Ruger GP100 1/2 lug 5" or S&W 69 4.2"

[CraigC]

Craig, I beg to differ. The fact is that the forging process of heating and hammering upsets the grain structure of the metal creating stronger structure. Casting produces linear grain structure which isn’t as strong as forged metal. So....it isn’t S&W marketing. It is metallurgy 101. Blades and machine parts are forged rather than cast not only for strength but to obtain a similar part by casting would require it to be heavier and larger to be as strong. That being said, I see no problem with having a .44 special GP. I have no doubt that it is a fine weapon.
However, being able to use both magnum and specials is a positive to my way of thinking. Of course, one could handload .44 specials to approach magnum levels if you want to push the limits as Keith famously did. It is the prerogative of the buyer to do as he wishes.

The limitation is the forcing cone, not the frame.

I'm sorry but the cast vs forged argument is old and tired. It falls flat on its face with little scrutiny. Fact is that forgings are stronger, in one direction but investment castings are strong in all directions. The bit of added material in the Ruger's frame MORE than makes up for any shortcoming compared to a forging. Furthermore, the Ruger's design is stronger, by far. Bill Ruger set out to deliberately eliminate all the known shortcomings in the S&W and Colt designs when he designed his revolvers. That included eliminating the sideplate, reinforcing the crane and moving the bolt notches. It's worthy of note here that the N-frame is beyond its limit with the .44Mag and quite often shoots loose with only a few thousand full power loads but Ruger .44Mag's have been successfully adapted to the .454 and .480 chamberings with only slight alterations. Yet S&W had to design the massive X-frame to contain +60,000psi.

 

[Rio Laxas]

I love my older S&W's and just got my oldest, a 1935 .44Spl but IMHO, the quality/refinement advantage over Ruger is no longer existent.

2nd Model or 3rd Model?

 

[CraigC]

2nd Model.

 

[If1HitU]

You can't go wrong,whatever you choice is,just my opinion!

 

[DM~]

Fact is that forgings are stronger, in one direction but investment castings are strong in all directions. The bit of added material in the Ruger's frame MORE than makes up for any shortcoming compared to a forging.

EXACTLY what I've been saying forever, Ruger has to add more metal to make up for being cast...

There ya have it, from the expert himself... lol

DM

 

[Rio Laxas]

2nd Model.

Very nice! The 2nd Model is probably my favorite for practical reasons. As you no doubt know, with the collector's premiums attached to 1st and 3rd Models, it is far easier to end up with a very good 2nd Model. I have a 30s 2nd Model with a 5" barrel and the later style flat top groove sight that is a real joy to shoot. I actually prefer the 6.5" barrel on the 44 Hand Ejectors, but the flat top sight confers a real edge for me.

Sorry for the hijack. To answer the OP, my vote goes to the Ruger. I plan on getting one myself. Most of my collection is older Smith & Wessons, but I am not terribly impressed with their modern iterations.

Half lug 5" barrel, gold bead sight, and Roper grips? Sounds about perfect to me. I like cylinder flutes but that is a very minor gripe.

 

[CraigC]

I agree. This one's a 6½" and was fairly affordable. Looking forward to having a .44Spl day at the range, when the weather cooperates.

I usually like flutes but for some reason, it just doesn't look right on a five-shot.

 

[ray15]

EXACTLY what I've been saying forever, Ruger has to add more metal to make up for being cast...

To be fair, if they didn't it might only be as strong as a Smith.

 

[DM~]

To be fair, if they didn't it might only be as strong as a Smith.

Might?? or is it mites?? Isn't that something dogs sometimes get in their ears?? lol

DM

 

[CraigC]

The design is more important than the material used. The crap about forgings versus castings is only used by diehard S&W fans in a vain effort to defend their play-pretties. If the larger N-frame shoots loose with a few thousand factory loads, what do you really expect the smaller L-frame to do? S&W frames are left soft so they can be slapped back into place with a lead babbitt. Rugers rarely encounter these problems. No amount of snarky comments will change that.

I have my play-pretties too (more S&W DA's than Ruger) and I love them but I'm under no illusion that they're as strong as a Ruger. I simply enjoy them for what they are.