GP100 vs SW 686

[JCSC]

I don’t own any real revolvers, aside from 22 cal. I have been looking at the Ruger GP100. Not sure if 4” or 6”. 357. But the few I handled have really nice fit and finish.

I haven’t laid hands on the SW 686, but it looks similar with a slightly higher price tag.

Any pros or cons between these 2 options?

 

[MrBorland]

Some of my thoughts here…

FACE-OFF: Heavy-duty 6" 357

There are a great number of revolver shooter's that will not be able to join the debate because from 1988 onwards Rugers revolvers were less expensive and more available, so they took a large share of the market. Never owned a S&W but have dozen Ruger revolvers GP's, SP's and Blackhawks...

www.thehighroad.org

 

[UncleEd]

JCSC,

You really must decide after handling a few specimens of each model.

Choosing a gun is quite subjective. My perfect trigger and weight in its
pull may not be your preference. Grip/stock availability might also be
a factor.

If you are a bit handy, going inside either model is no particular challenge.

By and by the Ruger will have slightly sharper edges, just not as refined as
S&Ws but I find them no hindrance or anything I give any real attention.

Ruger stands out for having the best customer service reputation of
any gun maker.

A volume gun seller recently told me that customers are always on the lookout
for older S&Ws which mostly become safe queens but buy Rugers as shooters
these days.

That said, many posters here have reported total satisfaction with newly made S&Ws.
The story is the same for Rugers.

You might read a recent posting here on a "Clean GP100" for sale.

 

[shoebox1.1]

I’ve got both.. both great. Ether one is a win. Comes down to which one you like more. The Ruger is a slightly more “working man’s” revolver. “Slight” fit n finish edge to the OLDER sw guns..

 

[ontarget]

I love my 686 no dash, but they are both fine revolvers. If you choose the one that feels best in your hand, with the best balance for you, I'm sure you won't be disappointed either way. Just keep in mind, grips can be changed reasonably inexpensively. I'm not a fan of Ruger factory grips at all, but there are lots of aftermarket for both.

 

[cfullgraf]

Functionality, you cannot go wrong with either.

To me, the Rugers look a bit frumpy, but remember, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I do not have a 357 Magnum GP100, but I do have a 327 Fed Mag and 44 Special GP100's. I have a few S&W 586 and 686 revolvers chambered in 357 Magnum. Also, Model 69 (44 Magnum L-frame).

The grip frames are a bit different between the two. I find the difference fine as I like rubber grips but many folks like wood grips and there are lots of different models of grips out there.

Barrel length is another variable. I'm not fond of 3" barrels in 357 Magnum guns but I do have a couple. 4"-4.25" is good, longer up to 6" is better in my opinion. I have an 8-3/8" barrel 686 which is quite accurate but the long barrel length makes it difficult to carry.

(P.S. Because of the 8-3/8" 686, I've gone a 8-3/8" S&W revolver quest and have a few with several different cartridges, 8 at last count, Model 29, Model 25, Model 57, Model 27, Model 14, Model 686 Model 48 and Model 17. They are fun to shoot but not real convenient to use and carry.)

If you can get an opportunity to shoot both, borrowing a friends or a rental at a gun range, that may help with your decision.

Good luck.

 

[Styx]

I don’t own any real revolvers, aside from 22 cal. I have been looking at the Ruger GP100. Not sure if 4” or 6”. 357. But the few I handled have really nice fit and finish.

I haven’t laid hands on the SW 686, but it looks similar with a slightly higher price tag.

Any pros or cons between these 2 options?

Ruger GP101: Much better customer service, cast metal frame, can handle full power hunting loads better vs the 686....

S&W 686: More refined IMHO, better trigger, better grip selection and holster selection, forge steel instead of cast, slightly lighter....

If the revolver is a range toy or for hunting, go with the 6" barrel. If you ever think you might want to carry outside of the home, the 4" is the way to go. Personally, I'm a big fan of 2.5" - 3" revolvers for self-defense and carry, I like 4" too. 4" is where I draw the line for a carry revolver.

Here are my two 686+ Smiths. I regularly EDC the 2.5".

I plan on buying one of these in the future as well. I guess I'm no help. I'd just buy the one you can find the best deal on even if it's used, and then save up to buy the other.

 

[Tallball]

They're both excellent. It's win/win.

 

[tightgroup tiger]

I have both also. I prefer the 686 to the GP-100. Both will get the job done and both are very accurate.
If I could only buy one of the two, it would be the S&W 686. Just my personal opinion.

 

[Dave DeLaurant]

I've owned one of each and they both work fine. Rugers used to be a bit less expensive, but lately they are priced about the same.

The 686 had a better trigger, better accuracy and was a bit easier to clean.

The GP100 was built like a tank and I suspect it would continue working until the end of time. The removal and replacement routine for the triggerguard assembly is fiddly even by Ruger Mark I standards, but most owners won't take the gun that far apart.

 

[dannyd]

You maybe able to tell I like GP's, but don't know anything about S&W's.

GP's are easy to take apart to work on and clean, much like a military gun is.

 

[UncleEd]

I've owned one of each and they both work fine. Rugers used to be a bit less expensive, but lately they are priced about the same.

I suspect the prices reflect that Ruger still builds its GP100 the same way it did in 1985 whereas
S&W has found cheaper ways to produce its newer models than the ones dating to the 1990s
and before.

 

[Styx]

I suspect the prices reflect that Ruger still builds its GP100 the same way it did in 1985 whereas
S&W has found cheaper ways to produce its newer models than the ones dating to the 1990s
and before.

Both use MIM parts, and the GP100 is cast which is cheaper vs Smith forge which is more expensive.

The GP100 and S&W 686 are both made the same way now vs before the pandemic, and still Rugers have went up in price more so than Smith revolvers.

Heck, in 2019, I purchased a stainless Ruger commander size SR1911. I paid $683.99.....




The MSRP on the same exact gun is now $1200!!!!!

 

[roo_ster]

Either is a great revolver. You can't make a bad decision choosing between the two.

I prefer the SW686. Why?
1. I 'smith on my revolvers and I know S&W guts, so I stick with S&W (J, K, L, N-frames).
2. Grip & holster selection
3. Build/finish quality
4. S&W pro shop for things I don't want to do, like high polish my N-frame.

The GP-100 is supposed to be stronger than the SW686. Sure, it is stronger than the S&W K-frames, but there seems very little space between SW686 & GP100.

Oh, and 4" is probably hte best compromise bbl for a medium/medium-large frame revolver. My 686 is the most versatile gun I own & the last I'd give up.

Good luck.

 

[UncleEd]

Styx, S&W changed its internals quite a bit including elimination a lot
of small pins in assembly of hammer/trigger. Also two piece barrel
is a savings.

 

[Styx]

Styx, S&W changed its internals quite a bit including elimination a lot
of small pins in assembly of hammer/trigger. Also two piece barrel
is a savings.

Yes, I know. I guess my point is those changes already existed and were made back in 2016 through early 2019 before the pandemic. Since then, Ruger has had a steep price increase compared to S&W. Also, Ruger and S&W have some models that incorporate two peice barrels. Some models have them and some don't. The S&W 686 does not have a two piece barrel.

The Ruger LCR and Ruger Redhawk both have 2 peice barrels. The LCR in 357 had a MSRP of $575. Now the MSRP for their revolver with a polymer trigger control group AND two peice barrel is $859.

 

[TarDevil]

Let your hands decided. If your hands are indifferent, perhaps asthetics may matter. If you are the ultimate utilitarian, price may guide you. If price is no object, buy both.

The Ruger just didn't feel good to me so I passed it along. If I see a 586 in my gun shop it's coming home with me.

 

[UncleEd]

I think that labor costs for S&W are a bit less now with the new parts; less
skilled labor/assemblers is needed. In the meantime, Ruger's advantage
has been erased as wages are probably now about the same for both makers.

 

[Styx]

I think that labor costs for S&W are a bit less now with the new parts; less
skilled labor/assemblers is needed. In the meantime, Ruger's advantage
has been erased as wages are probably now about the same for both makers.

That's a moot point because both companies made their revolvers the same way before Ruger dramatically increased their prices vs before. It's not like simultaneously Ruger raised prices while S&W didn't dramatically raise their price because they suddenly made all these cost saving changes so that they could keep their prices low.

As I also pointed out, the Ruger LCR with a polymer trigger control group AND two peice barrel ALSO went up in MSRP by almost $300, and you can't say they needed to raise cost for all the skilled labor it took to make a LCR. I paid around $450 for my LCR at a LGS upcharge, but now I'm seeing them for almost $600 online prices.

 

[UncleEd]

An average retail price on a major online outlet
is $780 for a standard GP100 4-inch; a
comparable S&W 686 average price is $950.

It still comes down to what a shooter likes or
decides is the superior product. Often
perception is the deciding factor. As I wrote
early on, posting No. 3, choice is subjective.

 

[Styx]

An average retail price on a major online outlet
is $780 for a standard GP100 4-inch; a
comparable S&W 686 average price is $950.

It still comes down to what a shooter likes or
decides is the superior product. Often
perception is the deciding factor. As I wrote
early on, posting No. 3, choice is subjective.

The 686 is $800 +/- online retail at several vendors. Both can be found for practically the same price. $950 is almost the MSRP price of $975 for the standard 4" 686+. The Standard stainless 4.2" GP100 has a MSRP of $1059.00.

@UncleEd Ruger also switch from some cast components to MIM components just like S&W did. The only difference is Ruger fanboys aren't whining about it like some S&W fanboys are.

 

[dannyd]

Ruger GP100 SS 4 inch barrel was 319.00 dollars in 1989, with inflation today the price would be 786.00 dollars.

 

[Tinman357]

I have both, I shoot both, I like both.

I got my 6" GP100 half lug back in 1986 when I turned 21 as a birthday present to myself and as a re-enlistment present. Yep, I had already served a full tour before I could legally buy my own pistol. I thought that was odd, even back then.

I've had several 686's during that time but was never really enamored with them enough to hold on to them through some tough financial times, they all fell to the wayside.

A few years ago I picked up a 3" 686 + and it has been a good one. Slicked up real nice and holds a nice tight (to me) group. It has a good balance and handles very well. I greatly prefer it over the longer barreled ones I'd had in the past.

The GP was an all around general purpose gun that has punched a lot of targets, I've taken deer and other game, it's been on home defence and even ccw a time or two. I had always planned to hand it down to my son, but life changes things sometimes.

The 686 is set up for ccw if the political winds blow that way and I'm not able to carry a semi. I have a low profile night sight on the front and a Bowen rough country fixed on the rear. I've got it filed down and set for a 25yd zero with the most common factory loadings and I've slicked up the insides as well as a few other old time tweaks that used to be common when revolvers were king.

They are both good guns. Not much difference in price anymore, or quality for that matter. Pick what fits best for you. Both will last the rest of your life and well beyond.

 

[4v50 Gary]

If I could only have one, then it would be Ruger. Trigger isn't half as nice as the S&W, but for a rugged gun that requires less maintenance and can take more abuse, Ruger beats both Colt & S&W.

If however I want to target shoot and not carry it in the woods, S&W. Better trigger, better looking and greater resale value.

In TFL we had someone who releaased the trigger and the lockwork (cylinder wouldn't turn and hammer couldn't be cocked) was locked up. Gunsmith said there was a broken part from something in the lockwork. I wish I knew what broke off of where.

 

[JCSC]

Thanks for all the replies. Would there be a discernible accuracy difference from 4-5-6” barrel? Obviously we have the sight radius window equation in that mix.