S&W vs Ruger Small Frame 357 MAG

[DWARREN123]

Went to the range this morning to see how my S&W model 60-15 compared to my new Ruger SP-101. Both are stainless with a 3" barrel and are 5 shooters. The Ruger has fixed sights and the S&W has adjustable sights, both were purchased new. Tested 2 types of 38spl ammo and 1 type of 357mag ammo.
The ammo tested was Winchester 38spl 130gr Full Metal Jacket (USA38SPVP) and Remington UMC 38spl +P 125gr Semi-JKTD Hollow Point (L38S2B). The 357mag ammo was Remington 125gr JSP.
Both revolvers were set up with original grips, cleaned before firing and fired at 15 yards at a bulleye style target.
This was at an indoor range with fluorescent lighting which I hate and can not see very well in.

Do not have the ability to post pictures at this time.

I checked out both revolver when I purchased them and found that the Ruger had slightly better lock up and no end shake/play, the S&W hammer was tighter in side to side movement. These measurements were done by hand and eye and may be subjective. The S&W has had about 100 rounds put thru it while the Ruger was brand new.
I fired 10 cylinders of each type of 38spl ammo, 3 cylinders of 357mag ammo and was amazed that the only difference was in felt recoil, the S&W being lighter actually felt better with OEM grips.
I was able to keep all 38spl/38spl +P loads in 3 1/2 inches while the 357mag ammo opened up to 4 1/2 inches, I feel this is due to recoil. Basically no difference in group size or form (both were circular) with all ammo.

After firing these groups I changed out grips on both for Hogue Mono-Grips, they looked and felt just alike. I fired 3 cylinders of each type of ammo again and this time I could tell no difference in felt recoil but groups opened up about an inch which I feel was due to being tired and pounded by both guns.

The main difference between these 2 revolvers was I feel in price, the S&W 60-15 cost $620 while the Ruger was $383, prices before any taxes or NICS check.

Both of these guns are good and I think reliable but I am not sure that the S&W is worth almost $240 more. I will be keeping both because I like the size and looks of both. I will also keep the Hogue grips on them both.



I don't think I will be doing this again because it wore me out!

I would like to add something about the triggers, both are good with no stacking but they are slightly on the heavy side. The S&W trigger is a little less heavier than the Ruger but I have to have both in hand to feel it. The Ruger trigger is wider than the S&W so I think they are about even in my opinion.
Also because of the way the Ruger is made it is very easy to diassemble and clean, the S&W is easy to clean also just not as easy.

 

[Jim March]

Just a sidenote but...side-to-side hammer play either at rest or cocked makes...well pretty much no difference as far as accuracy goes. At least not until you get into the reach of big-bux target guns...with these sorts of "street defender class" critters, it's not a worry as long as the hammer stays on the sear when cocked regardless of wiggling.

As to this comparo: very interesting regarding felt recoil being similar. I take it the Remington 125 JSP in 357 was a "full house" load, and felt it? I think that's one of their wilder rounds and Remington does a good job for a large ammo house of not "wimping out on powder charges" except for some specifically-reduced loads. Of which I don't think that is .

It would be interesting to see how velocities compare.

Some data is being published showing that Ruger SP101 and GP100 barrels are shooting faster than some of their S&W equivelents. Some of the newest S&W barrels have however caught up...I don't know where the 60 in 357 fits in with this.

 

[DWARREN123]

The side to side play of the hammer does not worry me so much as it shows the tightness of the specs for machining. Just a aid in telling about quality in my opinion.
I like things right and tight!

 

[roscoe]

How about 180-200 grain loads? I bought the SP101 for its ability to handle the heavier stuff, and sort of thought that the S&W wouldn't really love too much of a heavy diet.

 

[DWARREN123]

I think that anything over 158gr 357mag out of these little guns will hurt. The guns may handle it but don't know if I could.

 

[copaup]

My take on Ruger vs Smith snubbies:

The Ruger is heavier, slightly bigger, and will recoil less and last longer firing magnum loads.

The Smith will have a better trigger (usually), be smaller and lighter, and will be snappy to down right painful firing magnum loads depending on the frame material.

I have both a Ruger Sp101 in 357 and a 638 in 38. The Ruger is a very nicely put together gun, but is just too big to carry in a pocket. The 638 fills that role very nicely indeed. I had one of the scandium Smiths in 357 that was the nastiest gun I ever shot recoil wise.