Ruger GP-100 or S&W 686
- Thread starter Smithers
- Start date
- Status
jad0110
Member
It's a conspiracy, that was our plan all along
!wizard of oz
Member
ha ha
I had the same dilemna and ended up buying an Nframe S&W 627. 8shot 5inch barrel. Best revolver I can imagine for hunting, range, home defense.
sorry - not much help !
I had the same dilemna and ended up buying an Nframe S&W 627. 8shot 5inch barrel. Best revolver I can imagine for hunting, range, home defense.
sorry - not much help !
10xforever
Member
The 686 is a good choice
I just recently purchased a 686-6 powerport 6" and the gun is very well balanced. The trigger pull is very smooth. I shoot it
mostly in single action mode for target shooting. Mostly use
357 mag cases with 148 grain wadcutter ammo for target use.
The partridge front sight is great for this purpose.
The gun is flawless in quality and comes standard with Hogue
grips from the factory. If you are going to shoot standard 357 ammo the gun is heavy enough to handle this type of ammo as well as target loads.
I just recently purchased a 686-6 powerport 6" and the gun is very well balanced. The trigger pull is very smooth. I shoot it
mostly in single action mode for target shooting. Mostly use
357 mag cases with 148 grain wadcutter ammo for target use.
The partridge front sight is great for this purpose.
The gun is flawless in quality and comes standard with Hogue
grips from the factory. If you are going to shoot standard 357 ammo the gun is heavy enough to handle this type of ammo as well as target loads.
Waywatcher
Member
Everything that 2ndamd said is true. I agree with him fully.
I just shot a 4 shot group (my last 4 rounds today) with my GP100 today at 20 yards, and three of them were touching, and the fourth "widened" the group out to One inch.
It's a great gun.
P.S. I traded a S&W 686 for it, and it was a great decision.
I just shot a 4 shot group (my last 4 rounds today) with my GP100 today at 20 yards, and three of them were touching, and the fourth "widened" the group out to One inch.
It's a great gun.
P.S. I traded a S&W 686 for it, and it was a great decision.
AStone
Member
The current vote count
SW 686: 11
Ruger GP-100: 7
Sitting on the fence: 5
SW 686: 11
Ruger GP-100: 7
Sitting on the fence: 5
DWARREN123
Member
I like Ruger's so my choice would be the Ruger. I like the solid frame and mine have as good a trigger as S&W's.
Stainz
Member
I like partial lugs, so the current fare in either the 686 or GP100 guise fails for me. I do like the 66's replacement - the 620. It literally is a 7-shot 686+ frame with a partially lugged barrel installed. They fit okay - I don't like the Hogue grips - and balance nicely - great 'pointers'. My only 686+ is the 5" 'Stocking Dealer Exclusive', SKU #164284, from '04. When I bought it new, it was priced $30 less than an in-stock 4" 686+. Although they were once in Ruger's catalogs, I have never seen a partial lug GP100.
As my experience with new Rugers has always given me an opportunity to use my tools, you'd think I'd prefer them. Well, sometimes it is nice to take a revolver from a new box and just shoot it, so I buy a lot more new S&W's these days. Both have great service - and make worthy products. You can't go wrong, but give the 620 a look - if you like the partial lug look. As to new price differences, consider the gunsmithing costs to 'improve' a Ruger trigger, too.
Stainz
As my experience with new Rugers has always given me an opportunity to use my tools, you'd think I'd prefer them. Well, sometimes it is nice to take a revolver from a new box and just shoot it, so I buy a lot more new S&W's these days. Both have great service - and make worthy products. You can't go wrong, but give the 620 a look - if you like the partial lug look. As to new price differences, consider the gunsmithing costs to 'improve' a Ruger trigger, too.
Stainz
fallingblock
Member
Both my GP-100's worked out of the box -and have kept on working.
Neither of the two latest S&W's I owned did so.
The GP-100 is a superior design in that it incorporates a solid frame rather than a sideplate.
As someone mentioned above, the Ruger does not rely on the ejector rod for locking - it has a dedicated lock for the crane.
The grip design of the Ruger is far superior to the S&W in that it surrounds the frame with shock absorbing material.
The S&W relies on what is essentially a century old design while the GP 100 is a fine modern revolver.
Neither of the two latest S&W's I owned did so.
The GP-100 is a superior design in that it incorporates a solid frame rather than a sideplate.
As someone mentioned above, the Ruger does not rely on the ejector rod for locking - it has a dedicated lock for the crane.
The grip design of the Ruger is far superior to the S&W in that it surrounds the frame with shock absorbing material.
The S&W relies on what is essentially a century old design while the GP 100 is a fine modern revolver.
Marshall
Member
Range, HD, poke around outdoors, S&W.
Hunting, Ruger.
Hunting, Ruger.
AStone
Member
I'm curious, Marshall, why that particular division between roles for your Ruger and Smith?
Not being critical or questioning judgment at all, but just curious.
Nem
Not being critical or questioning judgment at all, but just curious.
Nem
md7
Member
after reading about both here on THR, i decided that both were close in quality. the smith having the better trigger and great customer service, the ruger being more solidly made, but both outstanding in their own right. so only after handling both did i decide to go with the ruger. i liked the weight and the feel of the ruger better than the smith. so i am going this saturday to pick up a 4" GP100 in .357. So for me, GP100 fits.
Marshall
Member
Range, HD, poke around outdoors, S&W.
Hunting, Ruger.
Hi Nem, sorry it took me a while to get back.
To me a S&W is a lighter and more refined gun, one I would use for the uses I described because.
The Ruger is a tank. I have no concerns about shooting whatever ammo I choose, or how many rounds of heavy stuff I put through them. Hunting ammo falls more along those lines than range ammo.
Thanks.
Hunting, Ruger.
Hi Nem, sorry it took me a while to get back.
To me a S&W is a lighter and more refined gun, one I would use for the uses I described because.
The Ruger is a tank. I have no concerns about shooting whatever ammo I choose, or how many rounds of heavy stuff I put through them. Hunting ammo falls more along those lines than range ammo.
Thanks.
AStone
Member
Marshall, thanks for the clarification. (No problem about "delay"; we're all busy here. )
I like to press one point a bit more. You wrote:
)
I'm prepared to be wrong on this.
But my sense, from all the reading I've done on these two specific guns during the last year and a half (and that's a BUNCH of reading, both on THR and off), is that the SW is at least as capable of handling hot rounds as the Ruger. Forged v. cast and all that.
I'm NOT arguing that either is "superior" in some sense to the other. I have no clear evidence that's the case. It seems to me that "better" is more a matter of subjectivity, not objectivity, specifically how the gun fits and feels. I've not read any horror stories about consistent failures. Sure, a problem here, a problem there, but no consistent and repeating problems that are common to one or the other.
The only issue that bothers me a little bit is the timing issue that's been mentioned at least once in this thread, and particularly the assertion (IIRC) that it is more common in 7-shot 686+ than either the 6-shot or the Ruger. That issue is high on my list to research more.
Comments welcome and appreciated; links to more in depth information even more so.
Thanks,
Nem
)I like to press one point a bit more. You wrote:
Hmmm. I'm certainly no expert with either of these guns. (Or with ANY gun for that matter; I'm still a student with all of them.
) I'm prepared to be wrong on this.
But my sense, from all the reading I've done on these two specific guns during the last year and a half (and that's a BUNCH of reading, both on THR and off), is that the SW is at least as capable of handling hot rounds as the Ruger. Forged v. cast and all that.
I'm NOT arguing that either is "superior" in some sense to the other. I have no clear evidence that's the case. It seems to me that "better" is more a matter of subjectivity, not objectivity, specifically how the gun fits and feels. I've not read any horror stories about consistent failures. Sure, a problem here, a problem there, but no consistent and repeating problems that are common to one or the other.
The only issue that bothers me a little bit is the timing issue that's been mentioned at least once in this thread, and particularly the assertion (IIRC) that it is more common in 7-shot 686+ than either the 6-shot or the Ruger. That issue is high on my list to research more.
Comments welcome and appreciated; links to more in depth information even more so.
Thanks,
Nem
jad0110
Member
The timing issues were more common in early 7 shot 686s. I believe S&W corrected the problem later, but I could be wrong.
Seven For Sure
Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2006
- Messages
- 437
Get the 686P. It's stronger than the 686 (turn notch is the thin spot on 6 shot's) and has an extra round. It now comes in 2.5, 3, 4, 6 and 8.5 barrels. It's the 357 all other's are judged by. I have two (3 and 6) and I love the triggers and accuracy.
Gator
Member
You are correct Sir! The 686s are built on the L-frame, which was designed to take the "Ruger like" abuse that the smaller K frame could not handle. I doubt you could wear out either a 686 or a GP 100. Personally though, I'd pick the S&W, but only if it was a -4 or earlier one.
The frame of the L frame Smith may be able to handle the heavy loads, but the lockwork is still a weak link. With heavy loads, you run into timing issues, and now with the weak two-piece barrels, weak MIM parts, and weak link lock, the Smith wouldn't make it on my list.
As a range deal, sure it's a nice gun, but there's too many strikes against it for me to trust a Smith with heavy loads or in a situation where anything or anybody might want to kill me or eat me.
As a range deal, sure it's a nice gun, but there's too many strikes against it for me to trust a Smith with heavy loads or in a situation where anything or anybody might want to kill me or eat me.
Kimber1911_06238
Member
GP 100
Marshall
Member
Nem, thanks for your patients and understanding.
When I say built like a tank, I don't mean the 686 S&W's frame is weak to the point it's a danger or a problem even. I am speaking of other operational aspects of the gun, as others have pointed out.
However, I will point out that this is less of a concern to me with the L Frame 686 & 357 ammo than it is with the K Frames or, N Frames in .44 Mag and .45 Colt, for example. Whe you get into the heavy +P loads, many ammo manufactures have recommendations and restrictions to brands of guns able to shoot these loads without concern.
They are as follows for Buffalo Bores 44 Mag.
[ Ruger Red Hawk, Ruger Super Red Hawk, Ruger Super Blackhawk or Vaquero, Freedom Arms Model 83, Taurus Raging Bull and Dan Wesson Revolvers]
Buffalo Bores .45 Colt +P.
[Blackhawk, Super Blackhawk, all pre-2005 Vaquero, Bisley, Redhawk]
Corbon's .45 Colt +P
[Ruger, Freedom Arms, Colt Anaconda, and Thompson-Center Contender will handle this load with authority.]
Doubletap's 45 Colt +P
[all large frame Ruger revolvers, TC Contender, Colt Anaconda, and Freedom Arms firearms.]
Keep in mind, I have more Smith's than Rugers. I just try to keep mega loads to a minimum in my Smiths. They're too nice of a gun of screw up.
greener
Member
One of the better (or worse if you were going by a gun shop on your way to the range today) set of opinion posts I've read in a while. I can't say much about the 686 quality, but I do have an S&W .38 Police special that's approaching 80. The nickel is getting a bit ratty but it still shoots, and well, every time I fire it. Don't know if they still make them like that, but it is a darned fine revolver. I thought about giving my son his granddad's service revolver, but my wife explained that that would be my executrix's decision. She sorta likes it.
Just bought a GP100 after shooting one my son had. Shot well out of the box and better with a bit of twiddling with the sights. Zero complaints about the trigger in either DA or SA. I figure in 2087 someone is going to be looking at replacing the grips.
I shoot either revolver better than I shoot my M&P9. You've got me wondering what the local gun pusher will allow on trade for a 686.
Just bought a GP100 after shooting one my son had. Shot well out of the box and better with a bit of twiddling with the sights. Zero complaints about the trigger in either DA or SA. I figure in 2087 someone is going to be looking at replacing the grips.
I shoot either revolver better than I shoot my M&P9. You've got me wondering what the local gun pusher will allow on trade for a 686.
- Status
