S&W Combat Masterpiece v. Ruger Security-Six

[Confederate]

Has anyone had the chance to do some side-by-side comparisons between S&W's new .357 Combat Masterpiece and a Ruger Security-Six of the same barrel length? Not trigger pull, but overall accuracy, balance and recoil. When the 686 was introduced, it killed just about every other .357 and ran neck-to-neck with Colt's Python. It did exceptionally well with lighter bullets, like the 110- and 125-grain jacketed hollowpoints and softpoints. The Rugers, on the other hand, have always been better with heavier bullets.

Now that S&W has reintroduced its Combat Masterpiece 66, I couldn't help but wonder how it stacked up with the old Security-Six and the newer Ruger whatever. Ruger always follows S&W for some reason, and when Smith came out with its 686, Ruger followed with its GP-100 boat anchor. Then S&W discontinued its outstanding 66. Now they're bringing it back and Ruger has decided to bring out a somewhat lighter version called the Match Champion, of which I've seen very little.

So if anyone has been able to compare any of these old and new revolvers, it would be great hearing about it.






The S&W 686 is a beautiful, accurate .357, but if I'm going to carry a .357 In the
great outdoors, I'd go with the S&W 66 or the Ruger Security-Six.

.

 

[sgt127]

I'm a huge S&W fan. And likely, the new 66 may be a tad more accurate that the Security Six due to the new two piece barrel.

But, I would rather have an old Security Six than a current Smith.

When they added the (thing that shall not be spoken of) they changed the shape of the frame around the hammer. It's utterly trivial but for me, just not as attractive.

I never really gave the Ruger Six series the credit they deserved. Always thought of the as the kinda "second tier" guns. I was wrong. They were dang fine guns and I've tried to rectify past mistakes and now own a Service Six and a Speed Six.

In true head to head competition. I'm not sure one would really outshoot the other.

 

[Confederate]

Yes, the Speed-Six is an incredible gun that ought to be put back into production. Six powerful rounds in such a compact package makes it a great hiking and trail gun. Now your only choice is an SP-101 or a GP-100. In my opinion, S&W couldn't make enough 2.75-inch 66s now to meet the demand if they were in production. I've never seen one on a dealer's shelf at a good price. When I bought my first 629, I had to be on a list for months. Then, when it came in, I had to wait a week to pick it up. Not because of a waiting period, but because the dealer wanted me to leave it on display so people could see it. Getting a 66 with a barrel under six inches was out of the question. I saw a 66 6-incher once, but it had a barrel/cylinder gap of .012 and it was in time, but when cocked it was loose. Besides, with stainless Security-Sixes on the shelves, why buy a shoddy S&W? (The dealer offered to send it back to S&W if I bought it, but I thought the Rugers were better guns. If it had been a 4-inch with recessed chambers and a stamped sideplate, I would have bought it and let him send it back.)



The new Combat Masterpiece would be a tempting purchase, but I've yet to talk to anyone who has one and has shot it enough to give me a report. I figure Deaf Smith will get one before me, but I don't think he had one yet.

 

[9mmepiphany]

Just for the sake of accuracy's:

The Combat Masterpiece usually refers to the S&W M-15; in stainless the M-67
The Combat Magnum usually referred to the M-19; in stainless the M-66

I've owned and shot both the Security-Six and the M-66, back in the day when we all carried revolvers.

Of the two, the Ruger was generally more rugged and less prone to locking up when used "hard". The Ruger I preferred was the Speed-Six, because I liked the rounded butt...the taper of the Security-Six barrel just never looked right to me; but my favorite was a Security-Six fitted with a 4" electroless nickeled Python barrel. I was lucky that a local smith could actually tune a Ruger trigger.

The new M-66 is very nice. The MIM parts allow them to come out of the box with a pretty nice trigger. The two-piece barrel really adds to the accuracy...I guess being 4.25" long doesn't hurt either

 

[Confederate]

Thanks for the correction.

I wonder why Ruger didn't just round all their butts. They could still use square butts but would be able to have the option of having round butts for those who wanted them.



So...can you notice the increased accuracy of the Combat Magnum over the older guns? With my Security-Six 4-inch, I can do pretty well at a hundred yards shooting those orange clay pigeons. Would I notice a significant improvement shooting with lighter bullets, do you think?

 

[bannockburn]

Confederate

I wonder why Ruger didn't just round all their butts. They could still use square butts but would be able to have the option of having round butts for those who wanted them.

I always wondered that myself as I never really cared all that much for the shape of the square butt configuration and always replaced the factory stocks with Pachmayrs. The round butt Speed Six was just about perfect in terms of it's shape and dimensions.

And I totally agree: the Speed Six really should be put back into production, along with the Security Six and the Service Six.

 

[CajunBass]

Bill Ruger said once in an interview that they lost money on ever Speed/Security-six they sold. I have no idea if that's literally true (probably not) but it gives an indication of why they aren't made anymore.

I'm a Smith & Wesson guy, but I've owned several of the "Six" series Rugers. They're good guns. I prefer a "K-frame" Smith myself, but for no "mine is better than yours" reason.

I've never owned one of the "new" 66's. I do own one of it's cousins the Model 69. That is an outstanding revolver. I don't shoot a lot of heavy loads in it, as a matter of fact I don't shoot ANY heavy loads in it. But with 44 Special and light 44 Magnum loads it's a winner.

Which is best? I don't know of any objective way to say. In the end, at least for me, it comes down to which I like best and that's the Smith & Wesson's. Someone else will say they like Rugers better.

We're both right.

 

[calaverasslim]

Truth be told, I just can't get used to the round butt. I sold a S&W M21 because of it. AND, 44 special is my favorite cal.

 

[Hangingrock]

The early Ruger Security-Six frame where the web of the hand between the thumb and index finger contacted the frame shoulder, was lower than it should have been and was elevated on the later examples due to customer complaints. I had one of the early models and noted the problem and went back to the S&W K Frame M15/M67 - M19/M66 revolvers.

I've briefly owned GP100 and Redhawk revolvers but they were never keepers.

The odd think is I really like the RAP9 firing it extensively and have a RAP45 on layaway.

 

[Confederate]

Well, didn't Pachmayr or some other third party grip manufacturer make a square version you could have put on the Model 21? It would be such a simple solution (as I showed in the photos above). If you don't like them, simply swap them for the type you like. Ruger, to save $$$, now just puts a stump on their revolver frames and you're limited to whatever anyone can fit on them -- and you can't find smaller size grips because of the design limitations.

They also call their new guns "medium-sized" -- well, of course they're medium sized .357s; they eliminated the real medium sized .357s and now the klunker large sized magnums are ipso facto medium sized! If clothes designers begin making larger pockets, they can be called "pocket guns."

 

[Confederate]

The early Ruger Security-Six frame where the web of the hand between the thumb and index finger contacted the frame shoulder, was lower than it should have been and was elevated on the later examples due to customer complaints. I had one of the early models and noted the problem and went back to the S&W K Frame M15/M67 - M19/M66 revolvers.

Yes, the first ones were bears about that. But didn't Pachmayr fix that to a large extent with its third party grips?



Ruger's horrible grips were noted in a 1979 magazine.

I think Bill Ruger wanted a single action revolver that would shoot double action. Everyone else wanted a double action gun that would shoot double action.

 

[CajunBass]

Ruger's horrible grips were noted in a 1979 magazine.

The joke used to be that when Ruger went into business he bought one tree to use for making grips. He was still using it.

Man, those were awful grips (To be fair, the same could be said for Smith & Wesson and Colt pretty much). A T-grip helped, but the best solution (for me) was a set of Pachmayr Grippers.

These days we all swoon over the "original" grips, but back then, we tossed them and the box, before we got the gun out of the shop.

 

[bannockburn]

CajunBass

I never threw anything the box or the grips away but the first thing I did was put a set of Pachmayr presentation grips on my Security Six. Only factory grips that felt "just right" for me on a DA revolver were those that came on the Colt Trooper Mk. V.

 

[raven2]

The joke used to be that when Ruger went into business he bought one tree to use for making grips. He was still using it.

Lol, ain't that the truth


Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk

 

[CajunBass]

I never threw anything the box or the grips away but the first thing I did was put a set of Pachmayr presentation grips on my Security Six.

I never did myself, right away, but I watched a lot of people do it. I remember a box of take off grips behind the counter at Ali-Babba's. I think they wanted $5.00 for a set of S&W Magna's and $10.00 for a set of targets. There was another box full of holsters. $10-25.

I'd like to have one of those boxes of S&W stocks, now.

No, I carried that stuff home, stacked it on top of my glass front gun cabinet (remember those?) where they'd gather dust for a couple of years until I got tired of looking at them and then threw them away.

A few I traded in when I traded guns (I did that back then, before I knew better). Then the dealer took the gun out of the box, put it in the case, and threw the box in the trash. Who wanted an old cardboard box and instruction book?

Just to keep this on topic, back then I was buying a fair number of Ruger revolvers. I remember three or four of those red/yellow Ruger boxes on top of the cabinet at one time.

 

[Confederate]

I've never been overly fond of the Colt Python grips. They're narrow at the top where the hand is larger and larger at the bottom where the hand is smaller. The company should have made it smaller at the bottom and larger at the top. That's one of my gripes with single action pistols. But at least cowboy pistols aren't shot double action. Pythons are beautiful, but I liked the grips on the Mark V much better.

 

[Archie]

Hard choice.

Unless something has changed, the Ruger (Double action) "Six" series are no longer being made. On the other hand, modern S&W revolvers are cheap copies of S&W revolvers.

Back in the day when Ruger made the Security Six and S&W made real S&W revolvers, I shot both. I liked, and still like, both. I thought the Ruger was a better revolver on a cost comparison basis but I liked the Smith revolvers better, but not by much. And doing a trigger cleanup on a Ruger revolver was not a secret arcane process.

Today, of course, there seem to be few competent gunsmiths who can do much anything with a double action revolver. There are some, yes; but mostly semi-automatic pistols are in vogue and everybody and everybody's dog work on self-shuckers.

Of the two revolvers you pose, I'd rather have a Security Six. They were tough and dependable and mine shot well enough for me to be top shooter for several years in my area.

 

[roaddog28]

I have owned both the Combat Masterpiece pre-15 and the Security Six 2.75 and a Police Service Six 4 inch. I like them both but the edge goes to the Combat Masterpiece for the 38 special round. Probably the better comparison would be the S&W Combat Magnum model 19 versus the Ruger Security Six. I have owned three Model 19s and one Model 66. I would give the edge to the Security Six. They will hold up better shooting full power 357 magnums.
Howard

 

[Confederate]

Although I'm quite understanding of your sentiments, I'm reminded of the Greek orator's remark to the Roman announcer in I CLAUDIUS. When told by the announcer that the theater was not what it was, the old Greek replied, "I'll tell you something else, it never was what it was!"

As someone who lived in the good old days of Smith & Wesson, I remember the complaints about shoddy quality control and I myself sent my share of S&Ws back to the factory because of loose lockworks, excessive b/c gaps and other various problems. That was during Smith's time that it was owned by Bangor Punta. Those great, glorious guns were often berated as junk at the time. Many were impossible to get and when you could get them they were way over the retail price. I recall articles being written reminding people who shelled out $680 or more for a $425 S&W revolver not to expect seven hundred dollar quality for a four hundred and fifty dollar gun. The factory could not control the prices its guns went for in the open market, we were told; and a four hundred and fifty dollar pistol (as determined by the factory) could not be expected to live up to the outrageous premiums people often had to pay. It was still a four hundred and fifty dollar pistol no matter how much one had to pay.

The only Rugers I ever had to send back were two FBI Academy commemorative stainless 6-inch Security-Sixes I'd bought at a very attractive price. When I got them, they had fine layers of rust in the insides. I sent them to Ruger and got them back like new. It was the deal of a century.



This is a first generation S&W 686 with wood grips, chrome-plated hammer and
trigger and stamped sideplate.




I waited months to get my hands on this thing. Never got a chance to shoot it, though. Showed it
off a lot.


[



Got two of these Rugers at warehouse prices. The GA-36s are great outdoor guns.


.

 

[roaddog28]

My response Confederate is about the topic only. I have a S&W revolver that was shipped in 1922. A M&P 1905 4th change 38 special. There is not a revolver I have owned that has a better action. I have owned S&W revolvers made in the Bangor Punta era. Some were good and some not so good. I currently own a 686-6 4 inch with mim parts and the internal lock. This revolver fit, finish, accurately and action is better than most of the revolvers I have ever owned including Ruger. Here is my point. I prefer like others the original combat masterpiece over the Ruger Security Six. I feel the action is better and the combat masterpiece was the standard for shooting the 38 special. Equal to a Colt Police positive or a Colt Official police. These revolvers were the best. I love Ruger Security Six. The Security Six came out to address the issues Smith & Wesson K frame magnum was having with light weight full power 357 magnum loads. Because of the success of the Security Six, Smith & Wesson was forced to introduce the L frame revolver. Bill Ruger decided that the company could not afford to make the Six series anymore do to cost. So, in comes the GP100 which in my opinion is a inferior product to the Security Six.
So I am basing my response to shooting the 38 special round. That is why I chose the model 14 combat masterpiece.
Howard