GP100 vs 686
- Thread starter PurpleMountainOutdoors
- Start date
derek45auto
Member
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2012
- Messages
- 441
- Reaction score
- 813
S&W forged
Ruger CAST
Ruger CAST
Last edited:
OP
PurpleMountainOutdoors
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2014
- Messages
- 137
- Reaction score
- 33
This is making my decision harder...
I'm thinking now, I need a 3in 686+ for HD etc, and just cool factor. I also need a 4-6 in GP for abuse and fun. Now what to buy first with my limited funds...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm thinking now, I need a 3in 686+ for HD etc, and just cool factor. I also need a 4-6 in GP for abuse and fun. Now what to buy first with my limited funds...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have owned a number of Ruger revolvers. Their SA revolvers are very nice. Their Security-Six was a nice revolver. Have not ever really liked the GP-100. It looks to much like a Taurus.
I have owned a number of S&W revolvers of all sizes. I've shot the hound out of them. Never found them to be problematic as regards strength, etc. Shot hot loads, even borderline loads w/ no problems. Nowadays don't feel the need to shoot such screamers. In my own personal opinion, the Ruger simply is not well thought out in terms of aesthetics. It is just simply lacking in refinement, again much like a Taurus. The 686 is about the best looking of the modern lugged barrel revolvers. This includes the Python of which I've owned three. Again, that is just my opinion, but there you have it.
Why pay more for the S&W? Simple. It will come w/ a better SA trigger and likely a better DA trigger right out of the box. While the number of competent revolver smiths of any persuasion are not as numerous as once was the case, a smith who actually knows how to work on a S&W is easier to find. As well, if you should have a serious problem S&W customer service is simply outstanding. Parts both current and for revolvers no longer in production are available produced not only by S&W but by after market producers.
The initial cost of a S&W as opposed to a Ruger is simply not that much more money. Once you own the handgun, you shoot it. And the S&W is simply a more user friendly design with far more available in terms of stocks, sights, holsters, scope bases, etc.
Well said.
I agree with the above statement. I own a 686-4 and also a GP100 5" bbl model and love them both. The Smith is a more refined revolver in both fit & finish. The GP100 has a very slick action which locks up very solid, has a very smooth trigger and is easier to stage. I will not part with either, because I know I would immediately be consumed with remorse if I did.
I agree with the above statement. I own a 686-4 and also a GP100 5" bbl model and love them both. The Smith is a more refined revolver in both fit & finish. The GP100 has a very slick action which locks up very solid, has a very smooth trigger and is easier to stage. I will not part with either, because I know I would immediately be consumed with remorse if I did.
lhump1961
US Veteran
I have never understood the implication that you can't "shoot" a S&W revolver. I have been shooting K's & L's for years without issue...not that other folks may not have had the odd problem but I'm not afraid to shoot my Smiths along side any Ruger...any day. I have seen Rugers blown up as well as Smiths or any other brand but it is rare...even more rare for it to be the gun...almost always the ammo. Some people just have to test the limits!
Now, I understand the difference between K's and L's and N's but I won't hesitate to shoot any frame with what it was built for.
My son-in-law is a Ruger guy and we shoot together often. I like his stuff just fine and I do own a Redhawk (although I'm not a 44mag fan) that came from my Dad.
Bottom line for me is I like both manufacturers because they are American made and both quality revolvers. So whichever way you go I'm sure you'll be happy. My point is that if a person wants to push the load limits then you are risking any gun you're using and maybe your safety! If you want your .357 to feel like a .44mag then get a .44mag! But don't feel like you can't shoot max .357 loads (within spec) in a 686.
Let us know what you decide.
Now, I understand the difference between K's and L's and N's but I won't hesitate to shoot any frame with what it was built for.
My son-in-law is a Ruger guy and we shoot together often. I like his stuff just fine and I do own a Redhawk (although I'm not a 44mag fan) that came from my Dad.
Bottom line for me is I like both manufacturers because they are American made and both quality revolvers. So whichever way you go I'm sure you'll be happy. My point is that if a person wants to push the load limits then you are risking any gun you're using and maybe your safety! If you want your .357 to feel like a .44mag then get a .44mag! But don't feel like you can't shoot max .357 loads (within spec) in a 686.
Let us know what you decide.
AgentM
Member
I own S&W K-Frames, L-Frames, J-Frames, and a Ruger GP100. My Ruger is an older (1989-vintage) fixed-sight, 3" blued model with wood-insert rubber grips. It is the best revolver I have ever owned, and I will never sell it. The ergonomics are great, and I know that the ejector rod will never unscrew, and the cylinder thumbpiece will never shoot loose. I put several hundred .357 loads through it a year. Newer GP's (Hogue gripped/adjustable sights) are nice, too, and I liken their overall feel/heft to that of a S&W N-Frame.
I use a square-butt J-Frame S&W M36 as an off-duty gun. Ruger makes no equivalent gun in feel or handling (the SP101 is too fat and chunky for a 5-shooter, and I have no use for their new LCR). I also like the classic feel of K and L-Frame S&W's. For concealment, I like S&W.
If I had a revolver as an authorized on-duty weapon, loaded with .357 Magnum ammo, I'd go Ruger for durability. Were I limited to .38 Special ammo, though, I'd go with a S&W K-Frame. I have a 4" S&W 16-3, agency-marked, in .38 Special caliber, that handles beautifully. I like the trigger stop that came factory-installed. In all but frame stamping, it's really a M15 "Combat Masterpiece". In .357, though, I'd want a heavier gun.
I use a square-butt J-Frame S&W M36 as an off-duty gun. Ruger makes no equivalent gun in feel or handling (the SP101 is too fat and chunky for a 5-shooter, and I have no use for their new LCR). I also like the classic feel of K and L-Frame S&W's. For concealment, I like S&W.
If I had a revolver as an authorized on-duty weapon, loaded with .357 Magnum ammo, I'd go Ruger for durability. Were I limited to .38 Special ammo, though, I'd go with a S&W K-Frame. I have a 4" S&W 16-3, agency-marked, in .38 Special caliber, that handles beautifully. I like the trigger stop that came factory-installed. In all but frame stamping, it's really a M15 "Combat Masterpiece". In .357, though, I'd want a heavier gun.
BigBill
Absent Comrade
There are ruger collectors now too. My ruger GF 32 357 snubbie made in the 200th year of American liberty was never in the catalog. It's worth between $1,000 to $1,200. It's a police service six. My ruger security six with 6" barrel I just seen one sold for $750.
It's just like new s&w' s they might not be worth much now, we can always get what we pay for it but it we wait the value does go up some models more than others. We can't lose
When shooting a s&w with magnum loads how often do you tighten the side plate screws?
I'm not bashing my s&w' s in anyway I love them too. I chose ruger first because of them having no screws to come loose in the double action revolver. The ruger SA SBH is another story I tightened the screws after every outing. Again it won't keep me from buying them.
I chose my new s&w m57 & m58 because s&w is the only manufacturer who still offers a 41 magnum DA revolver. And that world famous s&w nickel too. My very first s&w purchase was a s&w k22 the rest is history. Just watch the tales of the gun (s&w story) if that story doesn't move you nothing will
With no other manufacturer offering these big frame double actions I'm hooked on s&w's N frames.
Ruger and Colt petered out there big framed magnum before people could buy them there discontinued. Sales are like a roller coaster ride there up and down but don't drop the line up. The market will get better. I'm sticking with s&w now it they keep up with there lineup I'll buy them. I have no clue why the other manufacturers models come and go so fast. This leaves the market wide open for the S&W N Frame Revolvers. Bill
I like my Magnums heavier they handle better.
I say buy both the s&w & the ruger.
Last edited:
BigBill
Absent Comrade
Ok Investment Casted steel vs. Forged Steel.
Most of the investment castings are made from 4140 steel which is really a good quality steel. The forged steel is the toughest. I have both in auto' s and actually see no difference in wear. There is no wear in both steels.
We hammered both my 1911's just to see which steel process was better for 500rds in each 1911 and both frames are still in New condition. Ruger has done investment casting for many decades now. There probably the world's leader in investment casting. I can't say which one is better. I have both and hammer each one the same way. I have no favorites.
Most of the investment castings are made from 4140 steel which is really a good quality steel. The forged steel is the toughest. I have both in auto' s and actually see no difference in wear. There is no wear in both steels.
We hammered both my 1911's just to see which steel process was better for 500rds in each 1911 and both frames are still in New condition. Ruger has done investment casting for many decades now. There probably the world's leader in investment casting. I can't say which one is better. I have both and hammer each one the same way. I have no favorites.
Ruger makes really high quality firearms and I have owned many including a GP 100 4 inch and a 7.5 inch Redhawk and they were both great revolvers. That said I sold both of them and went with S&W with a 686 and a 29-2. I have sold those two S&W revolvers also as my tastes have changed some since I've got older and will be 70 next week. My 357 magnum now is a 4 inch Model 28-2 and my 44 Magnum is a 6 inch 629 no dash.
I also had several Ruger Model 77's with the tang safety and they are great rifles.
I also had several Ruger Model 77's with the tang safety and they are great rifles.
So just two cents. I don't have a 686, but have a 629 and a few Rugers. Though I'm not sure that's relevant to this two cents.
For all the people talking about resale value, keep in mind that this applies to products no longer made. Either models or configurations that S&W no longer makes, or just with(out) features that you can't get now.
No one is selling a 686-6 or something for more than a new one sells for. The same somewhat true of Rugers, except that they don't cycle through as many variations or models. That said, an average older discontinued model Ruger probably won't bring the premium that a S&W would (though they also likely didn't sell for the same amount new).
I'd say it is true that older S&W's are more likely to be a good investment, but that seems irrelevant when talking about buying a new firearm, especially if it's a fairly standard 686.
Not knocking your opinion, I just found that logic funny. Taurus makes revolvers that are literally spitting images of S&W's, and they even use the same names like the Model 65 or 66.
For all the people talking about resale value, keep in mind that this applies to products no longer made. Either models or configurations that S&W no longer makes, or just with(out) features that you can't get now.
No one is selling a 686-6 or something for more than a new one sells for. The same somewhat true of Rugers, except that they don't cycle through as many variations or models. That said, an average older discontinued model Ruger probably won't bring the premium that a S&W would (though they also likely didn't sell for the same amount new).
I'd say it is true that older S&W's are more likely to be a good investment, but that seems irrelevant when talking about buying a new firearm, especially if it's a fairly standard 686.
Not knocking your opinion, I just found that logic funny. Taurus makes revolvers that are literally spitting images of S&W's, and they even use the same names like the Model 65 or 66.
Not knocking your opinion, I just found that logic funny. Taurus makes revolvers that are literally spitting images of S&W's, and they even use the same names like the Model 65 or 66.
With respect, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. My reference was to the general appearance of Taurus revolvers as compared to S&W revolvers. That Taurus uses the same model numbers is not surprising. It would be surprising if S&W used Taurus model numbers.
With respect, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. My reference was to the general appearance of Taurus revolvers as compared to S&W revolvers. That Taurus uses the same model numbers is not surprising. It would be surprising if S&W used Taurus model numbers.
SGT_Calle
US Veteran
The Wiley has me seriously looking at Ruger right now. I was thinking I'd like to find a 327 Night Guard but for less money and less hassle I can grab a new Wiley Clapp. Plus, I already have a 686 SSR.
slickracer
Member
Everyone claims the Ruger is so strong. Quite honestly with all of the extra metal over a Smith, it should be. For me, Ruger means single action revolvers and S&W means DA.
Attachments
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2005
- Messages
- 8,005
- Reaction score
- 7,074
Although I like Ruger firearms very much, I do not believe that the GP100 is "more durable" than the 686.
The GP100 is probably more durable with Magnum loads than a Model 19 or 66 (K Frame), but I think the best you can say about a match-up between the GP100 and the 686 is that they are equals in the durability department.
That said, due to the use of forgings instead of castings, the S&W, while at least as strong, if not stronger, is leaner than the Ruger.
Recall that when pressure tested, the lowly N Frame outlasted the Ruger in the H. P. White Lab Tests due to the construction of the S&W with forgings. The cylinder blew on the Ruger before the S&W in the big bore, for whatever that is worth.
Ruger and S&W had an advertising war about the GP100 and the 686 back in the 80s, and it culminated with this ad and with Ruger telling its distributors to choose - if they carried S&W, they could no longer carry Ruger. Ruger long ago rescinded that policy.
Attachments
bmcgilvray
Member
I have never heard this before. Could you help with attribution?
