Ruger GP-100 or S&W 686

[Smithers]

So if you had a choice and price isn't an issue, would you pick the Ruger GP-100 or the S&W 686? And why?

I want to use this revolver as a range gun, and outdoors use. And possibly for HD.

Comments, pictures and discussions are welcome.

 

[g5reality]

S&W 686 4". S&W best customer service & warranty. I've seen people who have shot out older models and had them replaced with brand new models FOC. Lifetime waranty, S&W reputation will win over Ruger. I do like Ruger ranch rifles the Mini 14 & 30.

I researched the exact same thing 6 months ago and got the 686 4". I shot both at my local range and liked the S&W better. I shot better with it and if felt better in my hand.

 

[tbtrout]

I was going for the GP100 when I came across a deal on a 686 no dash. For $250 it was hard to say no on the 686. I have read mixed reviews about the new model smiths and I have no expierience with them. But the old 686 has the best trigger pull of any revolver I have fired. And is very accurate. I am pleased with it.

 

[Edmond]

Never shot the Ruger before but I've yet to shoot a revolver smoother than my twenty something year old 686.

 

[461]

I had the choice and could afford either gun. I chose the Ruger and I'm still happy with the choice. The Ruger is more accurate than I am and is plenty smooth and I know it will be around for my grand kids to shoot with heavy loads.

Customer service at Ruger takes a back seat to nobody, every dealing with them over the last 15 years has shown me they are wonderful in every respect.

 

[jad0110]

You have narrowed it down to 2 fine revolvers to choose from. You really can't go wrong with either, so do as I and others have done. Spend some time at the gunshop and at the range, if possible, with both of 'em and pick the one that feels and works best for you. I started out more interested in the Ruger, but the 686+ just balanced and felt better in my hands. You'll here from some snobs that push one over the other pretty hard (none yet in here, of course). Stuff like "The Ruger trigger pull is complete junk" or "the S&W will fall apart after 100 rounds but the Ruger will eat sticks of dynamite." As I said, both are fine guns and you would be well served by either, the most important thing for you is which "fits" you best.

As for barrel length in a do everything gun, I personally think 4" is the best all-arounder. I know S&W made the 686 in a 5" barrel length (partial underlug) for a brief time. I recall Ruger may have done something similar with their GP? Given their rarity, I think it would be cool to own something like that, if you can fine one.

Don't rule out a used Ruger Security Six either, nor a S&W N Frame. If you come upon a nice used example, at least consider it.

Good luck!

 

[Oktagon]

Get a pre-lock Smith. Generally S&W are better made then Rugers and sell at a different price point when new. I looked at many Ruger revolvers, and it always irritates me how rough the internal surfaces are. Ruger makes great rifles and some of the best S/S shotguns in the world (Gold Label). Why their revolvers are made in the "working man" mentality is beyond me.

 

[wooderson]

New, I like the Ruger 4". They're pretty even in all areas, in my experience, and I prefer the look and grip of the GP-100.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I like the older S&W M686 over the Ruger GP100. I have a S&W M619 and IMO it’s a nicer revolver than the GP100.

Like said above, why doesn't Ruger make a more finished product? They have such a good following you would think they would want to keep it. I'm guessing the current Ruger fans were won over with the Security/Speed/Service Six models since they were excellent guns.

 

[Sunray]

My GP is the only revolver I've ever had that didn't require a change of grips to fit my hand. The fit is the only thing that matters. All new firearms need a trigger job due to frivolous liability law suits. Had a Smith 19 with an excellet trigger job that never did fit right. I forget how many different grips I tried. Even grips I customized. None of 'em beat the GP factory grips.
"...a more finished product?..." Eh? More finished in what way?

 

[Blue .45]

Generally S&W are better made then Rugers and sell at a different price point when new.

Ruger uses a method of investment casting, IIRC, which allows them to sell their guns for less. If I were to buy a new revolver, I would get a GP100. I had a S&W M19-4 which had a very nice trigger after a trip to the gunsmith. I bought my first GP new about ten years ago. It had a good trigger right out of the box. I later bought a used stainless one which had a somewhat heavier trigger. I really don't care for the newer Smith revolvers too much. I like the way the GP points for me and the interchangeable sights are a plus too. As far as durability, they both will last longer than you will.

 

[3 gun]

I've had both. Both were great, just the GP was a 9 and the Smith a 9.5. I kept the S&W mainly because of the better trigger. That might have changed if I liked to push the limits reloading. The GP has the rep of being a great test platform for the reloader.

 

[AStone]

You'll hear from some snobs that push one over the other pretty hard (none yet in here, of course).

Contrary to assertions by my friend Jad, I'm a SW 686 "snob in here".

(In addition to the fact that we both own a 686+, we also both own a 642.)

I looked at both Ruger GP-100's and SW-686's.

I bought SW-686(+) because it just felt better to me.

YMMV.

I agree with Jad: "You have narrowed it down to 2 fine revolvers..."

Handle both many times before buying.

Purchase the one that "feels" right to you, even before shooting.

Comments, pictures and discussions are welcome.

Attached is a (hand held digital) image of my new (NIB)
SW 686+ purchased yesterday (Saturday) for a mere $522.50.

I've spent the evening with it: first cleaned it (after dinner);
then rammed it into the new crossdraw holster (about 77 times);
and dry fired it (DA and SA) about 93 times.

Based on that experience, before I've even fired it,
I can unequivocally say that this revolver is
in the top five finest guns I've ever owned.
(Now ranked with a Rem 870P, Marlin 336A, Marlin 39A, SW 642).

Bigga bada boom.

Good luck with your decision.

Nem

 

[ranger53]

Since this is an opinion, I would say a GP 100 hands down!
tommy

 

[treebeard]

I have had both, and currently own a 686 4" and a 686 6". I did not like the trigger on the GP100 at all. In fact, I hated it. The trigger on my 686 4" is pure smoothness so the 686 wins hand down.

 

[jad0110]

Contrary to assertions by my friend Jad, I'm a SW 686 "snob in here".

No, my original assertion was correct - you are no S&W snob my friend, just a man with his preferences, who respects those of his peers.

Congrats on the 686, I know you've been aching for a nice 357 for a while! I'm very happy for you. You are going to love it ... be warned though, it won't be long before you want more .

And $522 for a NIB 686+ is excellent. Not much more than the cheapest NIB GP100s in my area ($459). In any event, the price difference between the 2 in my area was about $50 - $90, depending on 686 or 686+. Not really enough to justify one over the other, IMO.

BTW, the GP100s I have seen were finished quite nicely. A few more tool marks perhaps, but that kind of think generally doesn't bother me.

Here's a pic of my 686+:

 

[Bob79]

Because with my 686's I get 7-shots instead of 6.

S&W trigger is better.

The 686 balances better.

S&W lifetime service.

These are all my opinions, but I do own three 686's, with a 4th on the way!

 

[TN Trapper]

I have two 686's, a 4" and a 6" Hunter model. I HAD a GP100 but sold it about a year ago. You will never wear a Ruger out but there's no finesse there. A S&W is silky smooth and just has a better balance. The GP felt like holding a handgun replica molded from concrete.

 

[AStone]

Congrats on the 686, I know you've been aching for a nice 357 for a while! I'm very happy for you. You are going to love it ... be warned though, it won't be long before you want more.

Thanks, Jad.

It's funny, I went through my first bout of .357 mag fever about a year to a year and a half ago when I looked at GP-100's, SP-101's and 686's.

I felt then that the SP's weren't right for me, but couldn't decided between GP & 686.

Then, I convinced myself that one of those wasn't the right handgun for me. I went 9mm instead.

While I loved the 9, such a sweet little pistol, when I bought and shot the 642, I just admitted I'm a wheel guy since I was liking the Smith 642 so much. (I'm actually about to part with the 9. Parting is such sweet sorrow. )

Since I already had the 642, and liked it so much, when I got ready to get a big brother for it, it just had to be a 686. I did continue to handle GP's, but my Smith appreciation bias had kicked in by that time.

And, truth be told, when I closed my eyes and just held each in turn, the 686 just felt better. That's why I advise people to handle both as much as possible, for as long as you need to before buying, then go with the one that feels better. They're both fine revolvers.

I think this 686+ 4" is going to be it for me for a long while. (Finances are a large part of that prediction, and relates to why I'm parting with the 9.) If I add another later , I'll probably add a 6" specifically for hunting. (This 4" is a dual purpose camp/outdoor gun: SD that can double as a hunting weapon in a pinch.)

Anyway, back on topic ... I spent most of last evening dry firing Mr. 686. Smooth, smooth, smooth. The trigger break is absolutely predictable. As I squeeze the trigger, I can feel it stage through those two audible "clicks" (associated with cylinder advance) on the way to hammer drop. It feels so good, and is so balanced.

And the SA is almost inconceivable. I don't have to move my trigger finger to fire it; all I have to do is think about moving my finger. Gonna be very, very careful with SA.

The grips are on the upper edge of "acceptable" for my size hand (I have relatively small hands), but it still feels OK + 1. I'm not stretching my grip. It feels like I can handle it fine. I'll know once I shoot a couple of boxes of rnds, some .38's and some power loads, and I know I can install a different set of thinner grips if these turn out too large.

I'm hope to take it to the range Wednesday (though it's a busy week coming, so ...). Once I do, I'll post a report back here.

Nem

 

[vero1]

I couldn't decide so I ended up with one of each. I do like the trigger pull on the 686 better but the GP triger can be made pretty dang nice with a little polishing work. I also think you will wear out a couple 686's before you wear out a GP.

 

[doc2rn]

Built like a tank take the Ruger. Packin all day 686. Both are excellent choices.

 

[jad0110]

I couldn't decide so I ended up with one of each.

Smithers, listen up. Vero1 here knows his stuff . I liked the 3" GP100 best, the 4" felt too barrel heavy to me for my tastes. I know I wouldn't like the 6".

I also think you will wear out a couple 686's before you wear out a GP.

I dunno, that L Frame 686 will last a pretty long time. I think you'd have to really abuse the crap out of either of 'em to wear them out in your lifetime. Heck, a S&W K Frame will last a lifetime if you shoot 38s and nothing lighter than 158 grain Magnums.

I'm actually about to part with the 9. Parting is such sweet sorrow.

Nem,

I certainly hope you don't regret your sale, but you gotta do what you gotta do. I liked my Taurus 66, but sold it to buy the 686. But since the 686 is a better gun for me in every way, I don't miss the Taurus.

I think this 686+ 4" is going to be it for me for a long while.

Yeah, sucks, don't it? I'd like to add a 2.75" Ruger Security/Service/Speed Six and a 1911 to my collection, but that just aint gonna happen right now. :banghead:

 

[Confederate]

For a range and home defense gun, I'd love to have a Smith & Wesson N-frame. The GP-100 also is a nice gun if you can get it with a tapered barrel and not a full lug. Also, I don't know whether a GP trigger can be made as slick as that of the Security-Six, but if it can, dry firing alone can make it like ice.

Barring an N-frame, I'd be tempted to buy used, but I'd look for a primo quality 686 no dash or a stainless Security-Six. Many people love the 2.75-inch barrel, but the 6-inch is a favorite among outdoorsmen who have to carry it. A number of years ago a beautiful blonde bagged a rapist using a 6-inch SS and made the cover of a national magazine. The guy swore like a sailor as he came at her with a knife but underwent the most miraculous of changes when she produced the Ruger. He then started telling her his hard luck story, but she added insult to the whole thing by making him call the police. Inside the mag was a bunch of photos of her with the gun. It was a nice choice then and still is.

Naturally a heavy .357 has less felt recoil, but the 686 and GP 6-inchers are just too heavy.

In stainless or blue, the Ruger Security-Six is a
great value, providing it has a good pair of grips
to go with it.

 

[Smithers]

Those are some beautiful revolvers.

By chance, I stopped by the range yesterday and I tried out the 686, and the GP-100. Both are fantastic guns, and I enjoyed shooting them.

But I liked the feel of the 686. The trigger was better, and while the GP-100 had the least recoil, the 686 was a tad more fun to shoot.

Thanks for your responses, and as soon as I get a 686, I'll post some pictures.

Now I just gotta find one without that lock...

 

[2ndamd]

I have owned 586, 686 (twice), 686 plus, Colt King Cobras (2 of them) and then the greatest of all DA .357s appeared. The Ruger GP100. Superior design.

The Front sight is the easiest to swap in the industry. I do not know why more handguns do not incorporate this design.

The grips are the easiest to changee but why change perfection? They are functional and look cool. Best of both worlds.

The Ruger does not have its locking lug notches cut directly over the cylinder hole like the Smith. They are off center of the hole.

The ejector rod on the GP100 is not used as a locking point on the mechanism. Hence, it can be and is lowered. This means more metal in and around the forcing cone area. This is easy to see when you compare a security six and a GP100 next to each other.

The Ruger is SSSSOOOOO easy to take down to work on if (EVER) needed. The smith has a side plate and many parts that are not easy to access IMO. The Rugers trigger group drops from the bottom of the frame.

Another added strength. Because the trigger drops from the bottom then the frame is all one peice. Unlike the smith, Taurus and Colts which all lend themselves to weakness.

Now for personal experience. The Smiths 686 plus went out of timing fastest. That 7th shot comes at a price......maintenance. The 586 I did not own long enough. The Smith 686 6 shots, went out of timing around 13,000 rounds (full power .357 magnums). The Colt King Cobras went out of timing around 15,000 rounds. All timing issues were not bad. Maybe 1-2 cylinders were off or would not lock-up upon a pull of the trigger (unless slapped at). Again not a big deal to have timing go out. Send it off to gunsmith or S&W and they rebuild it for you.

BUT............................The Rugers have yet to go out of timing. This allows me more money to spend on ammo. Now I am a shooter, not an accumalator or collectore.....a shooter. This means I spend more on ammo than any gun in about 3 months of owning said gun. I like to shoot. Most gun owners do not spend money like I do on ammo and some would never even consider getting to 13-15,000 rounds of .357 magnum ammo through one gun in their lives. It takes me about 3 years to put 15,000 rounds through one gun.

Those guns are now ALL exclusively Ruger DA .357 magnums. Simply the best imo.

S&W 686 is a good gun for many but, it will not hang in there with the Ruger when the round count gets into the 5 digits.