GP-100 v. S&W

[Lord Bodak]

I'm sure this has been done a million times... but I shot my dad's 6" 686 this afternoon and absolutely loved it. Going to have to buy one. The 6" barrel was a little uncomfortable-- made it a little too front heavy, so I think a 4" barrel is the right way to go for me.

Ruger has the GP-100 in 4" as either the KGP-141 and the KGPF-341 (short grip and fixed sights).

S&W has the 65, 66, and 686 in 4". The 65 has fixed sights, the 66 has adjustable. Other than that, they seem to be almost identical. The 686 just looks to be a more solidly built revolver, but I'm not sure what that means in practical terms.

A lot of it will come down to ergonomics and I need to go see what fits my hand best, but I'm curious what people's opinions are on these choices. I'm also curious about how they will hold up to Magnum loads over time-- I suspect I'll mainly be shooting .38 Special and +P, but if and when I decide to shoot Magnums, I want something that will handle that.

 

[Arub]

The Smith 686 (L frame) is the closest match to the Ruger GP. I have both the Smith 686 and the Ruger KGP141 (stainless, full underlug, 4" barrel). I use both in steel plate shoots and place well with both. After break in, the revolvers are pretty evenly matched with a very slight edge to the Smith (IMO).

After break in, the triggers are pretty evenly matched (redundancy?). Fit and finish go to the Smith as well as sights. The sights on the Smith have conventional adjustment and can be adjusted with a pretty standard screwdriver. The sights on the Ruger, although adequate, have two small inconveniences. #1, adjustment requires a jewlers screwdriver - no big deal. #2, windage adjustment is just the opposite of convention.

Pricewise, advantage is Ruger, running about $100 or so less than the Smith. Also, remember the trigger requires some break in before smoothing out (but it does smooth out).

One more note, the Smith 66 is also an excellent choice. It is rumored to be not as robust as the 686 and the Ruger, but you will probably not wear it out in your lifetime. It has the same advantages as the 686 and may actually fit your hand better (a definate advantage).

Lots of luck on your decision.

 

[orangeninja]

I had a Ruger GP100 .357 Mag stainless, tight lockup. Awsome gun all around

 

[JohnKSa]

A friend of mine bought a brand new 686. Even though he was not a high-volume shooter, it shot out of time a couple of times in the first two years he owned it--S&W fixed it for free under warranty both times.

My GP100 cost less and has been going strong for about 13 or 14 years now with no service required. During that time it's had somewhere between 2 thousand and 4 thousand rounds through it of which less than 3 boxes have been .38 specials--probably 95% of the rest have been full power 125gr JHP .357 loads. I checked the cylinder gaps and endplay awhile back and compared all of the measurements with a new GP100 revolver. All the measurements were as good or better than the new pistol's numbers.

 

[Majic]

The K-frame Smiths (M65 and M66) will hold up fine with any 158gr load. It's the hot 125gr and 110gr loads that can cause them problems after a while. The L-frame is beefed up and stronger than the K-frame.

 

[Rob96]

Do a search and you will see a history of these threads come up.

Now to participate. I owned the S&W 686 and currently own a Ruger KGP-141. FOR ME......the Ruger is the better revolver. It fits me better, I like how it manages recoil, and balances very well in my hand. It is also more accurate than the 686 I owned. Which is odd, considering that the 686 I had was a 6" barrel. The 686 I had also had an annoying little problem of the cylinder binding after firing a couple cylinders of magnum ammo.

Go out and handle both, or better yet, see if you can shoot both. Then decide which you want.

 

[Boats]

They're both the cream of the crop. No one will have anything new to say, so why not learn to search the site?

 

[Lord Bodak]

I did search the site, and spent quite a bit of time browsing through the results. So far, everything posted here has been new information that I appreciate quite a bit.

 

[Werewolf]

The 686 I had also had an annoying little problem of the cylinder binding after firing a couple cylinders of magnum ammo.

Mine does the same thing. After 30 or 40 rounds of .357 158gr FMJ for some reason the cylinder does not want to lock into the frame when closing it. It takes a bit of force to get it to seat back in the frame.

S&W told me to check for grit/powder under the star and to check the swing hinge to make sure no grit got in there. Neither suggestion panned out. The cylinder gap on this particular gun is .003 which is pretty tight I think but since I'm not shooting lead bullets and an examination of the barrel at the cylinder end never shows any powder build up I'm at a loss as to what is going on.

When the problem occurs once the cylinder is seated back in the frame everything works fine it's just getting it to seat that is the problem.

What's the deal here? Any suggestions as to what might be going on?

 

[orangeninja]

"They're both the cream of the crop. No one will have anything new to say, so why not learn to search the site?"

New info comes up all the time. New members join all the time. New opinions are formed all the time.

 

[Rob96]

Mine does the same thing. After 30 or 40 rounds of .357 158gr FMJ for some reason the cylinder does not want to lock into the frame when closing it. It takes a bit of force to get it to seat back in the frame.

When it would happen in mine, it was sause the cylinder to not advance to the next round. The cylinder was prevented from turning while locked in place.

 

[ColtBRH]

I would get the Ruger. I had the same choice a few weeks ago, but I had heard rumors about the Smith .357's wearing out. Just for fun, I contacted S&W and they naturally said their .357 revolvers would not wear out, however, they attached a document that suggested that I shoot .38s for target practice and save the magnums for home defense. This hinted to me there would be the possibility of the Smiths wearing out if I shot .357 rounds only. To me, if a revolver is a .357, I should be able to shoot .357 rounds and never worry about the gun's durability. That's why I bought the Ruger. Good luck with your choice.

 

[Marshall]

They both suck hind tit, buy a Taurus! Is that a new one?

 

[Karate]

I have never had any experience with a Ruger revolver but I hear and read a lot of good praise for them...(I may have to get one and try it out for ymyself ) I do know that I have a 1982 model 66 with a 2 1/2 barrel..BTW it is pinned and recessed and it has held up fine to a mixture of all loads)...I had a 4 inch version but I sold it and boy do I regret it :banghead: ....I carry my 2 1/2 inch version almost daily (sometimes I let my Model 29 ride or maybe my Sig 228) I shoot some Magnums out of it( all that I want) but do shoot some .38's too...it show no wear.

 

[L-Frame]

I prefer the 686 over the gp 100, but just by a nose. Better trigger in my opinion. Both are very strong, gp a little stronger. Don't listen to people who say if you want to shoot magnums buy a Ruger because the 686 will wear quicker. They are both very strong for anything reasonable. If you want more power, go to a .44 mag. ATTENTION: SHAMELESS PROMOTION TO FOLLOW. I've got 2 very nice S&W .357 mags. in the classifieds in case you're interested. Sometimes I just can't control myself.

 

[Boats]

"They're both the cream of the crop. No one will have anything new to say, so why not learn to search the site?"

New info comes up all the time. New members join all the time. New opinions are formed all the time.

I'll believe there are new takes on this hardy perennial when I see them.

 

[Z_Infidel]

The longer I own my GP100 and my S&W revolvers the more I appreciate them for what they are. The Ruger is just so solid and reliable -- very well made. Mine has a nice aftermarket express sight setup that makes it even better. It also has a custom grip made by Lett that looks really good. I really like the cylinder release on the GP100 better than the Smiths. That, of course, is just personal preference. I have a lot of rounds through the gun with no malfunctions. The trigger has smoothed out nicely with use but is still heavier than my Smiths.

The S&Ws I own feel better in my hands and seem to balance better for me than the Ruger. My 586 (blued version of the 686) is probably closest to the GP100, and it has a better trigger and little better balance.

Actually, I've really come to like the N frame Smiths. I have a 624 and a 625 that are both good shooters. The triggers on both are very good, with the 625 having the best trigger of all my revolvers. That gun is a pure joy to shoot and has been utterly reliable.

 

[tbeb]

First, I recommend you buy one with adjustable sights. You can adjust them to hit point of aim with whatever bullet weight you're using.

In .357 magnums I've owned S&W's (model 19/66), Ruger's (GP-100 & Speed Six), and Dan Wesson. Barrel lengths were 2 1/2", 2 3/4", 4", and 6". The short barrels are cool. I didn't like 6". All in all I think 4" is best choice. My favorite was the S&W model 66.

 

[Lord Bodak]

Thanks tbeb. Adjustable sights do seem like the wiser choice and it's not going to be a carry gun (if I decide to carry a revolver at some point in the future it'll be an SP-101).

I'm leaning towards the 4" as well... like I said, the 6" 686 was just a little too front heavy for me. I know going with a 4" will hurt accuracy somewhat, so I don't expect to shoot it as well as the 6"-- at least not right away. But I know I'll be more comfortable with it.

Going with adjustable sights narrows the list to the 4" 686, the 4" 66, and the GP-141 or KGP-141. Next stop will be the gun store to take a look at a few up close!

 

[ddj8052]

I prefer the GP-100. By far my favorite revolver. I had the 4" version, and sold it. This is the only gun I have ever gotten rid of that I regretted. So today I picked up a used GP-100 with a 6" barrel. I wanted to try the new size to see what I think. I may also get a 4" version again. I highly recomend the GP

 

[fallingblock]

The GP-100 is my preference.....

S&W's "K" and "L" frame grip shape doesn't fit my hand as well as the small fixed-sight GP-100 grip.

The Ruger is a bit more rugged than the S&W, and the cylinder lockup on the Ruger is stronger.

The best advice is to try them both and decide which you like better.

 

[pwrtool45]

New takes, huh? Don't see it.

Seems to be the same as it has been since the beginning of time. "Ruger's are more durable!" "Smiths and smoother!"

Yeah. Of course, where the rubber meets the road that doesn't always hold (or even usually hold), but it is what gets said. The difference between the two is a lot more subtle than many are willing to admit.

Nobody's ever complained about the pull on my old man's SP-101. Come to think of it, his P90 has a fantastic DA pull (even if the SA is pretty cruddy). Then there was the other P90 that had a fine trigger. Oh, and a friend's brace of Vaqueros that all have better-than-'good' SA pulls. (Certainlly a lot better than the SA on my 25-5.) Just an anecdote, though. Proves nothing.

Yeah, I'm also still trying to break my 686-4. Only got about 9k through it though. No measurable wear on the center pin/frame recess or yoke, but that could all be an illusion. Guess it'll fall apart any day now, probably in a lane next to some Ruger fanatic with a suitcase full of GPs and *hawks doing the 'I told you so' dance. Just be an anecdote, though.

Yep, those are just my anecdotes. Please ignore it and the pleathora like it. Pay attention solely to the people with clear black-n-white answers, even if their eyes do glaze over with confusion when you ask them to expound on exactly how their revolver's "timing jumped off." I mean, revolvers *do* work on magic, right? (Just like electronics work on magic smoke. No, really.) The timing. It's just off.

Perennial favorites?

Look at the top strap on that Ruger! I mean, it's really thick. The revolver HAS to be uber strong!

That's the difference between cast steel and forged steel!!

It's not the type of steel it's how you treat it!!!

Well, look at the S&W lockwork, the trigger is SO much smoother

Which S&W lockwork? coil rebound w/ slide or leaf w/ toggle?

etc. etc. etc.

No, I mean really. There's nothing to see here. It would be nice if there *were* new arguments, but it's a mature topic. Just like revo v/s auto or 9mm v/s .45. It neither grows nor dies. It just is.

Recipe for any of the above threads:

A lot of flaming, a pinch of discourse, a tad of wit and a mod to put the lid on it. Simmer for a few days and open in a new thread. Serves 10-12.

 

[Boats]

AMEN!

 

[106rr]

They are both good revolvers but in my opinion the Ruger excels at hitting in the dark. It just seems to point better. This is a miniscule difference unless you happen to need hits quickly in the dark.
Good Luck