GP100 vs 686+

[The_Shootist]

Was looking at a 3" bbl GP 100 on Ruger's website. Mainly just in interest. I already have a 686+ in 4" bbl and an SP 101 in 3" bbl.

Just curious as to whether anybody thinks the 3" GP 100 would make a useful additon to my small .357 family. Both the ones I have now are belt guns. I frequently carry the 686 for CCW duty, even in shorts and a t-shirt and the SP 101 conceals REALLY well.

But the GP 100 even in 3" bbl seems like a BIG revolver, so I don't see it concealing (or weighing) any better than the 686, plus I lose a round.

 

[20nickels]

Hmmm, Looks like you have your bases covered In the Mid-framed .357 department. Why not a matching levergun, an airweight or an N frame? Nothing against Ruger, fine guns.

 

[MachIVshooter]

I don't see a good reason for it. The 686 you already have is a far superior gun. If you were gonna add another .357 to the family, I'd be looking for a 6" or 8" 586 or somesuch. It'd be different enough from what you have.

 

[Jim March]

The only reason I'd add the GP100 to the stable is if I wanted something that's both very tough and can be field-stripped without tools, for long-haul hiking and/or wilderness carry. That's really the only thing the GP has over the Smith. Even then, you get all that with the SP101, down to five shots but what the hell.

I wouldn't add a 3" or 4" GP to your stable.

Now, if you are shopping for a long-barrel GP in that sort of "woods role", esp. the somewhat rare "half lug" GP100 6" barrels, then you'd have both performance and toughness beyond the S&W. The 6" half-lug guns are really neat, they have the "pointability" and heft of a 4" but with the velocity of a 6". Remember that the smaller-size GP grips fit the longer-barrel variants - the underlying grip frame is the same.

 

[BikerRN]

I personally don't like 7-Shot Revolvers.

The "extra" round is great, but after years of carrying a six-shooter I find that I shoot six, dump and reload when I'm shooting fast. Also, if you have a new S&W you have to contend with the "Hillary Hole", of which I'm not a fan.

I carry a 3" GP100 most days when I'm off duty and a J-Frame "snubbie". Soon I will relegate the J-Frame to "third gun" status and carry my 3" GP100 and my 2 1/4" SP101. Yes, I carry two or three guns when I'm not on the clock.

One thing I like about the 3" is, except for pocket carry, it carries like a 2" gun and shoots like a 4" gun. I find that the 4" guns tend to "pinch" me in my rear when I move to sit down. I carry IWB, so this is important to me and my comfort.

My 4" GP100 is my "Game Gun" and I'm working on fixing it up for the Police Games next year. In the meantime I'll carry my 3" and when Ruger fixes my SP101, that too. You can't go wrong with a good Fixed Sight 3" handgun in my book.

BikerRN

 

[ozarkman]

My standard answer to questions like this "Should I buy such-and-such revolver" is always a resounding YES !! Revolvers are like women, if you love them, you can justify anything

 

[Markbo]

Bingo, we have the right answer!

You can always sell it if you don't like it, but you can never try it if you don't buy it first.

The GP100 is a bit larger. Not by a huge margin. The stocks are a completely different feel than a 686. You might find that you absolutely LOVE them. Like most Ruger handguns, they are hell for stout and I would not hesitate to load up full power loads with heavy for caliber bullets for hunting.

 

[HOME DEPOT GEORGE]

I like my gp100 a little better than the 686's I've fired and have to strongly disagree with the statement that the 686 is far superior and would like some facts to back that up, don't want to start a big debate bit I think they are equal in quality with ruger having a slight edge for not having a lock that can malfunction as small as the chances are. I like my gp100 better simply because I shoot better with it and the original factory grips with the rosewood panels fit my hands better.

 

[Guillermo]

Never one to tell someone not to buy a gun...you should buy SOMETHING. Sounds like you already have a good full size .357. Sounds like you need a small .38 snubby or a 44 magnum.

 

[The_Shootist]

Actually...

..... I have a Taurus M85 snubby in .38. But yeah, am looking hard at the new Ruger Redhawk SS in 4" bbl chambered fir .44 mag. That seems like a pretty versatile revolver.

 

[20nickels]

Shootist,
You can find those Redhawk .44's used ( and parobably shot little) all day long at a show. Unless there is something different about the new one's I do not know about. BTW, IMHO the .45 Colt would be even more versitile. Drool.

 

[Markbo]

4" Redhawks used, all day long? I have not see ONE. Ruger has just released these within the last couple of months.

 

[20nickels]

Oh, He wants a 4 incher, that's what is different. Oops.

 

[PIMAN]

I added a 3" S&W Pro-series. Great grip and a front sight is a night sight. This is the Pro-Series

 

[theNoid]

My standard answer to questions like this "Should I buy such-and-such revolver" is always a resounding YES !! Revolvers are like women, if you love them, you can justify anything

'Nuff said.

Noidster

 

[MachIVshooter]

have to strongly disagree with the statement that the 686 is far superior and would like some facts to back that up,

They're both heavy framed, durable revolvers. It's the fit & finish and action that distinguishes S&W. Just a much nicer gun.

And FWIW, I buy pre-lock Smith's. I no longer buy Rugers at all. The four Ruger revolvers I have will be the only Ruger revolvers I ever have.