ArchAngelCD
Member.
MIM = Metal Injection Molding
New revolvers: Smith vs. Ruger. Which do you prefer?
- Thread starter harmon rabb
- Start date
- Status
oldfool
Member
I voted S&W, but mostly ditto post #28
face it, every poll that comes along, it's always the same, there is S&W and Ruger competing for top spot (I own both, and others), and nobody in 3rd place
unless the subject is SA only, like Freedom Arms
and that's a downright dirty shame
face it, every poll that comes along, it's always the same, there is S&W and Ruger competing for top spot (I own both, and others), and nobody in 3rd place
unless the subject is SA only, like Freedom Arms
and that's a downright dirty shame
Old Shooter
Member
I love the older blued Smiths and I even have a couple of the stainless models, but that hole in the side of the frame makes me sick every time I look at a new one. Between that "feature" and the higher price (S&W sure is proud of them aren't they?). I believe for a new one I'd have to go Ruger. The Rugers I've had in the past were built solid and reliable to a boring degree.
Now if they had a nice looking used Smith in the case for the same price as the new Ruger, different story.
Now if they had a nice looking used Smith in the case for the same price as the new Ruger, different story.
Guillermo
member
pre MIM Smiths are superior to Rugers
post MIM Smiths with the lock...I would rather have a Ruger...or a Taurus...or a Rossi...or a Llama...or a Dan Wesson...etc
BTW
didn't vote
post MIM Smiths with the lock...I would rather have a Ruger...or a Taurus...or a Rossi...or a Llama...or a Dan Wesson...etc
BTW
didn't vote
An out of the box trigger of either, a S&W or a Ruger will not be what I expect from my guns. Neither did I find S&W triggers on the past 35 years to be so much better than today's.
I do extensive work on the actions of my revolvers and S&W can be tuned to a much nicer trigger than any of the current Ruger D/A revolvers. The best D/A on Rugers could be achieved on the old Six Series but it is still far from a good S&W and a lifetime away from a Korth.
I do extensive work on the actions of my revolvers and S&W can be tuned to a much nicer trigger than any of the current Ruger D/A revolvers. The best D/A on Rugers could be achieved on the old Six Series but it is still far from a good S&W and a lifetime away from a Korth.
Marshall
Member
I like them both.
I use Redhawks for Hunting. Smiths for carry. Range gun only, Smith.
I use Redhawks for Hunting. Smiths for carry. Range gun only, Smith.
I just went with a new Ruger SP-101. As far as MIM parts go the Ruger's do have some MIM parts now days. I emailed Ruger about this like 2 months ago and they replied that the GP-100 now has MIM parts in it. Which parts well I can't say because I got rid of the email and I just don't remember the parts they said were MIM. I do remember it was only 3 parts. I believe S&W uses more MIM parts then Ruger. I really don't think it matters.
heavyshooter
Member
I'm a Ruger man. But I also prefer Dodge over Ford.
heavyshooter
Member
double tap
While I'm pretty much a Ruger guy, I find it hard to compare the two across the board because Smith and Wesson makes so many different and more models of DA revolvers than Ruger does. There are many models in the Smith and Wesson line for which there is no comparable Ruger. Among those models there are comparisons, I tend to prefer the Ruger, e.g. the GP100 that was mentioned. I think they are both fine revolvers but really dislike the design of the Smith lock.
In the end, I mostly prefer single-action revolvers so that put's me solidly in the Ruger camp, LOL.
In the end, I mostly prefer single-action revolvers so that put's me solidly in the Ruger camp, LOL.
buck460XVR
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,083
I prefer Smiths because of their looks, their triggers and the way they fit my hand. Ruger makes a fine gun and I own a few of them also. Altho I prefer the Smiths, I see no reason to bash Rugers or those that prefer them. To each their own. As for the IL, I own two revolvers with the lock. Both are models/calibers that were unavailable before the lock and unavailable from Ruger. I don't notice the lock hole on my Smiths, like I don't notice the billboards on my Rugers. Like was said before, there are a ton of options out there..........pick your favorite and enjoy. Save the bashing for the antis.
BADUNAME13
Member
No, it's Quality.
You've got 'older models' which look (Leaving off pins etc) very much like the new models...
Older ones are better.
I'll grant you... the Prewar Blue.... (Insert picture of me drooling here) etc...
But I owned a Ruger before I owned a Smith.
ANYWAY... what I MENT to say was this:
Baring things like my .44 S&W mountain gun... mosto f my 'larger revolvers' are single action.
In that: Ruger
All else:
Smith.
gordy
Member
S&W for me
I started out with a ruger security six in 1981, 6 inch 357. Great gun.
Sold it to my brother and bought a ruger gp100, Not nearly as nice as the ss.
Traded the gp100 for a S&W 586, and then there were 9 S&W revolvers in the gun safe.
Rugers are great guns, Beat the hell out of them and they just keep working.
Kinda like a f250. Gets the job done. You just wont brag about the way it looks.
But a S&W is like a fancy race car, Better triggers, better finish.
Just better. I have never seen or fired a ruger with a great trigger. You can have work done and you have a OK trigger, but never great.
On a S&W you can have a fantastic trigger, single and double action.
I would buy another ruger revolver. I own 2 auto loaders and a couple of long guns. love them.
But when it comes to revolvers S&W for me.
I started out with a ruger security six in 1981, 6 inch 357. Great gun.
Sold it to my brother and bought a ruger gp100, Not nearly as nice as the ss.
Traded the gp100 for a S&W 586, and then there were 9 S&W revolvers in the gun safe.
Rugers are great guns, Beat the hell out of them and they just keep working.
Kinda like a f250. Gets the job done. You just wont brag about the way it looks.
But a S&W is like a fancy race car, Better triggers, better finish.
Just better. I have never seen or fired a ruger with a great trigger. You can have work done and you have a OK trigger, but never great.
On a S&W you can have a fantastic trigger, single and double action.
I would buy another ruger revolver. I own 2 auto loaders and a couple of long guns. love them.
But when it comes to revolvers S&W for me.
Coal Dragger
member
My preference in double actions runs to Smith and Wesson. I don't really care about the lock in the side, or the MIM parts. I have a Kimber Super Match II that uses MIM parts for some of the components, not a single one has failed in over 20K rounds (round count determined roughly by weighing spent primers). So to me the MIM parts are a non-issue, for those that despise them so much and favor Rugers (which also use a few), you do all realize that Rugers are all made from cast parts which 20-30 years ago would have been considered unacceptably cheap and shoddy for a quality firearm.
I prefer the wide array of options S&W offers in frame sizes, barrel lengths, round counts, and materials (not that I would buy a scandium frame, but some people would). I like the S&W triggers better than the Ruger out of the box, even if the newer Smiths don't feel like they have triggers as nice as older ones (which I believe to be an inaccurate perception since triggers smooth out with use as they wear in).
Lastly I appreciate the fact that Smith & Wesson have a "custom shop" in their Performance Center. So, if you want some bit of work done to your new revolver like a trigger job, or replacing MIM parts with machined replacements, and a whole host of other options you can have them done at the factory and maintain your warranty. Even better you can buy a revolver strait from the Performance Center that is already tuned up, which you can't do from Ruger at all.
Sturm Ruger's idea of a trigger job is to make sure and reverse any improvements made by the owner to said trigger if the revolver goes in for service. Which they did to my father's Single Six that had some nice trigger work done on it, they did this "free of charge" like they were doing us all a favor by returning the little revolver to a 6lb mushy trigger pull. Yuck.
Do Smith's cost more, sure they do, do the Performance Center revolvers cost even more than that? Yes. However, I am lucky enough to be able to afford them if I want one and that does factor into my decision.
I prefer the wide array of options S&W offers in frame sizes, barrel lengths, round counts, and materials (not that I would buy a scandium frame, but some people would). I like the S&W triggers better than the Ruger out of the box, even if the newer Smiths don't feel like they have triggers as nice as older ones (which I believe to be an inaccurate perception since triggers smooth out with use as they wear in).
Lastly I appreciate the fact that Smith & Wesson have a "custom shop" in their Performance Center. So, if you want some bit of work done to your new revolver like a trigger job, or replacing MIM parts with machined replacements, and a whole host of other options you can have them done at the factory and maintain your warranty. Even better you can buy a revolver strait from the Performance Center that is already tuned up, which you can't do from Ruger at all.
Sturm Ruger's idea of a trigger job is to make sure and reverse any improvements made by the owner to said trigger if the revolver goes in for service. Which they did to my father's Single Six that had some nice trigger work done on it, they did this "free of charge" like they were doing us all a favor by returning the little revolver to a 6lb mushy trigger pull. Yuck.
Do Smith's cost more, sure they do, do the Performance Center revolvers cost even more than that? Yes. However, I am lucky enough to be able to afford them if I want one and that does factor into my decision.
Hondo 60
Member
For new guns, the Rugers win hands down.
The new Smiths just don't have a quality feel to them.
Now if we're talking 1960's guns, the Smiths are the bomb!
MIM = Metal Injection Molding
The process involves combining fine metal powders with plastic binders which allow the resulting metal powder and plastic mix to be injected as a liquid into a hollow mold using equipment similar to standard plastic injection molding machines.
The new Smiths just don't have a quality feel to them.
Now if we're talking 1960's guns, the Smiths are the bomb!
MIM = Metal Injection Molding
The process involves combining fine metal powders with plastic binders which allow the resulting metal powder and plastic mix to be injected as a liquid into a hollow mold using equipment similar to standard plastic injection molding machines.
Confederate
Member
Side by side, for a .357, the older S&W 686 are an outstanding buy. The workmanship was incredible. If someone was going to just dump me in the wildderness with several thousand rounds of various types of ammo, I'd have to pick a Ruger because they don't break often and when they do, they're easier to repair.
For beauty and for accuracy, the early 686s were made to compete with Colt Pythons. The Pythons were great guns, and beautiful, but their pawls were so tiny that they go in and out of time frequently. S&W 686s fixed all those problems and the early models I think are most likely more accurate than the current models.
For durability, I think the Rugers are best. For price, again the award goes to Ruger. But for accuracy, the Python would win out. Finally, for price, the Ruger would win.
For beauty and for accuracy, the early 686s were made to compete with Colt Pythons. The Pythons were great guns, and beautiful, but their pawls were so tiny that they go in and out of time frequently. S&W 686s fixed all those problems and the early models I think are most likely more accurate than the current models.
For durability, I think the Rugers are best. For price, again the award goes to Ruger. But for accuracy, the Python would win out. Finally, for price, the Ruger would win.
speedway
Member
I love them both.
I have more Smiths than Rugers if that is any indication of which one I would pick.
I have more Smiths than Rugers if that is any indication of which one I would pick.
Deanimator
Member
Ruger.
I own a safe full of pre-lock Smiths.
I've never owned a Smith with the current lock and never will. That means no new Smiths for the foreseeable future. They don't want my money.
I own a safe full of pre-lock Smiths.
I've never owned a Smith with the current lock and never will. That means no new Smiths for the foreseeable future. They don't want my money.
In general, Ruger for new guns. I do like certain older S&W revolvers, and not just the ancient P&R'ed revolvers. S&W went through eras of greatness, one being right before the MIM parts started. MIM itself is OK, but an MIM trigger itself is wide and blocky, and because it is hollow-backed, does not have enough "meat" to allow it to be sculpted to what I like. With the keyhole lock, plus MIM, S&W revolvers went from being works of art to mere tools, like a Dewalt drill or something like that. I like my Dewalt drills, but they are not works of art.
The trigger on Ruger DA revolvers is perfectly shaped for me. The stock SP101 grip is near-perfect for my hands. The pre-Hogue GP100 factory grip IS absolute perfection for my hands. Finding a Ruger with a smooth action does mean some shopping around, at dealers that have enough stock for comparison. It helps that I find SA to be irrelevant in most DA revolvers, so I just shop for DA smoothness.
FWIW, a snapped mainspring, in my personally-owned duty S&W Model 58, is one of several reasons I now rarely carry only one gun, but notably, Rugers use coil springs, which virtually never break. I do still trust an S&W, but not as completely as a Ruger. Anything mechanical CAN fail, but Rugers have that one point where they are less likely to fail than medium- and large-frame S&W revolvers.
The trigger on Ruger DA revolvers is perfectly shaped for me. The stock SP101 grip is near-perfect for my hands. The pre-Hogue GP100 factory grip IS absolute perfection for my hands. Finding a Ruger with a smooth action does mean some shopping around, at dealers that have enough stock for comparison. It helps that I find SA to be irrelevant in most DA revolvers, so I just shop for DA smoothness.
FWIW, a snapped mainspring, in my personally-owned duty S&W Model 58, is one of several reasons I now rarely carry only one gun, but notably, Rugers use coil springs, which virtually never break. I do still trust an S&W, but not as completely as a Ruger. Anything mechanical CAN fail, but Rugers have that one point where they are less likely to fail than medium- and large-frame S&W revolvers.
doc2rn
Member
Old Smiths = New Rugers, but new Smiths = Taurus and thats just sad
LRS_Ranger
Member
I like my Rugers... For the everyday working man, they just seem to have more going for them, ie, cheap, tough as nails, and accurate.
Fishman777
Member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2007
- Messages
- 520
Ruger...
I like Smiths, but I wouldn't buy one as long as Ruger keeps making their DA and SA revolvers.
I like Smiths, but I wouldn't buy one as long as Ruger keeps making their DA and SA revolvers.
kevinkinney
Member
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2010
- Messages
- 11
I'm all in with the new Rugers.
My .45 Redhawk has a really nice trigger, considering who made it. Granted, it's not as smooth as a Smith, but for what I paid, it's worth a bit of tinkering. I bought it as a hand cannon, and I know it will digest anything I feed it without complaint.
My 25 year old Security Six is nicely broken in now too.
My .45 Redhawk has a really nice trigger, considering who made it. Granted, it's not as smooth as a Smith, but for what I paid, it's worth a bit of tinkering. I bought it as a hand cannon, and I know it will digest anything I feed it without complaint.
My 25 year old Security Six is nicely broken in now too.
- Status
