Who Makes The Best Revolvers (SA & DA)?

[marineman]

The two best revolvers are the SW Model 21 and the Colt Python.

 

[lonegunman]

Ruger is a great choice for uninformed shooters. "Thicker" metal is meaningless. The correct type of metal is important, S&W pointed out years ago when it came out with "L" framed revolvers that using cheaper metal and more of it is not actually a plus.


I happen to think a pinned bbl S&W of any type is the best revolver made, period. Lately S&W has gone cheap with trigger locks and cheal two piece barrels, Ruger uses all cast and MIM parts and has a terrible trigger on nearly everything they make, Colt is just living off it's name and waiting to die. Uberti makes a better copy than Colt makes a gun.

S&W had a transfer bar safety in the 1950's, so carrying on a loaded round is not a problem and until the 1980's they had a stellar trigger. I shot a revolver competition with my Dad's pre-27, .357 magnum in April. The gun is 54 years old, never been apart and trigger still makes weight, accuracy is flawless and for more that FIVE decades is has gone bang everytime.

 

[Hawk]

The two best revolvers are the SW Model 21 and the Colt Python.

Python is no longer made.
OP is "who makes..."

I'd like to nominate another for ineligibility:
Dan Wesson.

Based on my attempts to purchase a new one several weeks ago, these appear to not only be limited but essentially vaporware.

 

[VE2RF]

Dan B. Wesson of Monson MA

 

[Fiveshooter]

Okay... I will play too....

I am more of a single action fan than a double action fan. My vote goes to Freedom Arms. I own several and have plenty of Colts, Rugers and Smiths to compare them to. The Freedom Arms revolvers are expensive and I would not buy them If I did not feel they are worth it. The single action Rugers represent a great value for the money but they are nowhere near the best.
As far as double action goes I guess I am not qualified to judge. I will say that although the Rugers are not as smooth out of the box as the Smiths are they can be tuned and seem to hold up to steady diets of heavy loads just fine. The question is obviously opinion based and of course you will get several opinions. If more posters to the thread owned a Freedom Arms, I think it would get more votes. I am curious as to how many that voted a Korth as the finest actually own one or have even shot one. I know they are expensive but are they worth it? I am curious as to how many are sold at all.

 

[dogngun]

Smith & Wesson, although I really prefer the ones they made before 1980.
My favorite Smith was made around 1937, a DA .45 ACP N Frame revolver.

mark

 

[teknoid]

Ruger is a great choice for uninformed shooters. "Thicker" metal is meaningless. The correct type of metal is important, S&W pointed out years ago when it came out with "L" framed revolvers that using cheaper metal and more of it is not actually a plus.

The question, again, was MAKES. There is only one answer from the choices provided. As for being uninformed, I'd think 40 years of shooting has informed me pretty darned well. I've got a S&W model 65, and a Ruger SP101 at the moment. I carry the Ruger. 'Nuff said. Nothing wrong with the Smith, but I like the Ruger better. IMHO S&W is now just plain over priced, and I don't buy guns with locks. I'll probably buy another S&W, but it will be an older gun. The GP100 comes first, though.

 

[Fishman777]

Rugers are great for uninformed shooters?

I hate to deviate from the "High Road", but I'm going to do it for a moment.

If you are so well-informed, educate me. What grade of Stainless Steel does Smith and Wesson use in their guns, and what grade does Ruger use? What data do you have to support your position? Don't give me garbage about how everyone knows that casting is inferior to forging. I've heard qualified people argue that the opposite is actually true in some cases. Everyone raves about Freedom Arms. Guess what? To my knowledge, Freedom Arms doesn't forge any of their revolver parts, I do however, know that they use casting.

Oops. I guess Freedom Arms sucks now. Right? Not on your life. The only top end handgun that I'd ever consider worth buying would be a .357 magnum Freedom Arms revolver.

As far as I can tell, you are basing your position on the infamous hamburger ad.

I think everyone on this website has seen that cute little Smith and Wesson Hamburger ad. Why do you suppose Smith and Wesson came up with an ad like that in the first place? Think strategically. Smith and Wesson responded with that ad because they viewed Ruger as a legitimate threat. Why? It is because the perception was and still is that Ruger's solid, investment cast frames were stronger than Smith and Wesson's forged frames. I thought it interesting that Smith and Wesson mentioned how *serious* hand gunners know better than to be fooled by thick investment cast frames. Not exactly the most technical argument in the world, but it was an effective ad. I find it even more interesting that you basically parroted the message of the ad, just now.

Have you ever seen any Smith and Wesson-only loads in a loading manual? I haven't, but I've seen plenty of Ruger-only loads listed. This partly has to do with Ruger's longer cylinder lengths, but it also has to do with overall strength of the revolver as well. If you go over to the Smith and Wesson forum, and do a search for timing issues, you'll find quite a few references to different Smith and Wesson products requiring timing adjustments over time. I've never heard of a Ruger GP100, sp101, RedHawk or a Super Redhawk ever with a timing issue. Isn't that interesting. I guess all of us stupid Ruger owners are just lucky, or maybe we are too stupid to notice that our guns are shaving lead. We also don't have problems with ejector rods unscrewing or bending, either. We can also easily disassemble our guns, because of their modular design. As I see it, the only downside of Ruger products is the rough finish, heavy springs, and trigger mechanisms that are sometimes a little rough. They usually are not very refined out of the box. I can fix these "Ruger" problems, easily enough. I can't, however, make a Smith capable of handling the abuse that I routinely heap on any of my Ruger revolvers.

I have no problem with a person liking Smith and Wesson, Dan Wesson, or Colt products. Heck, I like them all. I wouldn't mind owning an eight-shot .357 magnum. I do have a problem when people go around implying that other people are ignorant because they don't agree with them. If you have solid data to support your argument, then educate me. I have no problem with being wrong.

 

[Hawk]

Dan B. Wesson of Monson MA

Nope. Inapplicable.

Does not make revolvers - made (past tense) revolvers.
Not since 1992 AFAICT.

There's some measure of doubt that the Norwich NY Dan Wesson makes revolvers. I couldn't buy one for whatever that's worth.

 

[wheelgunslinger]

It's true. I'd vote for DW, seeing as I own one and it's one of the best revolvers I've ever owned or shot.
But, their purchase by CZ and the consequent resurrection seems to have made DW a 1911 brand and no longer in the revolver bidness. Which is a real shame.
And, CZ did make DW revolvers for a while, but now they just can't be had.

Though, you can still buy NIB CZ/Dan Wessons on Gunbroker and as new old stock in gun stores.

my vote? I don't care for any of the new ones. Literally, there's not one single new revolver I want to buy bad enough to plunk down my cash.

 

[Catherine]

I never had to 'tune' or do a trigger job or anything else to my firearms bought NIB-right out of the box. I had help adjusting the sites since I was a 'Newbie' in learning/buying my own firearms. I was buying my own firearms for the first time circa 1998-2001.

Ruger and Smith and Wesson were my choices.
S&W= my D/A Revolvers
Ruger= my S/A Revovers
(Glock and some S&W models for semi automatic pistols.)

I did not own/buy one but Dan Wesson had some pretty good firearms. I learned on a 357Magnum and that was my home self defense gun of my late husband's. Smooth action, well balanced and nice gun. Pretty too!

Freedom Arms makes a GREAT gun too. I don't own one but my groom/husband has had two of them. He sold one and kept the other one. I have shot many of his firearms... revolvers and lever action rifles MORE often than the other ones.

He has some custom made revolvers and other custom things done on some other firearms too.

The only thing that I would put on my Ruger S/A guns IF and when I ever needed it would be a Belt Mountain Pin. I think that is what it is called. He has an extra one IF and when I could ever need it. So far... NO need.

If I wanted to change the grips... I would do that too. I have not done that yet but I did see some cute ones that I liked in 'looks'. So far... I like what I have in form, function and beauty.

There is a gun on here that a man posted that I absolutely adore in looks. USFA one? A couple of people own them here. Woo hoo!

I understand a bit about the metal deal but I am NO expert. My late husband could explain all of those things better. He made prototypes of ALL kinds of things in his life. He understood engineering, building anything (Metal objects, stick built houses, etc.) from a to z, actually could DO IT not just 'talk it' and he knew math the old fashioned way too! He knew metric measures too. Brilliant man, used common sense with his brains too.

Catherine

 

[BlindJustice]

When Smith & Wesson went from the long DA trigger action to the
shorter DA action Post-WWII the N, K, & J-frame all got the
safety transfer bar. Ruger didn't change until about 1970-.

I don't know about best, but I'll stick with my S&Ws.

625 in .45 ACP/AUto Rim - Ruger doesn't make an equal
617 10 shot cylinder - not a Ruger out there that can touch i
Model 60 J-frame 3" .357 Mag adj. sights.
686P 7 shooter Better balance in 4" Bbl than a GP100

NUH YHAAAAAH

R-

 

[BHPshooter]

I never did like the firing pin on the hammer of the Smith & Wesson revolvers. To safely carry it holstered you still, to this day, have to load 5 rounds with the hammer resting on an empty chamber.

I don't know where you got that idea. S&W got a hammer block right after WWII, in late '45 or early '46. I have an early post-war M&P with the hammer block.

Anyway, I voted S&W.

Wes

 

[tuckerdog1]

Drawing on limited personal experience, I'd have to say Freedom Arms for the SA. The sweetest DA I've ever shot was a friend's Python. I know, no longer being made. Close behind that would be a couple older S&W model 29s I used to own. These were pinned & recessed, and I don't know how the newer ones might compare today. But if the new ones are as good, I'd have to give the DA nod to S&W.

No pics of the S&Ws but here is an old FA 353.

Tuckerdog1

 

[lee n. field]

I never did like the firing pin on the hammer of the Smith & Wesson revolvers. To safely carry it holstered you still, to this day, have to load 5 rounds with the hammer resting on an empty chamber.

Uhhh.... no. There the little thing called a hammer block.

My old Taurus 66, made the way you like, ate firing pin springs if you weren't careful dry firing. I much prefer the firing pin on the hammer.

 

[ds/ks]

I own 7 Ruger firearms and happy with all of them, including GP100,SP101, and SBH. I believe Ruger makes the best revolvers for the money. For the money is the key. All my Rugers have sub-par triggers, but I know if I can muster the strength to make that hammer fall, it WILL GO BANG>

 

[Brass Rain]

That's a pretty subjective question. Supposedly Rugers are toughest, Smiths have the best triggers, and Colts have the best alignment of internal parts.

When we're going to find a company that can do it all is unknown to me.

 

[devildog66]

Korth

Only seen pictures of them, and heard testimonials to their quality, but that
.357 looked as though it had been grown instead of made it was so precisely fitted. Of course, at 4-5K it should look that way...

 

[SAWBONES]

Old Colts and Smiths in average or typical examples were far better quality than anything available today out-of-the-box.

Freedom Arms makes the best current production SAs, without question, with USFA and STI also being quite good.

As for current DA revolvers, both Smith and Ruger examples need a minor to moderate amount of work to be acceptable IME unless you happen to get lucky. Both brands can be made into quite good guns after trigger work, endshake reduction and attention to timing, not to mention surface polishing.

I won't buy any current S&W revolvers with "the lock", so my revolver purchases nowadays are pre-lock Smiths, Rugers and old Colts (when I can find one).

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

I know I'll get flamed badly for this ( ), but if including past guns and present both, but excluding boutique makers like Korth, Manhurin, Janz, Mateba, etc., I would say, best to worse, ALL things considered (looks, reliability, durability, accuracy, trigger, materials, politics, price/value, everything), in order:

1. Freedom Arms
2. tie - OLD Colts
2. tie - OLD Smith & Wessons
2. tie - (Monson) Dan Wessons
5. NEW Colts
6. Taurus
7. Beretta (Stampede)
8. Rossi
9. NEW Charter Arms
10. Ruger
11. NEWer Smith & Wessons (recently bought my first and LAST)
12. Heritage Arms
13. OLD Charter Arms
14. non-Monson Dan Wessons
15. EAA Windicator and such

Just my humble opinion - take it for what it's worth (not much), because I haven't owned very many. Have very limited experience - I have owned only 5 of these 15 categories. But I do read a fair amount and have some line of reasoning for my choices.

 

[351 WINCHESTER]

I like the older s & w's. Never cared much for the colts, although some say they were good. Don't like the new s & w's and never have liked the rugers.