ruger vs s&w
- Thread starter dc0120
- Start date
- Status
TheFrontRange
Member
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2003
- Messages
- 550
I've handled (but never fired) a four-inch Ruger GP-100...the revolver felt as if it had been custom-cast from a single billet of stainless steel (and, heck, maybe it had)! Very, very solid and impressive. Folks I've known who own them have only spoken highly of them. I have a friend who owned an older six-inch Ruger .357 called the Security Six...he let it go in a trade some time back and has often regretted it.
I've owned several S&W .357s, all in the medium K-frame size, specifically Models 19 in blue and its stainless counterpart the Model 66. They're a personal favorite of mine, but I'm biased because a four-inch 19 was my very first handgun and I've recently come back into one as well. Other Smith K-frames in .357 include Models 13 (blue) and 65 (stainless) plus I'm sure some other model numbers I'm leaving out! More recent Smith .357s are on the L-frame, a beefier chassis that retains the well-liked grip frame size of the K-frames. Plus, recent Smith L-frames offer seven shot capacity instead of six.
Summary: I think you'd do pretty darn well with either make...just pick the one that feels the best in YOUR hand!
I've owned several S&W .357s, all in the medium K-frame size, specifically Models 19 in blue and its stainless counterpart the Model 66. They're a personal favorite of mine, but I'm biased because a four-inch 19 was my very first handgun and I've recently come back into one as well. Other Smith K-frames in .357 include Models 13 (blue) and 65 (stainless) plus I'm sure some other model numbers I'm leaving out! More recent Smith .357s are on the L-frame, a beefier chassis that retains the well-liked grip frame size of the K-frames. Plus, recent Smith L-frames offer seven shot capacity instead of six.
Summary: I think you'd do pretty darn well with either make...just pick the one that feels the best in YOUR hand!
Depends, of course
I loved my GP100 for shooting full house .357 loads. The rubber grip seems to soak up the sharpness of recoil. And it is built like a bank vault so I never worry about it shooting loose. I bought it used and the previous owner must have had some trigger work done because it is slick. I liked enough that I gave it to one of my daughters as her first handgun.
If you get a S&W I would go for the more robust L-Frame (all they make now in .357). But one I tried lately had a much heavier and less smooth trigger than my GP100.
If you take the side plate off the S&W and remove the guts from the Ruger I think you will immediately see why the Ruger is so tough. No small, intricate doodads intricately connected.
If you were into gunsmithing it looks like the S&W would lend itself to much more treaking and tuning. Plus, the S&W has a very long history of aftermarket parts and smithing.
Personally, I have decided to buy S&W for .38 such as the Model 10 or 67, and the Ruger GP100 for .357.
But when it comes down to laying my cash on the counter, I would choose which ever one felt the best balanced in my hands, had the best sights, and most importantly, had the best DA trigger pull.
I loved my GP100 for shooting full house .357 loads. The rubber grip seems to soak up the sharpness of recoil. And it is built like a bank vault so I never worry about it shooting loose. I bought it used and the previous owner must have had some trigger work done because it is slick. I liked enough that I gave it to one of my daughters as her first handgun.
If you get a S&W I would go for the more robust L-Frame (all they make now in .357). But one I tried lately had a much heavier and less smooth trigger than my GP100.
If you take the side plate off the S&W and remove the guts from the Ruger I think you will immediately see why the Ruger is so tough. No small, intricate doodads intricately connected.
If you were into gunsmithing it looks like the S&W would lend itself to much more treaking and tuning. Plus, the S&W has a very long history of aftermarket parts and smithing.
Personally, I have decided to buy S&W for .38 such as the Model 10 or 67, and the Ruger GP100 for .357.
But when it comes down to laying my cash on the counter, I would choose which ever one felt the best balanced in my hands, had the best sights, and most importantly, had the best DA trigger pull.
Master Blaster
Member
Have you had the trigger group out of your Ruger??
If so you will discover those very tiny pawl plungers and the tiny spring, much smaller and easier to lose than any part on a S&W. I know I lost it and spent a few minutes looking for it after I reassembled my SP101 and it didnt work!!!
Both are good guns, Ruger stronger depending on the model. S&W more refined and more expensive as well. I prefer my 686, over any Ruger though.
1 LT MPC
Member
Just curious--if you're recoil sensitive, why do you want a .357 magnum? Even though the 357 isn't as bad as a .41 or .44 magnum, they still have a little bite to them if you use the right ammo.
weregunner
Member
Why would somebody want a .357magnum?Because you can use either .38 specials or full power magnum rounds.38s can be mild or a more powerful round can be used.One can tailor the cartridge to his needs.From target wadcutters,+P loads,standard pressure loads,or the heavier magnum rounds one can decide what one needs to get the job at hand done with.For recoil shy people this versatility can be a blessing.
This seems to be an ongoing debate. It's kind of like Ford verses Chevy. Each group swears by their brand. But from my point of view it really depends on what you want to use it for and what feels good in your hands. I have both.
If you like fine lines and such go with the Smith. If it's going to be a gun that goes into the field and worked hard then you can't beat a Ruger. Plus, the Ruger is less than the Smith so you can spend that extra money on ammo or a nice holster.
If you like fine lines and such go with the Smith. If it's going to be a gun that goes into the field and worked hard then you can't beat a Ruger. Plus, the Ruger is less than the Smith so you can spend that extra money on ammo or a nice holster.
I guess i am not super recoil shy just know from experience that I dont like the 44 mag. dont care to much about the lines. Let me give yall and idea of my situation.
I was gonna go with an auto but after talking to my uncle i decided a revolver was better suited. I can only afford one right now and i like the versatility of the 357. My wife and her sister need to be able to handle it safely and easily. I also need one that I could carry concealed, but i dont like the 2 and 3 inch barrels. Kinda looking for an all purpose gun. My first instinct says a gp 100, though i am completely open to other suggestions.
I was gonna go with an auto but after talking to my uncle i decided a revolver was better suited. I can only afford one right now and i like the versatility of the 357. My wife and her sister need to be able to handle it safely and easily. I also need one that I could carry concealed, but i dont like the 2 and 3 inch barrels. Kinda looking for an all purpose gun. My first instinct says a gp 100, though i am completely open to other suggestions.
1 LT MPC
Member
When you think of 4 inch barrel in .357 I can tell you from experience that they are not easy to conceal or carry all day. My Trooper Mark III and Smith model 19 are all steel and fairly heavy. In addition, they have rather long trigger pulls which make them difficult for my wife to shoot. As a compromise, I bought my wife a Ruger SP 101 with a 3 inch barrel. I smoothed out the trigger pull, bought a nice OWB holster and carry the gun on occasion. However, if I'm going to be carring all day, I revert to a .38 snubbie that is alloy and steel. I guess that I'm a comfort creature at heart.
10-Ring
Member
I've fired & enjoyed both...S&W 19, 60,640, 66, 586, 686, 629 & 617....Ruger SP101, GP 100, SRH, RH, SBH. Both make wonderful wheelguns. Personally, I prefer the S&W triggers but both make wheelguns that are a lot of fun to shoot
weregunner
Member
I have to ask the classic question,how tall are you and what is your build across? I won't expect an answer here but it has to be considered. I am short at 5'8".If I tried to carry a 4 in. barreled revolver it would be quite a stretch to do so because of my size.If your at 5'10" or taller you could get away with carrying a 4 in. revolver.The other thing to consider is how to carry the gun.Inside the waist band holster or on the belt?Being short, the revolver would dig into my side and sitting down had the barrel hitting the chair.So the 3inch barreled revolver in the appropriate holster I can get away with.Peruse the catalogs online or the companies can send you a catalog with the discriptions options and prices.There are threads in the archives to search for on this as well.
RON in PA
Member
Since you want to conceal let me suggest that you go for a revolver that you said you didn't want and that's a 3" barrel revolver. That's assuming you want a belt gun, if you want something for the pocket you need to go to a Smith J frame. The 3" revolver is easily concealable, but is large enough to serve well as a range and house gun. In other words it's the do-it-all gun.
Ruger makes a 3" GP100 .357 that is very comfortable to shoot because of the grips and weight and while the trigger pull is not the best, after a lot of shooting and dry firing they smooth-up nicely.
Smith currently makes only one 3" K-frame revolver and that's the model 64 in 38 special. This would be a little lighter and smaller, but still a do-it-all. In the past Smith made other 3" guns such as the model 10 in 38 special and the model 13 and 65 in .357. All these are in the used gun market, but are often hard to come by because the 3" revolver has a strong following.
If you only wanted a range and house gun then I'd advise a 4" revolver and than either the Ruger GP-100 or Smith 686 would do. I'm partial to Smiths, but have a Ruger and it's splitting hairs.
While a .357 revolver is very versatile and is the usual recommendation don't put down the 38 special. Most people wind-up shooting 38s out of their .357s because of the comfort factor. Loaded with the right bullet such as Speer's 135 grain +P or Remington's 158 grain lead hollowpoint semiwadcutter +P the 38 is effective for self defense.
Ruger makes a 3" GP100 .357 that is very comfortable to shoot because of the grips and weight and while the trigger pull is not the best, after a lot of shooting and dry firing they smooth-up nicely.
Smith currently makes only one 3" K-frame revolver and that's the model 64 in 38 special. This would be a little lighter and smaller, but still a do-it-all. In the past Smith made other 3" guns such as the model 10 in 38 special and the model 13 and 65 in .357. All these are in the used gun market, but are often hard to come by because the 3" revolver has a strong following.
If you only wanted a range and house gun then I'd advise a 4" revolver and than either the Ruger GP-100 or Smith 686 would do. I'm partial to Smiths, but have a Ruger and it's splitting hairs.
While a .357 revolver is very versatile and is the usual recommendation don't put down the 38 special. Most people wind-up shooting 38s out of their .357s because of the comfort factor. Loaded with the right bullet such as Speer's 135 grain +P or Remington's 158 grain lead hollowpoint semiwadcutter +P the 38 is effective for self defense.
DWARREN123
Member
The Ruger has a one piece frame and the S&W has a side plate. Not saying this makes a difference but it seems the Ruger is stronger at least that is why I have one S&W and 4 Rugers.
gudel
Member
S&W is far more refined though it costs more. The ruger is a little too crude for my taste.
Smith, advantages: Nicer trigger, and nicer revolvers in general than rugers.
Ruger advantages: Unparalled durability for withstanding a lifetime of hot loads. the "investment casting" allows a design that does not require sideplates, whose screws can back out. Their cylinder has a three point lock up design, you're not going to find a gp out of time.
But if you are really going to conceal a revolver, you might want to reconsider the 3" option, or reconsider an auto (GLOCK is "point and click" also, and your whole family can shoot for example a 17).
That being said, your first instinct is a solid one; the GP100. If you want four inch, adj sights, durable revolver for range and hd, that will outlast you, you can't go wrong with a GP100. I had a SS one configured exactly like this, within a few hundred rounds the trigger was even much more slick. Though I eventually sold it to someone (here on THR in fact) and bought a GLOCK.
Ruger advantages: Unparalled durability for withstanding a lifetime of hot loads. the "investment casting" allows a design that does not require sideplates, whose screws can back out. Their cylinder has a three point lock up design, you're not going to find a gp out of time.
But if you are really going to conceal a revolver, you might want to reconsider the 3" option, or reconsider an auto (GLOCK is "point and click" also, and your whole family can shoot for example a 17).
That being said, your first instinct is a solid one; the GP100. If you want four inch, adj sights, durable revolver for range and hd, that will outlast you, you can't go wrong with a GP100. I had a SS one configured exactly like this, within a few hundred rounds the trigger was even much more slick. Though I eventually sold it to someone (here on THR in fact) and bought a GLOCK.
Quickdraw Limpsalot
Member
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Messages
- 282
I have nothing bad to say about Smith & Wesson... however...
I've never owned one, because I've never had a Ruger fail me. The Rugers are less expensive and I don't have deep pockets, so that's what I started with and that's what I will continue to use. What some folks above like to call "crude" I call sturdy and dependable. That's beauty to me.
I've never owned one, because I've never had a Ruger fail me. The Rugers are less expensive and I don't have deep pockets, so that's what I started with and that's what I will continue to use. What some folks above like to call "crude" I call sturdy and dependable. That's beauty to me.
mtnbkr
Member
You can't go wrong either way. Shop by price and what feels good to you.
Triggers tend to be better out of the box on the Smiths, but I've handled NIB Smiths with bad triggers and NIB Rugers with good triggers (talking DA here, I don't bother much with SA). I own two Rugers (GP100 and Redhawk) and two S&W 38specials (M10 and M37). After several years and several thousand rounds (and lots of dryfiring, new springs, and some polishing work), the GP100 has a much nicer DA trigger than any Smith I've handled. The pull is different, but lighter and smoother. I'm sure a M19 or 686 would end up the same way with the same treatment.
I've not fired a S&W enough to learn it's durability limits, but I've fired at least a couple thousand full power 357mag loads (my fav bullet is the 180gr XTP) and a few thousand more 38specials through my GP100. It's just as tight today as it was when I bought it seven years ago. I only recently bought the Redhawk, but my "standard" for it is a 300gr bullet at 1150fps. I've only fired 100 rounds of that through it and another 100 rounds of standard 240gr ammo.
Chris
Triggers tend to be better out of the box on the Smiths, but I've handled NIB Smiths with bad triggers and NIB Rugers with good triggers (talking DA here, I don't bother much with SA). I own two Rugers (GP100 and Redhawk) and two S&W 38specials (M10 and M37). After several years and several thousand rounds (and lots of dryfiring, new springs, and some polishing work), the GP100 has a much nicer DA trigger than any Smith I've handled. The pull is different, but lighter and smoother. I'm sure a M19 or 686 would end up the same way with the same treatment.
I've not fired a S&W enough to learn it's durability limits, but I've fired at least a couple thousand full power 357mag loads (my fav bullet is the 180gr XTP) and a few thousand more 38specials through my GP100. It's just as tight today as it was when I bought it seven years ago. I only recently bought the Redhawk, but my "standard" for it is a 300gr bullet at 1150fps. I've only fired 100 rounds of that through it and another 100 rounds of standard 240gr ammo.
Chris
Pistol Toter
Member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2005
- Messages
- 657
Hey here is the bottom line. If your a Neanderthal that wants to pour 5 lbs of powder down a 2" barrel, buy a Ruger. They're built like WWII battleships. They shoot great and are accurate. As others have said somethimes the triggers are not quite as good a S&W but like wine they improve with age. I carry a 2 1/4" SP101 loaded with full bore .357's stoked in it and there ain't no doubt it will take it. Like a TIMEX it will take anything I shovel into it and will be ticking when my ticker stops. Generally a S&W, especially older ones, are a finer produced piece of machinery, kinda like older Cadillacs and Pace Arrows. S&W will do a fine job, they're just not bank vaults. I own several times as many S&W's as I do Rugers. So if you are a Cro-Magnon get you a Ruger if you're a conesiuer of fine wine get you a S&W. 
Quickdraw Limpsalot
Member
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Messages
- 282
I guess you can go ahead and chalk me up as a knuckle-dragger then!
ronto
Member
New S&W's have a lock, Rugers don't. One less thing to go wrong, that's one of the reasons I went Ruger. Another reason is some new S&W revolvers have cyclinder binding problems. I didn't want a semiauto because of reliability issues. I sure didn't want a revolver that was going to bind up on me when it was crucial that it go bang.
gudel
Member
so, they say ruger is stronger. has anyone here actually have had their s&w worn out after short amount of rounds?
- Status
