Highest Quality Revolver for under $500

[cpirtle]

Don't buy into the cast versus forged argument.

For the sake of arguing guns I tend to agree with you. Ruger has engineered extremely robust, albeit big revolvers.

I personally see nothing wrong with both methods being used in gun manufacturing.

This logic does not apply to manufacturing in general and tends to get people who know better defensive (I'm not one of them), which is how we end up with threads like this.

Feel free to do some research into knives at any price. Until recently only one custom maker was able to successfully cast knives and that was David Boye. What he created was more of an alloy (440 dendritic) than steel.

 

[Cato the Younger]

I think a used S&W Model 28 is the best value under $500

Mine cost me $315. It is a wonderful shooter, and a great gun to learn reloading on. I think they are underestimated, as most collectors buy up model 27's instead. The Highway Patrolman has the same guts, but lacks merely the cosmetic finishing touches. You should be able to find some for under $500, for sure if you shop around.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[hags]

For the sake of arguing guns I tend to agree with you. Ruger has engineered extremely robust, albeit big revolvers.

I personally see nothing wrong with both methods being used in gun manufacturing.

This logic does not apply to manufacturing in general and tends to get people who know better defensive (I'm not one of them), which is how we end up with threads like this.

Feel free to do some research into knives at any price. Until recently only one custom maker was able to successfully cast knives and that was David Boye. What he created was more of an alloy (440 dendritic) than steel.

Just to be clear, I'm strictly talking guns here. In particular, slide failures, stress cracks, etc......

When it comes to firearms, it is my opinion, based on experience, warranty info, manufacturers data etc..... that when considering strictly cast versus forged it is a none issue.

 

[Virginian]

In as much as new Colts are not available, you have no doubt noted the discussion has deteriorated into the usual Smith vs Ruger one. Since you did not ask, I will not bore you with engineering credentials, intergranular structural differences, or the superiority of two different mechanisms that accomplish the same goal, or the myariad mythical points of superiority.
Either one of them is a very good firearm and the maker will stand behind it, which is good because occassionally they both churn out a lemon. I have personally seen more from Smith, but heard about more from Ruger. Not aware of a one that either one did not make right.
The two guns have a very different 'feel', and whichever one feels best to you is the way to go.
If you like politically correct visible locks, you will definitely prefer the Smith and Wesson, which is good, because you cannot get a new one without it. As of right now, Rugers don't have one on their DA revolvers that I know of, yet. The ones on the new single actions are about as invisible and unobtrusive as you could get.

 

[Shade00]

My picks:
S&W Mod. 65-4 (police trade-ins available from various places, Centerfire, CDNN)
S&W Mod. 28, if you can find one in your price range
Ruger Security/Service/Speed Six in Stainless - love these, should be able to find one (or maybe even two!) for your price range
Any of the large number of quality Colt Troopers available in your price range

There are plenty of good used guns to be had. Just look around.

 

[BlindJustice]

Before reading this thread
I would say without a doubt

A good quality S&W Model 28 "Highway Patrolman"
in the barrel length you consider to fit your needs,
a nice length to get would be 5".

R- now to go back and read the responses

 

[2ndamd]

A new GP100 4" ss adj sight model.

 

[hags]

I would agree on that, I have a Highway Patrolman 28-2 and it's really, really nice. You should be able to find a really nice used one for under $500.
No lock, no receiver mounted firing pin, etc.......

The new Rugers feel alot closer to a 686 now that they come with the Hogue fingergroove monogrip.

 

[Virginian]

I know I passed reading. It was a long time ago but I do remember that. And the man said new.
I definitely prefer some of the used ones myself, but he said new.

 

[H2O MAN]

I picked up a NIB GP100 for $400

 

[wheelgunslinger]

I would stay away from Charter products.
I would stay away from the EAA windicator.
I would stay away from cheap single actions.

Clearly, there are people who like Smith and Ruger. Both are good weapons.

If you want a quality weapon for under 500 bucks, your choices are few and already outlined here, when it comes to new guns.

Which do I prefer? I don't. I can't find a single 357 NIB that I want that would somehow be better than a nice used weapon made years ago in various attractive permutations.

 

[cpirtle]

because you cannot get a new one without it

Smiths new production lemon squeezer does not have a lock.

 

[Deanimator]

A Smith & Wesson Highway Patrolman (Model 28) is a fine revolver.

Great guns, and the prices haven't yet gone insane on these like they have with other N frame Smiths.

Also, used Dan Wessons are also a great value

 

[skoro]

I am looking to buy a 4" .357 sometime this week. I have a budget of $500 and would like to buy new since I have had a few experiences buying used. I would really like some suggestions from the forum as to what to stay away from and what is regarded as being a good value.

Even though you've stated a reluctance for used, that's going to be your best bet for a solid, high-quality .357 revolver. Used S&W Models 13, 19 or 65 would fit your requirement perfectly. Good ones can be had for less than $500 on gunbroker.com or auctionarms.com so check it out, and good luck!

 

[2ndamd]

Lemon sqeezer does not have the hillary ho' but, it does cost more than $500.

 

[Evyl Robot]

I am looking to buy a 4" .357 sometime this week. I have a budget of $500 and would like to buy new since I have had a few experiences buying used. I would really like some suggestions from the forum as to what to stay away from and what is regarded as being a good value.

JN,

I'm afraid the 686 is going to be out of that price range. I'm a Smith fan, but you don't really care about that. I think the Ruger sounds like a fine choice. See if you can find a range that has prospectives for rental before you purchase. If you start feeling spicier, and want to test the used market waters, check out the revolver checkout in this same forum. I've used these methods in buying new and used revolvers, and I believe that everyone should be familiar with them regardless of what they like. I hope this helps.

--Michael

 

[Stainz]

The OP posted this in mid Jan of this year... if he has more moola, I'd consider a S&W - the 620 runs ~$620 - a 4" 686+ is ~$640 locally. The best buy is the 627 Pro, like mine - bought a month back at $719 + s/t. Of course, I financed mine by selling a couple of Rugers - I am much happier.

Now, eat crow time, I did look at the current crop of Hogue-gripped new Ruger GP-100s (4" KGP-141) - at $489 + s/t. No tool marks - comfortable feel/heft/and 'pointability', sad to say for a dyed-in-the-wool S&W guy. Smoothest new Ruger trigger I've felt... could they have finally hired an in-plant QC inspector? I was getting tired of being that guy here in my basement, thus my divesting myself of Ruger roundguns. Serioualy, I think most folks - me included - would be happy with a new GP-100. Gotta wash my mouth!

Stainz

 

[baker437]

GP-100 got my new 5 years ago for $400.00.

 

[Fishman777]

The silence is stunning...

Kramerer slams investment casting. Wuchak comes along and pulls an article that summarizes peer-reviewed scientific/engineering journal articles that demonstrate that forging is not superior to investment casting. Kramerer ignores that reply and goes on about how comical and inarticulate the Ruger fans are. Wuchak not only supplies scientific evidence to support his position, he also discusses some of the design features that confer the Ruger DA revolver's superior strength. Then Kramerer disappears.

Listen, I don't dislike Smith and Wesson revolvers. I like them enough that I almost bought a 686p over my GP100 about a year ago. Smith and Wessons are very good revolvers, and I would not fault anyone for wanting one or owning one.

My own observations have led me to believe that Smith and Wessons generally have pretty nice triggers and finishes out of the box. Smiths are good revolvers, but they *are* weaker than Rugers.

The Rugers are stronger by design. Wuchak already explained some of these Ruger design features, so I won't beat a dead horse. I do find it interesting, however, that Smith and Wesson implemented a variation of Ruger's triple locking cylinder in their model 500. They also implemented a Ruger style ejector rod in their model 500. If these design characteristics make no difference in the strength and reliability of a revolver, why is it that Smith and Wesson copied these features and used them in their most powerful revovler design? Isn't it interesting that Smith and Wesson copies these features for their most powerful revolver, but even the most modest Ruger DA revolvers have these same features (even the .32 magnum models).

 

[GingerGuy]

This thread needs a picture...

SP101

 

[Oro]

The silence is stunning...

Yep, you're right. It's just not worth arguing with roaring Luddites. I'd rather walk away and do something more useful. I had hoped 1858's intelligent comments here wouldn't start another degrading circle of silly, factless arguing.

Look, Wuchak brought out completely irrelevant information, well intentioned I'm sure, but it discusses (and from a biased angle, too) that investment casting can equal forging in a non-pressurized, non firearm application. I've actually read that paper in the past it's not news. I was just trying not to inflame what had already degraded into a non-scientific food-fight. I winced when 1858 came along to provided another intelligent analysis from an engineer about whey forging has the qualities it does. But you can still just roar into the wind.

Look, guys, we are talking about INANIMATE objects with known physical properties. This isn't difficult science, if you just look at the science instead of the heresay and testosterone - "This is what I like so it must be better..." mentality.

Frankly, the thread should either address the OP's questions or be closed. Since it's a six month dead thread, that's the best thing. It's not worth having a Ruger v. S&W smackdown with pointless assertions.

 

[Guillermo]

no dog in the hunt

Hi guys

Which is "best" has to do with the job you want it to do.

Are you going to carry it?
A range gun only?
Put a scope on it and hunt with it?

The differing characteristics make one or the other preferable to the other

Here are a few undeniable facts

Rugers are heavy
Rugers triggers need some help

Smiths are lighter
Smiths have better triggers

Rugers cost less than Smiths

New Rugers are not PC
New Smiths have a Hillary Hole

So if you insist on buying new and can't stand Hillary Clinton, buy a Ruger.

If you are okay with Hillary and don't mind spending a few extra bucks, buy a new Smith.

If you are willing to buy used, a Smith 19 is well within your budget, and is a truly great revolver.

Still you would save some money buying a used GP100 that would have the possible advantage of being stainless

 

[jjohnson]

686+ Reconsider Buying New.

I'm not going to say anything bad about the Ruger. I've never owned a GP100, but that's just a matter of timing. My several other Rugers are liked every bit as much as my several S&Ws.

My 686+ was bought gently used for $400 a few years ago. The guy that sold it to me was switching to autos, and gave it up after shooting maybe a dozen boxes of ammo. I got the box, warranty card, and oh, too bad, no Hillary Hole. I won't buy a new S&W while they insist on putting a LOCK in the design. My old Model 28 and Model 19 still kick hind end, too, and neither one of them were bought new - gently used.

I've been shooting handguns for 45 years now, and there are LOTS of really good used handguns at gun shows. Larger calibers tend to get used less than, say, .38s, because of cost of ammo and blast. Yes, SOME of us send half a ton of lead downrange each year in some of our favorites, but most people don't do that. You can still get a fine slightly used revolver for under $500, just take somebody with you who's good at picking them. You'd do the same if you were buying a used truck, right? If you're really not good at looking a used handgun over, drag a buddy along, no shame in that.

And oh yes - Rugers are even harder to wear out than S&Ws or Colts, so if you find that barely used GP100, snap it up....

 

[22LongRifle]

+1 on never buying new! If you don't think you can get a good deal on your own, buy a seasoned shooting buddy lunch and have him look at a few for you.

My favorite for home and carry is a 3" GP100 or 2.5" M19 or 3" 65.

I've had 686s that sucked and GPs that were too nose heavy. And then I had others that were perfect.

My current out of state carry weapon is a 3" GP100 with a light barrel. It was a range gun for a local LEO trainer and said he could begin to too me how many rounds were shot through it! Its smooth and sweet.

My wife's van weapon is my S&W M19 with the 2.5" barrel. Its baddly blunished on the left side, due to a ten year sentence in a poor holster in the sock drawer. But its just as sweet, if not more so, as the GP.

And, like stated before, its doubtful that a used wheelgun was shot more than 1000 rounds (unless its a range loaner like mine). Its just hard to wear on out.

And don't forget the Ruger Speed and Security Six series and the great line from S&W with a hard look at the M28.

22lr

 

[Fishman777]

Luddites??

Too funny. You are right, this thread could get out of hand, and I probably didn't help the situation.