did not notice a much greater difference in flip/recoil between the two revolvers. Maybe it is there and I'm just missing it, but it seems minor really. That is not to say the 686 PP 6" is not a sweet gun to take hunting, or use at the range, for it most certainly is. My #1 pick for that purpose. Either with, or without the PP, the 686 is a nice revolver.
Hook686
AStone
Member
size matters
My first handgun was a Taurus .38. It was a great gun and not even close to a Yugo. Likewise, my current truck is a Ford F-250 Turbo diesel and will pull your house off its foundation. I'll take it everyday of the week over a BMW or Cadillac.
So, what's wrong with Ford/Taurus? (Sorry; rhetorical question; answer = nothing. In some ways, especially with the Ford heavy duty trucks, they are superior to BMW and Cadillac, imo.)
Here's my beef with SW & Ruger. Like Nike and other shoe makers, those gun makers, at least when producing their otherwise fine .357's, assume that every human hand (worth protecting) is an "average" (ho hum) "medium-sized" hand.
Earth to SW & Ruger: not all hands are the same size. I may not buy one of your revolvers because my hand does not fit your guns, but is just as worth protecting as more 'average' sized hand.
May I suggest? Make other frame sizes, or lose business to others who do.
Instead, I will likely buy a Taurus .357, because they produce guns with three - count 'em, three - frame sizes: large, medium and "compact".
If the handgun fits, I'll buy it.
My Kahr K9 taught me that.
First time I picked it up, it sold itself because it FIT my hand.
On the spot, I plopped down five cent bills and carried it home.
Average sized guns only fit average sized hands.
Everyone doesn't have average sized hands.
Average sized guns are within 1-standard deviation of the mean.
That leaves many, many hands both larger and smaller.
Hypothesis: some gun makers don't seem to understand statistics of hand size variation, which supports their competitors who do understand statistics.
Just a hypothesis, mind you.
Opinion if you will. No absolute truth implied.
N~
PS: there's another related thread here.
I'm in Reed's camp.Reed1911 said:
My first handgun was a Taurus .38. It was a great gun and not even close to a Yugo. Likewise, my current truck is a Ford F-250 Turbo diesel and will pull your house off its foundation. I'll take it everyday of the week over a BMW or Cadillac.
So, what's wrong with Ford/Taurus? (Sorry; rhetorical question; answer = nothing. In some ways, especially with the Ford heavy duty trucks, they are superior to BMW and Cadillac, imo.)
Here's my beef with SW & Ruger. Like Nike and other shoe makers, those gun makers, at least when producing their otherwise fine .357's, assume that every human hand (worth protecting) is an "average" (ho hum) "medium-sized" hand.
Earth to SW & Ruger: not all hands are the same size. I may not buy one of your revolvers because my hand does not fit your guns, but is just as worth protecting as more 'average' sized hand.
May I suggest? Make other frame sizes, or lose business to others who do.
Instead, I will likely buy a Taurus .357, because they produce guns with three - count 'em, three - frame sizes: large, medium and "compact".
If the handgun fits, I'll buy it.
My Kahr K9 taught me that.
First time I picked it up, it sold itself because it FIT my hand.
On the spot, I plopped down five cent bills and carried it home.
Average sized guns only fit average sized hands.
Everyone doesn't have average sized hands.
Average sized guns are within 1-standard deviation of the mean.
That leaves many, many hands both larger and smaller.
Hypothesis: some gun makers don't seem to understand statistics of hand size variation, which supports their competitors who do understand statistics.
Just a hypothesis, mind you.
Opinion if you will. No absolute truth implied.
N~
PS: there's another related thread here.
Last edited:
KONY
Member
S&W does make compacts ... the j-frame. Ruger has the SP101, which is stout but still comparable to the steel j-frames. These still too big?
B
BigBoar
Guest
A while back both Ruger (GP series) and Smith (L frame) had a limited run 5" barrel model so by looking at the auction sites and Guns America you may find a 5" turn up.
The Rugers in using a grip stud allow one more freedom using custom grips to tailer length of pull to one's had compared to guns with grip frames. In my case with the exception of Herrett's (they will make a grip to fit one's hand size and finger length) and Ahrends I have not found most custom grips, either, work with my hand especially ones with grooves as they never line up right with my fingers.
I agree about the Kahr K-9. Picked mine up and sights lined right up first time.
Another gun to consider is the Dan Wesson 15/715 medium frame.
The Rugers in using a grip stud allow one more freedom using custom grips to tailer length of pull to one's had compared to guns with grip frames. In my case with the exception of Herrett's (they will make a grip to fit one's hand size and finger length) and Ahrends I have not found most custom grips, either, work with my hand especially ones with grooves as they never line up right with my fingers.
I agree about the Kahr K-9. Picked mine up and sights lined right up first time.
Another gun to consider is the Dan Wesson 15/715 medium frame.
mtnbkr
Member
Any of the medium framed 357mags from any of the major players (S&W, Ruger, Taurus) will be good guns. I have a GP100, but they're all good IMO.
BTW, does Zuiko refer to Olympus? I just got my OM-1 back from Camtech...
Chris
BTW, does Zuiko refer to Olympus? I just got my OM-1 back from Camtech...
Chris
waterhouse
Member
I tried out both the 686 and gp-100 when I was getting a .357 a little while back. They both seemed like great guns, but I found a used ruger for cheap, so I went with the gp-100. No regrets.
- Status
