S&W 686 or Ruger GP100 for First Revolver?

[DaBruins]

I've decided it's time to purchase my very first wheel gun, and based on my research I've narrowed my selection to either the 686 or the GP100. I intend to use it primarily for shooting 38's as a range gun (not a carry weapon) or possibly for home defense with the 357 mag. Unfortunately, I don't have the luxury of trying them out side-by-side beforehand, so I thought I'd toss it out there for some input from the more experienced shooters. My lgs has the GP100 available in 3", 4", and 6" (I'm leaning toward the 4"), but the 686's are still hard to come by in this neck of the woods (even though the S&W factory is only a 20 minute drive from my house!). I realize the 686's are a bit more expensive than the Rugers, but I don't mind spending the extra $$ if it's a better value. Thanks in advance for your help!

 

[Stress_Test]

A 6 inch stainless GP100 was my first centerfire gun, and I have no regrets at all about buying it. It soaks up the magnum loads easily and I can shoot 100 of them at a range session without discomfort.

Some people say the S&W has the better trigger, but keep the GP lubed and shoot it a lot, and once it wears in a little, the trigger should be really sweet (mine is, anyway!)

One downside to the GP is that I've heard people say there are few grip options available for it. I've kept the factory rubber grip on mine, so I can't say firsthand.

 

[Taurus 617 CCW]

Although the 686 is a fine weapon and I love Smiths, I would have to recommend the GP-100. Fantastic gun for the price.

 

[CDR_Glock]

I have a Ruger GP100. They're built like a tank. I have replaced the wood/rubber grip with a Hogue Tamer. I had trigger work done on it to reduce the trigger weight to 9 lbs. It is a solid six shooter.

I wanted a 686 but I like the 627 and 586 more. Smiths are excellent revolvers. They're well built but the biggest gripe are the built in locks. I never had an issue with mine but it does raise some concern.

For the money, it's hard to Beat a Ruger.

 

[bannockburn]

At one time I had three .357 revolvers: a S&W Model 686, Ruger GP-100, and a Colt MK.V. Due to financial considerations (college funds), I could keep one of them and would have to sell the other two. The Model 686 felt the best in my hand along with having great balance to it, had an outstanding fit and finish, and came with the smoothest out-of-the-box DA/SA trigger. The GP-100 by contrast never felt as good in my hand or as well balanced as the Model 686. Fit and finish were decent but nothing close to the overall quality of the S&W. Also the trigger pull was the least refined of the three guns. The Colt MK.V was very comparable to the S&W, along with having the best factory grips. But it had a 6" barrel while the other two were both 4" models which I thought was a more versatile and handier length. So I ended up keeping the Model 686 and sold the other two and have always felt very good about my decision.

 

[MagnumDweeb]

If you want a fine handling revolver with a great trigger get the 686. You want a tank that will milk the velocity limits to nth degree get a GP100. Most recent 686 owners I know that have chronoed their guns are not happy with the velocity results coming out of their guns. One time we put my Ruger GP100 6" up against my buddies recent production 686 6" and my Ruger GP100 was getting between 75 to 100 fps more in velocity depending on the load. It was mix of offerings from Aguila, Winchester, and my favorite Remington 125 grain SJHP.

My GP100 with the Rem SJHP broke over 1500 fps, the 686 barely broke 1400 fps. The Aguila 158 grain SJHP in my GP100 broke just over 1400 fps, the 686 got in just under 1300 fps.

I don't my own chrono so I have no idea if it was working right but it was enough to get me off of .357 smiths.

If you are going to get into .357, why wouldn't you want the highest velocity possible?

 

[critter]

The good thing is that you can't go wrong with either. Personal choice.

 

[jmr40]

I rarely sit on the fence. I usually have some strong opinions, but not on this one. I have a very slight preference for the Smith, but for the price difference you cannot go wrong with the Ruger.

Go into some gunshops, comapre the 2 in your hands. One or the other will eventually say "buy me".

One time we put my Ruger GP100 6" up against my buddies recent production 686 6" and my Ruger GP100 was getting between 75 to 100 fps more in velocity depending on the load.

I have no doubts as to your experience, but try the same test with 2 different revolvers and the results could just as easily be reversed. There is often that much difference between different guns

 

[Thursday45]

I have both and you couldn't go wrong with either. I like my 686 a little more than my GP100 though. If your looking for a range gun in 357 you've made an excellent choice with whatever you choose but let's be real here, you're going to end up with both You're only decision is which one to get first.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Both are great. I prefer the Smith myself. It's just a bit nicer looking to me.

That being said, my first revolver was a Ruger SP101. It's a keeper for sure.

 

[coolluke01]

I have a GP100 that I really like. I wanted a Smith, but for the price I couldn't turn down the Ruger. I did a trigger job and replaced the springs and it shoots like a dream.
I will no doubt buy a smith someday for steel action shooting, but this Ruger works great for me now.

 

[RugRev]

Like both equally. Both have been tuned and the triggers in pull weight are within 0.25 lb of each other in DA and SA. The Smith has a smaller hammer arc so feels different in pull than the Ruger. There are plenty of grip options for the GP100 including Eagle, Herretts, Hogue, Nille-Griffe, Badger to name a few in a number of different styles. The 686 can be had in 7 shot configuration, the GP100 is only 6 shot unless you go with a .327 Federal 7 shot GP100. The 686 is in Mountain Gun configuration which makes it attractive in that the 4" gun weighs 35.5 oz per S&W which is about what a K frame 66 4" would weigh with an extra shot in the cylinder on the 686. If I could find one
a 3" GP100 with adjustable sights would be nice but they are rare.

Weight wise a 6 shot 686 and GP100 weigh pretty much the same with a 7 shot 686 being a couple of ounces lighter. If one was going to shoot primarily .38's and you can find them I would consider the earlier models of each manufacturer: 19/66s for S&W and Ruger Security/Service/Speed Sixes as a 4" model will weigh about 5 oz. less. There are sites such as Gun Broker and Guns America with a number of examples up for bidding.

 

[L-Frame]

I have both currently and have had many of each in every barrel length available. They are both wonderful revolvers. The old mantra that 686's are more refined and smoother and the Rugers are stronger and more durable are technically true but do a disservice to both guns in my opinion.

The 686's are VERY strong guns, just not quite as strong as the GP-100. And the GP-100 is a VERY well made gun. As mentioned earlier, it will get max velocity out of a round and is one of the most accurate .357's out there, period (they both are).

I have a 4" 686-5 with a S&W action job and a front night sight which I love and 2 GP-100's, both in 3 inch, one with a front night sight and the other with front/rear Novak night sights (it's the Wiley Clapp version and Robar in Phoenix found the sights to fit) that I love also. No one can tell me that either brand is better than the other without talking strictly about personal taste.

I will say this, and it also comes down to personal taste. The 3 inch GP's have had the old style compact rubber/wood insert grips on them because I couldn't stand the new Hogue grips. It changes the gun completely and to the better for me. Others might disagree.

 

[roaddog28]

I have a question. Are you going to buy new or used? Both of these revolvers are good choices. You indicated that this is your first revolver. You might consider a S&W model 19 or 66. In Ruger a Security Six. Both are better handling than a 686 or GP100. I have owned two S&W 686s and two GP100s. I decided to sell them and stay will with my S&W 19 and Ruger Service Six. For shooting mostly 38s with a occasional 357 magnum both of these revolvers to me are better choices.

Good luck with your decision.
Howard

 

[Mr.357Sig]

They're both equally good. It comes down to personal preference.

But I swear, if I see one more guy tell me that Ruger GP wheelguns are "built like tanks", somebody's gonna get hurt. So, Ruger GPs are built by the lowest bidder? That's not good.

 

[musicman10_1]

I was faced with this dilemma once and I chose the Ruger. No regrets but I don't really think that there is wrong decision to be made on this matter.

 

[DaBruins]

I have a question. Are you going to buy new or used?

It will be a new gun. Due to the recent panic buying, especially here in CT, the used firearm inventory was decimated, as it was for new guns also. Surprisingly, my lgs has an ample supply of Rugers, but only one Smith, a 686 "snubie", and they cannot predict when their next shipment of Smith's will arrive or what models they will receive. If I decide on the GP100, I can take delivery almost immediately, but there's no telling when a 686 will become available.

 

[bikemutt]

My wife likes her GP100s, I like my 686/586s, we trade at the range from time to time and, while we both enjoy the "other guns", it's always nice to come home to the one's we like most. I would be happy with either revolver, the value proposition of the GP100 is quite compelling.

I should mention all my Smiths are pre-lock no-dash guns so I can't really comment on their current offerings, although I'm sure they're fine.

 

[TwoEyedJack]

Another vote for the S&W 66. Mine has the best single action trigger ever put in a handgun. Just don't shoot a steady diet of hot 125 gr. loads. Mine has shot *thousands* of warm 158 gr. and is as tight as the day it left the factory.

 

[bigride]

Whichever is the best deal. Can't really go wrong with either. Both of them will shoot better than you and last longer too. Just a word of caution...one .357 is never enough.

 

[anothernewb]

IMO - I'll jump on with the others who say either is great. In my neck of the woods - it comes down to which ever you can find first!

 

[HankR]

Barrel Length

I would pick the Ruger, but (as almost everybody else said) you can't go far wrong with either.

You mentioned leaning towards the 4". Note that the 3" Ruger probably does not have adjustable sights. If you're going to shoot a mix of .38 and .357, and not carry concealed, you probably want the adjustable sights (come on the 4 and 6 inch Ruger).

If you absolutely will never carry concealed, or have to chuck it in your glove box or console you might want to think about the 6 inch. 4 inch is a real good compromise, and much easier to sit down with if it's worn on the belt. 6 inch may be required for hunting in some states. Shooting .38s out of a 6 inch 686 or GP 100 kicks about like a .22, making it a good second gun to hand new shooters (after they shoot the .22). The 686+ comes with a 7 round cylinder, so you could have "hi cap" bragging rights when CT copies NY bans next year...

"If I could only have one" it would be the 4 inch Ruger. If I could have two it would be the 2" SP 101 and either a 4 or 6 inch (probably Ruger)..

 

[SabbathWolf]

Get the GP-100 and spend the rest on ammo.

 

[2zulu1]

I prefer the Smith ergonomics and trigger, but I've been training with Smiths for decades. I like 7 shots, made possible by Smith's forging process. I can get three and a half feet of soft tissue penetration with heavy, handloded hardcast bullets out of a 686P, how is a "built like a tank" GP100 going to improve that?

 

[SabbathWolf]

I prefer the Smith ergonomics and trigger, but I've been training with Smiths for decades. I like 7 shots, made possible by Smith's forging process. I can get three and a half feet of soft tissue penetration with heavy, handloded hardcast bullets out of a 686P, how is a "built like a tank" GP100 going to improve that?

The GP will stand up to high pressure loads for a lot longer with less trouble.
I agree with you that Smith has the better "out of the box" trigger.

But I like the GP's double latching cylinder crane a whole lot better than depending on latching the only the end of the ejector rod.
I like the GP's cylinder release button a lot better too.