GP100 vs 686

[Vaman49]

I realize there may be some bias. Tell me why I should pay more for the smith, when the ruger is supposedly more durable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I realize this discussion has been going on for a while now but I wanted to add my two cents. I had both the GP100 and the 686 at the same time. I ended up selling the Ruger off after having both a while and shooting them side by side, so to speak. I'm not going to bad mouth the Ruger at all. It is a fine revolver and a solid performer. I'd just as soon trust my life with it as my 686. It certainly can shoot better than I can do with it.

Now I ended up keeping the 686 even though it cost more and has the lock (I don't get my drawers wadded up over the lock). It's a more refined revolver to me. It fits my hand better and at least to me seems to carry better.

You can't go wrong with either in my opinion. Ruger makes fine weapons. I have the GP100's baby brother, the SP101, and it will not leave my possession. I've got a Model 60 that I'd let go before I sell that Ruger.

 

[bgrafsr]

A shooting buddy years ago blew up a Blackhawk in 45 Colt hot loading it I don't know what he had fed it that day, But he had a bad habit of coming up with some really brutal stuff. Ruger wouldn't warranty that gun, but offered him a new one at a good price and suggested he consider a 44 mag if he wanted hot loads. The 686 was brought out to provide a package smaller than the N frame and still handle a steady diet of magnums, including the ever potent 125 grain semi jacketed hollow point that the Ks couldnt do. The GP 100 followed the L frame. When shooters start talking about the strength of the Ruger to handle hot loads, that usually means hand loaders intend to push their cartridges over SAMI. Dont expect any magnum to hold up or stay intact when hot loading, regardless of how it's steel is formed.

You have to remember that the .45 Colt case is not as heavily formed as the .44 Mag case. That could have been the reason your friend blew up his .45 Blackhawks. I wonder if the .45 Casull case would have made a difference.cccc

 

[at_liberty]

I have both and like them both. Both guns needed cylinder reaming. As a stainless finish fan I much prefer the look of the GP100. However, it is a 5 inch barrel, so the SW686-4 is the better carry gun but then competes with my Ruger Security Six. In comparable lengths, I believe the GP100 and 686 guns are about the same weight, but the Smith doesn't look as bulky to me, full lug and all. The GP is quite a handsome gun once out to 5-6".

I use and recommend the Hogue Tamer grips on the GP100. I expect that those who like to carry a GP would prefer something in wood. The current production 686 grip is quite comfortable and is not tacky rubber like some Pachmayrs, which fit me very well.

 

[Redlegvzv]

Well, I am a GP100 fanboy, although I also own (and love) my 686+ 4" current production revolver.
My GP100s:

 

[PurpleMountainOutdoors]

I went with a GP100 Match Champion.

They're both nice guns, but the GP is just more affordable, but no built in lock...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jstanfield103]

Like already said, I would and have owned both. I was trained on a model 19 S&W and bought the Ruger for my first owned revolver many years ago. I sold the Ruger because I liked the S&W two stage trigger (staging the trigger) pull that I could not get in the GP100. I now own a 686-3, I would not hesitate on a GP100 but the staging of a S&W is 100% better than a GP and tthat is what I like to train and shoot with for scoring.

 

[bananaman]

I paid $420 for a used GP100. It was a 4" blue gun. I took it to the range 1 time and put it up for sale. My 686-3 6" cost me $580, and I have had it around 2 yrs. I have a 4" no dash 586 also. To ME, there is no comparison. There again I never claimed to be an expert. I bet I could sell any Smith I have quicker than the Ruger. Sorry, I am posting these pics again (not really) Bob

 

[PurpleMountainOutdoors]

The match champion is a special edition, it has a trigger job, and staging the trigger is very easy. Being a limited edition, I have no doubt it could be sold quickly if I ever needed to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wildenout]

Personally, this becomes a question of esthetics in my mind. I don't like the swoop where the hammer is on the GP, it's just ugly to me! The 686 though is beautiful...

 

[Mark6005]

Own a few rugers including a gp 4 inch and several smith revolvers though not a 686 but a 64. Would not offer any of them for sale and will buy rugers and smiths when a deal comes along. No colts in my budget

 

[rwsmith]

I'd buy the Ruger.......

I'd buy the Ruger if I couldn't get the Smith.

 

[fdw]

I decided on the GP100 Match Champion. I just felt like it was a better value for the money.

PS-My wife is trying to take it from me and now keeps it bedside

 

[eveled]

My favorite over both is a S&W Model 27.

Best Regards,
ADP3

You took the words out of my mouth. I don't have an actual model 27. My 627 and 327, are getting a lot more range time than my GP100 or SP101, or my Security Six. Ed

 

[papajohn428]

One of my "Gun Mentors" was my late father-in-law, who preached it this way: "SA Revolver, get the Ruger. DA revolver, get the Smith. 1911, get the Colt." We didn't agree on everything, but he was essentially right on most gun-related topics.

From my own experience, I've owned two each of the 686's and GP-100's, and still own one of each. Both current guns are less than ten years old, and if there's a difference in strength, it would take an H. P. White lab test to prove it to me.

What it comes down to me is this........if I want to shoot a .357, the Ruger is fine. The DA triggers are better than they've ever been. But when I want to savor the experience, the 686 gets the nod every time. There is a subtle difference between an adequate to good trigger, and a great trigger. The 686 has it all over the Ruger, the price reflects that, and thus you still still can't buy a Corvette for the price of a Buick. Resale (as if I'd EVER sell a sweet S&W) reflects that. The last Ruger Redhawk I owned was sold off for $300, in like-new condition, and that was slightly above book value......he showed me the book. Apples and oranges maybe, but I did take note of that fact.

I like driving the Corvette better.

 

[PurpleMountainOutdoors]

One of my "Gun Mentors" was my late father-in-law, who preached it this way: "SA Revolver, get the Ruger. DA revolver, get the Smith. 1911, get the Colt." We didn't agree on everything, but he was essentially right on most gun-related topics.



From my own experience, I've owned two each of the 686's and GP-100's, and still own one of each. Both current guns are less than ten years old, and if there's a difference in strength, it would take an H. P. White lab test to prove it to me.



What it comes down to me is this........if I want to shoot a .357, the Ruger is fine. The DA triggers are better than they've ever been. But when I want to savor the experience, the 686 gets the nod every time. There is a subtle difference between an adequate to good trigger, and a great trigger. The 686 has it all over the Ruger, the price reflects that, and thus you still still can't buy a Corvette for the price of a Buick. Resale (as if I'd EVER sell a sweet S&W) reflects that. The last Ruger Redhawk I owned was sold off for $300, in like-new condition, and that was slightly above book value......he showed me the book. Apples and oranges maybe, but I did take note of that fact.



I like driving the Corvette better.

Why would you sell a redhawk for $300!?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jaymo]

Smith=better firing mechanism (I thinks)

Not if it has the frame mounted firing pin.

I have both a GP100 and a 586.
I wouldn't sell either.
Both are very good revolvers.
Not Freedom Arms good, but still VERY good.

Buy the one that feels best in your hands.

 

[Owly]

I dont have an L frame, but I do own a K frame 19-3 .357 and a Ruger GP100. I wouldnt give up either one, but whenever I strap one on my hip or head to the range it is always the GP. Cant bear to put the miles on the Smith when the Ruger is so willing and able.

 

[M.Cunningham]

The look of the Smiths just wins me over every time.

 

[kbm6893]

The new S&W's just don't do it for me. I know they are great guns, but look at the new 66. Probably stronger then the original due to the 2 piece barrel and no flat spot on the forcing cone, but black hammer, trigger, and cylinder release, plus the lock and the frame mounted firing pin (which might be better, but just looks wrong on a S&W), means I am only interested in older ones.

Given a NEW 686 or a Ruger, I would go new Ruger. I owned a GP-100 once. Bought it for 299 and it looked new. Sold it for a profit, but I miss it. I do have a Service Six that is awesome, too.

 

[Tmatahead]

WARRANTY

Yesterday, at the the range, I had the opportunity to shoot my 3 week old SR1911. I was interested in doing a comparison to my 35+ year old Gold Cup. about 10 rounds in the front site snapped off at the base. Only half the blade is attached to the base. The site is manufactured with over hang to the front. While looking for contact information I looked through FAQ's. The warranty is at the company's discretion. The comments or answer was that they (Ruger) would be held to strict guidelines if any warranty card was given.
Having read through other peoples experience with Smith & Wesson, I'd spend my hard earned Ben Franklins on S&W. I have not yet, spoken to Strum Ruger. However, based on the attitude displayed in their web site, I don't expect them to step up. I'm expecting to pay $30 to ship both ways and $25 parts, $100 labor, so $185-$200 additional after $700+ for the weapon. I slap my forehead with my palm and think, I could have had S&W or STI.

Any way what I'm getting at is that when you buy a hand gun you expect it to be manufactured to a certain level of quality. If Not, the manufacture should make it right. Past experience of others who post here, that would be enough to wait a little longer to get S&W, or pull out two more Ben Franklins.