Greg8098
Member
If the price for these were the same NIB, which would you buy and why ?
Ruger GP100 vs. Smith 686
- Thread starter Greg8098
- Start date
- Status
M14/11B
Member
I have a 686, which is a really nice gun, but after shooting my sons Ruger, I think I might sell it an buy a GP100.
buck460XVR
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,099
The Smith. Pretty much a no-brainer. Look at prices of used .357s and see which one holds it's value better. Around here finding a used 686 is tough...
The 686 is designed to handle a steady diet of magnum rounds also......if one needs more speed and energy than you can get from max loadings, one needs a bigger gun. I have over 5000 rounds of magnum ammo shot thru my 10 year old 686 and its still as tight and as accurate as the day it came outta the box...and it's worth more today than what I paid for it.
Don't get me wrong, Ruger makes some fine guns. But to pass up a new Smith for the price of a new Ruger is, IMHO just foolish. Oh, I know.............the dreaded lock on new Smiths.......
LeonCarr
Member
Gp-100
New in box--take the Smith 686
because it holds its value a bit better.
Used-take the GP100-it takes a tank to destroy one and regardless of the past owner's foolishness will continue to give good service.
Summary-I'll take either of them over one of them plastic thingies.
because it holds its value a bit better.
Used-take the GP100-it takes a tank to destroy one and regardless of the past owner's foolishness will continue to give good service.
Summary-I'll take either of them over one of them plastic thingies.
straight-shooter
Member
Accuracy= Smith
Durability= Ruger
I own both and wouldn't hesitate to buy either one again.
Durability= Ruger
I own both and wouldn't hesitate to buy either one again.
SwampWolf
Member
Both are fairly equal in the things that really count:accuracy, workmanship, durability and warranty. On the one thing that doesn't count at all on an objective level, I think the Smith is by far the nicest looking of the two.
easyrider604
Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2008
- Messages
- 735
Ahhh...decisions, decisions! If the Smith were a NIB pre-lock, pre-MIM 686...I'd choose it over a NIB GP100.
Otherwise, my vote will be for the GP100.
I have three S&W L-frames (all pre-models, all bought used) and one Gp100 (bought new). Love them all but that really says where my heart lies.
Otherwise, my vote will be for the GP100.
I have three S&W L-frames (all pre-models, all bought used) and one Gp100 (bought new). Love them all but that really says where my heart lies.
Your poll is fundamentally flawed. If a NIB GP100 cost the same as a 686, then you're paying way, WAY too much for the GP. I'd still take the Ruger, though...
To be more equal the GP would have to come with around 400 rounds of quality .357s.
To be more equal the GP would have to come with around 400 rounds of quality .357s.
easyrider604
Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2008
- Messages
- 735
I think the OP was really asking "if the price was the same, which would we choose to buy".
How about if a NIB 686 was priced as low as a NIB GP100, which would you choose? Perhaps, in this case I'd go for the Smith's looks and finer craftsmanship, lock/MIM parts included.
cslinger
Member
Give me the Ruger. Stronger lockwork, no lock and well known for its durability.
Nothing wrong with Smiths I just don't care for the current ones.
Nothing wrong with Smiths I just don't care for the current ones.
jaydubya
Member
I voted for what I have, a 686+. I have fired Ruger revolvers, and did not care for them. In my eyes, a Ruger is a Hummer, while a Smith is a Beemer. Hey, I like that!
Cordially, Jack
Cordially, Jack
jjohnson
Member
+1 With smee781
He said:
He said:
[/Ruger gets my vote until Smith looses the lock.
QUOTE]
Amen, brother. Yeah, I know, it seems like quite a few others are jumping on that wagon, but Smith gets the Dirty Dastard award for being the first major manufacturerto do
to the guns we like.:banghead:
I'll stick with Ruger. I have a 686 Plus, and love it, all the more now because it is PRE-Hillary HoleSo I am done buying anything new from S&W until they lose the lock
There are quite enough excellent or NIB Smiths around that don't have the lock. And I'm not selling MY used ones. On the other hand, I've had Ruger firearms for nearly 40 years, and no complaints.
I voted Ruger condtitionally. I hate the lock, won't buy one with it. Swapped out the safety on my Remmy 870, lost the ILS MSH from my Springfield Armory 1911 and ordered my M&P .45 without a lock or mag disconnect.
I have heard that soon, S&W will be making the lock an option. Sales would double, lock-free guns would fly off the shelves.
I've owned a Ruger, and now have 2 Smiths. Didn't sell the Ruger 'cause I didn't like it, just fell into a trade deal I couldn't pass up. When it came time to replace it however, the Smiths just seemed more refined and smoother inside and out. Now I've got dad's old 36 snubby and a fine 4" 586, just waiting for the right deal on a nice 29/629 to meet my bigbore wants.
I have heard that soon, S&W will be making the lock an option. Sales would double, lock-free guns would fly off the shelves.
I've owned a Ruger, and now have 2 Smiths. Didn't sell the Ruger 'cause I didn't like it, just fell into a trade deal I couldn't pass up. When it came time to replace it however, the Smiths just seemed more refined and smoother inside and out. Now I've got dad's old 36 snubby and a fine 4" 586, just waiting for the right deal on a nice 29/629 to meet my bigbore wants.
Last edited:
I like the ultra smooth trigger and the resale value on my S&W 686P. The lock doesn't bother me in the least. But I wish I had the Ruger too. Ruger makes great guns...I'm in love with my 4 5/8", .44mag/.44spec, Super Blackhawk. One of the most fun and accurate guns I've ever shot.
Tom
Tom
Greg8098
Member
I was recently becoming interested in smith and wesson revolvers. I had been hearing folks on here talking about how they did not like the locks on the newer smith revolvers. I never understood until recently when I did a little research. I compared a pic of a pre-lock 686 to a version with the lock. The pre-lock version looks pretty nice, the post-lock version.... well for a lack of nicer terms :banghead:!!! I don't see myself ever buying a smith now, ( maybe another .500, because I miss that one ). If Smith really needed to use a lock, why couldn't they implement it into their design like Taurus did? You can barely notice that one. I would have sacrificed a bit of durability for IMO the better looking design, but now that's irrelevant.
:banghead:!!! I don't see myself ever buying a smith now, ( maybe another .500, because I miss that one ). If Smith really needed to use a lock, why couldn't they implement it into their design like Taurus did? You can barely notice that one. I would have sacrificed a bit of durability for IMO the better looking design, but now that's irrelevant.Combatcomm
Member
I was wanting to buy a Smith Wesson 686 6” but I end up buying a used GP 100 off of here after comparing the 2 I think GP 100 was better built and as others ways will take a tank to hurt it. I am now looking at GP 100 in 4:” for the wife. I love the look and feel of the GP 100!
steak-knife
Member
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2007
- Messages
- 153
GP100 All The Way...
My 4" bbl GP100 shoots silly hot and heavy .357 mag loads much better than the S&W 686, which I don't have anymore.
And although the OP stated which one would we choose if they were both the same price, the fact is that you get more bang for your buck on the Ruger than the S&W.
Lastly, whenever you hear about Ruger revolvers, adjectives like strong, robust, and built like a tank frequently come into mind because for the most part it's true.
Not so with the S&Ws, not even with their L frames.
My 4" bbl GP100 shoots silly hot and heavy .357 mag loads much better than the S&W 686, which I don't have anymore.
And although the OP stated which one would we choose if they were both the same price, the fact is that you get more bang for your buck on the Ruger than the S&W.
Lastly, whenever you hear about Ruger revolvers, adjectives like strong, robust, and built like a tank frequently come into mind because for the most part it's true.
Not so with the S&Ws, not even with their L frames.
Steak-knife, I'm not going to debate you point by point, but your statement about the strength of L frames .vs GP is a bit of a stretch.
Keyboard commandos(not saying you're one) can fill a persons head with loads of internet BS. If you like the feel of the GP over the 686 that's cool, I'll not challenge anyone's personal preference. The truth is that yes, the Rugers are built a tad thicker/heavier and if you're loading near max or max loads and for whatever reason enjoy shooting a crap load of them, that should be your choice.
However, if you are an average or even above average shooter you simply cannot wear out a S&W L frame in your lifetime shooting factory loads. Maybe a crane stretch and O.S. cyilnder stop after several thousand rounds, but that's not worn out, just in need of a tune-up.
Smith got a bad rap when the K frames were shot extensively with hot 125gr. loads and cracked the forcing cones. That's why the L frame was made, a stronger mid size .357 magnum that can hold up to a steady diet of full power loads.
I am not a S&W fanboy, I own two Smiths and three Rugers. Problem is that internet buzz and reality are usually very far apart.
Keyboard commandos(not saying you're one) can fill a persons head with loads of internet BS. If you like the feel of the GP over the 686 that's cool, I'll not challenge anyone's personal preference. The truth is that yes, the Rugers are built a tad thicker/heavier and if you're loading near max or max loads and for whatever reason enjoy shooting a crap load of them, that should be your choice.
However, if you are an average or even above average shooter you simply cannot wear out a S&W L frame in your lifetime shooting factory loads. Maybe a crane stretch and O.S. cyilnder stop after several thousand rounds, but that's not worn out, just in need of a tune-up.
Smith got a bad rap when the K frames were shot extensively with hot 125gr. loads and cracked the forcing cones. That's why the L frame was made, a stronger mid size .357 magnum that can hold up to a steady diet of full power loads.
I am not a S&W fanboy, I own two Smiths and three Rugers. Problem is that internet buzz and reality are usually very far apart.
- Status
