Anyone else prefer Ruger over S&W?

[JR47]

We still own a pair of 4", stainless, Security-Six revolvers. One was made in the mid-702, the other in '78. They have been fired extensively with .357 Magnum rounds, and are still tight and in time.

I also own a pre Mk.I P85 that had had well over 10K through it, to include +P,+P+, and Uzi sub-gun ammo. Nothing has been replaced since the factory recall on the firing pin.

S&W revolvers were always at least 30% more expensive when bought new. They just never seemed to me to be 30% better.

I do find it a bit troubling that those who choose S&W are all talking about out-of-production guns, yet are mentioning current production Rugers all too often. Seems a bit dishonest.

 

[Stainz]

Well, I don't fit your prototype for S&W, JR47. I bought a new 60 Pro last month - in January - and a new 3" 63 in November, with a new PC627 UDR both in early April and October. So - in less than a year - two new J-frames and two new Performance Center N-frames. I had to part with an old beauty of a revolver, among other things, but it was worth it. Perfect in every way functionally - all of them - just like my prior S&W's. Okay, there was the ill-fitting - and too small - Eagle boot grips on the UDR's - they had to go - some folks like them - not me. The last of my Ruger revolvers left 5/08, funding a new 627 Pro and 64. The last Ruger handgun, a decked out MKII, was sacrificed to fund a new 617 9/08. I am happy as a pig in deep waller - I have what I want - and enjoy - shooting. And... I shoot - I mean I shoot - a lot! I am blessed, no doubt. Of course, my long guns are now very few in number - and includea couple of .22 rimfire's - and a Puma M1892 in .45 Colt - everything else long is 'long' gone. But - I have the S&W's I wanted... happiness!

Stainz

 

[CSA 357]

in a word..........nope

 

[TheWanderingRed]

Ruger: for the durability. The same reason I go with a Honda over a Ford. I’m going to put countless rounds through my GP-100, and I need it to go bang every time I pull the trigger, just like I need my car to start every time I turn the key.

 

[savit260]

Having owned some nice older (50's-early 80's) S&W's and a couple of newer one's (2000-ish), I can honeslty say that very little S&W manufactures these days interests me.

Sold all my S&W's a while back. Got double actions covered with my Colts.

The ONLY new revolver I've ever purchased was a Ruger Blackhawk, and that one is a "keeper". I guess I'd vote Ruger.

 

[madcratebuilder]

A quick check of the gun safe indicates the score as S&W 14, Ruger 12. It appears I prefer S&W.

One brand is not better than the other, it is different. The job you want to do determines the tool you use.

 

[lizziedog1]

This thread is about comparing Rugers to Smith and Wessons. Why do some threads mention Taurus?

 

[JR47]

Why do some threads mention Taurus?

Because some people just can't shake their addiction to Taurus-bashing.

As to the poster with Performance Center guns. They had better be nice, as they cost several times what a stock Ruger does. Nor do they represent the standard production guns.

 

[youngda9]

Not at all. The only Ruger I like is my 3" SP101. I prefer Smiths by a long shot. Ruger's toughness over the Smith is highly over-rated IMO.

 

[Deanimator]

I do NOW. Prior to the S&W lock, I didn't.

I'd buy a new Ruger. I'd never buy a new S&W revolver as long as they have the lock.

 

[AZ Five seveN]

Six hours ago, I watched a 77 year old man put 6 rounds of .357 magnum nearly through the same hole as the original at 30 feet. He was using a 50 year old S&W which has seen over 30,000 rounds fired through it.

I'm sold!

 

[Nanook]

Ruger's "equivalent" to the 642? You mean the lighter, less-recoiling, less expensive LCR?

Now you have me interested. I'll have to check it out before I buy the 642.

 

[9mmepiphany]

I would think that was a good idea...and this coming from someone who has been carrying a tuned 642 for 15+ years