S&W 686 versus Ruger GP100

Status
Not open for further replies.
My enjoyment of Rugers mirrors my enjoyment of Glocks -- they are ugly, and they function perfectly. My Smith collection is beautiful...but most of them have choked at some point and required trips back to the factory.
 
I wouldn't go so far as to compare a Ruger GP100 to a Glock. The GP100 is a fine looking revolver.

I improved the cosmetics of my GP100 by having it bead blasted and the trigger, hammer, and hammer pivot pin polished to a bright shine.

I own a 686 and a GP100. The action of the 686 is better, but the Ruger is by no means bad. I have after market Wolff springs in my GP100 and after many rounds fired the action has smoothed up nicely.

Either will serve you well or you could do what many of us do and buy both ;)

attachment.php
 
Last edited:
686

100_0174.jpg
but I do expect to get a GP100 someday.:p
On second thought, I probably won't. After looking at some GP100's and Security Six's on Gunbroker, IMO they are as ugly as a bar-rag Betty at closing time, and after owning Smiths, I just can't see myself doing it.
 
On second thought, I probably won't. After looking at some GP100's and Security Six's on Gunbroker, IMO they are as ugly as a bar-rag Betty at closing time, and after owning Smiths, I just can't see myself doing it.
Click to expand...

Owning and enjoying both, I agree with your assessment but not your direction. Rugers are superior to Smiths (in my book) in two important ways: ability to field strip down to the last component without tools -- which you cannot do with a Smith -- and ability to shoot very heavy loads. I've seen one Smith model 19 and one 686 actually break when shooting Buffalo Bore ammo. Not so with the Ruger.

When shooting standard ammunition, I enjoy my Smiths better for light use.

Rich
 
Owning and enjoying both, I agree with your assessment but not your direction. Rugers are superior to Smiths (in my book) in two important ways: ability to field strip down to the last component without tools -- which you cannot do with a Smith -- and ability to shoot very heavy loads.
Click to expand...

Other then take off the grips, I've never "field stripped to the last component" my 686, nor felt any reason to. Trigger has always been silky-smooth and I clean it after every range trip. As far as ability to shoot heavy loads, I wasn't aware of ANY 357mag loads that would be too much for my 686, but able to in Rugers. I DID know of some issues with k-frames like the model 19 having rare issues with, but that's why they made the L-frames. You'll have to fill me in as to what loads you are referring to so my feeble 686 stays clear of them.:scrutiny:
 
First I'll say that I've never owned a Smith.
I have shot a Model 66 and 25 enough to get a good feel for the guns.

I do own a 6" GP-100 and a 7.5" SRH (480 Ruger) which has the exact same trigger.

I have the GP-100 because I got it from a friend for $300 with only 24 rounds fired.

If I could choose a 686 or GP-100 then I'd get the 686.
The 686 has better fit and finish and the triggers on Smiths are generaly a lot better than Rugers.

If I had to buy one then I'd get the GP-100.
I've fallen in love with mine. With Wolff springs and some polishing the triggers can be lighter and smoother than a Smith, but the trigger travel will always be longer. I just can't bring myself to pay that much for a S&W when a nice Ruger is 95% of the quality at 70% of the price.

Unless you shoot at a competative level you probably won't notice any accuracy differences.
 
As far as I am concerned, S&W hasn't made a proper revolver since sometime in the early part of this century.

They have been making a whole passel of 1911s, plastic fantastics, ARs, and as a hobby-like sideline, a few ugly gun locks that happen to sometimes fire common revolver cartridges.:evil:

I think "Bar Rag Betty" is the one with the open sore in her cheek that won't heal no matter how many people bag on her to do something about it.;)
 
It's an easy Choice!

S&W has an IL and the Ruger doesn’t. Are you using for self-defense or just punching holes in paper? Self defense get the Ruger punching holes in paper both are equal but the Ruger will probably last longer. Yes, I did have an IL self engage when the little spring holding down the flag broke.
 
what would be a fair price to pay for a 686M-1 with rubber monogrips? I have no idea and have heard the price can range all over the place. The gun is use but in very good condition
thanks
 
358-1,

Let me be the first to welcome you to THR.
(Funny that so many posted ignoring that was your first post.)

I'm a Smith guy, so take this with a grain of salt.

I prefer Smiths.
I like the way they feel and shoot.

My two revolvers now are a 642 & a 65.
Just sold a 686, not because it wasn't a great gun
(finest handgun I've ever handled) but because it didn't suit my needs.

Having said that,
there is no answer to your X v Y question.

Get the one that feels right to you.

Nem
 
ability to field strip down to the last component without tools
Click to expand...
You'll still need a screwdriver (or maybe a cartridge rim) to remove the grips, and a disassembly pin, punch, or similar tool to retain the mainspring when stripping the Ruger *. You also have to remove the trigger group sub-assembly in order to remove the crane & cylinder for cleaning on the Ruger. With a S&W you only need to remove one screw to seperate the crane & cylinder assembly from the frame.

Both designs have their merits, but neither is a no tools complete field strip.

* http://www.ruger.com/Firearms/PDF/InstructionManuals/14.pdf - see p.18
 
S&W 686 vs. Ruger

I have a Smith 686 no dash with a 6 inch barrel. I own several guns and the trigger on this beauty is the finest I have ever pulled on any handgun. The single action is sweet as candy and as accurate as I can be. Adjustable sights are the way to go. I hear good things about the Ruger as well. My brother-in-law has one. Both are good in my opinion. Sorry I guess I am no help. The Smith is a much sexier gun.
 

Attachments

  • Picture 012.jpg
    Picture 012.jpg
    278.6 KB · Views: 8
  • Picture 008.jpg
    Picture 008.jpg
    266.9 KB · Views: 10
You'll still need a screwdriver (or maybe a cartridge rim) to remove the grips, and a disassembly pin, punch, or similar tool to retain the mainspring when stripping the Ruger *.
Click to expand...
As you pointed out, the grip screw in the original Ruger factory grips can be removed with various commonly available items such as various coins, a .38/.357 cartridge rim, etc. And the pin required to retain the mainspring is included in a compartment in the original Ruger factory grips.

The ones that come with the Hogue grips may be different.

On page 18 of the manual look in step 1 where it cautions the user "not to lose the disassembly pin, which may fall free when the grips are removed."
http://www.ruger.com/products/_manuals/gp100.pdf
 
Last edited:
With Wolff springs and some polishing the triggers can be lighter and smoother than a Smith
Click to expand...

Uh, a bone-stock Smith without any rounds through it...

I picked up a pre-lock 686 for $350 recently, which did make the decision pretty easy.:D
 
Since Taurus was mentioned, I'd also put the Rossi R97206 .357 Mag 6" in contention. I've the 4" model and except for being two inches shorter than the Smith, it is identical to my 686. I actually shoot better with it and I would recommend giving a R97206 a tryout.
 
As others have said, you won't make a mistake whichever way you go. But I much prefer the trigger pull on Smith & Wesson revolvers and that goes a long way for me.
 
Because it needs to be due to its cast metal construction. If they made it as slim as a S&W, it would break with the first cylinder.......
Click to expand...
Have you compared the dimensions and weights of the two guns?

The GP100's reputation for strength compared to the S&W 686 doesn't come from being larger or heavier because it's not.
 
The GP100 is the same weight because it has less weight in the grip frame and more in the cylinder frame. I'm not saying what's good or bad.

It is obvious that there's more steel around the cylinder, when you look at the picture in post #27.
 
Guys, you do realize this thread is nearly three years old, right?


I think 358minus1 has probably made his choice by now, or his interests have moved onto something else.



Just saying . . .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
S&W 686 or Ruger GP100 for First Revolver?
2
Replies
28
Views
3K
CPLofMARINES
CPLofMARINES
303 hunter
  • Locked
New GP100!
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
OrangePwrx9
O
D
  • Locked
Ruger GP100 vs S&W 686
Replies
10
Views
3K
twoblink
T
C
  • Locked
S&w 686
Replies
23
Views
1K
madcratebuilder
M
357smallbore
  • Locked
Original GP100 and 686 (no dash)
Replies
20
Views
865
Obturation
Obturation
Back
Top