Final Photos Added - See Page 4

I have the option to purchase a 4" Model 13-2 in excellent condition with grip adapters or a 3" Ruger GP100 with fixed sights and the old style Ruger grip with the wood inserts. I have never had a Ruger revolver and never even fired one...currently I own a couple of snubbie S&W's and a 686-4P. I feel comfortable with S&W, but I've never had a blued gun either, so the 13 would be the first. I really wanted a 3" barrel, but the Ruger sure does look fat and heavy...I am big enough to carry it, but am not sure which to get since I have had very good results with S&W. I am partial to them because my grandfather used to talk about S&W when I was a child. I can only afford one of the two, and they are both priced fairly. I would like input from some folks here who have maybe shot both guns. I'm weighing carryability, durability, etc...I know the K frame likes 158 grain magnums but the Ruger could probably shoot hotter loads...so many variables. If you could only afford to purchase one of the guns, which would it be? Thanks, B

Hands down I would choose the Model 13. The best shooting .38/.357 I ever owned was a Model 13 with a 4-inch barrel. The second best .38/.357 I ever owned was a Model 13 with a 3-inch barrel. In my opinion the 13 leaves the Ruger in the dust.

Ditto on the 13. I am 6'6" and have quite a few guns. The 13 with a 3" bbl. is my absolute favorite carry weapon. I have snubs,342 for pocket carry. The 3" is "just right" for me with the heavy bbl. and will handle most anything I feed it. Nothing against the Ruger except the weight and bulk they posess. You'll never wear one out but you might wear out if you carry it a while.

Just my HO.

Regards
Bill

Definitely the Smith!
Dick

While I don't have any experience with the GP100 I have to add that, today, I sold a sweet Model 13-3 with 4" barrel that took me many attempts before I was able to do so, sell it that is.

Every time I got it out to sell I always had to put it back because it's such a nice pointing revolver with great balance. At least in it's new life it will be working overseas, after it gets cut down to a rd butt and maybe 3" bbl, in a security role.....

I would choose the 13, but then I have another one if it breaks, cracks a forcing cone, or gets out of time.

To me the GP 100 looks awful, but to be fair Rugers are overbuilt work horses. You can do things to a Ruger that you'd never do with an S&W.

Functionally — strength wise, Rugers are amazing. Aesthetics are another matter, although I think they were much better looking as the security six, service six, and speed six. While never pretty they were much better looking than the ungainly slab sided GP100 barrel profile.

I know a Ruger police distributer who has used the same security six sample gun for 35 years. The highlight of his demonstration is to drop it on the Academy floor. Oops!

Pick it up, load and shoot it, and then do it again on purpose, and dare the S&W rep to do the same.

Rugers simply never break. And all the stainless ones always had black sights! Oh how I wish S&W put black front sights on their fixed sight stainless guns.

/c

No doubt Rugers are fine but there's also no doubt that I'd choose the Smith.

You will never see the Model 13 made again. The GP is still in current production. They even have a special version of the three inch coming out or is out. But 13's are finite. I would snatch up the 13 and if you really want a three inch GP then save up and just get one.

you know those Budwieser horses..thats the ruger. The smith is a quarter horse....as for hotter loads in the ruger. A 357 can only do so much if you want more power get a 41 or 44 mag.

__________________
US ARMY
Viet Nam 70-71

This is exactly what I was going to say!

Except for the special GP edition, that I hadn't heard. In fact, got any more info?

__________________
NRA Certified Instructor

I've owned a 4" GP-100 and it was indestructable. If you are going to really shoot .357 mag ammo, I'd go with the Ruger. If you aren't going to shoot a whole bunch of .357 mag, I'd go with the S&W.

The Ruger is indeed fat and heavy. I sold mine because of that very reason. I wasn't shooting .357 mag, and was shooting alot of .38 Special, so I just didn't need the heavy weight, larger size, full-lug barrel, etc. I ended up with a .357 K-frame (PD-trade 66) and it fit my uses perfectly.

If you want a great all around gun, that you aren't going to torture test with .357 mag, the M13 will be great.

If you're going to OWB carry and want a gun that will last forever no matter how hard you treat it, it will be hard to beat the 3" GP-100.

If CCW is your primary purpose, I'd seriously consider looking for a 3" K-frame rather than either the 3" Ruger or 4" 13.

Don't worry about the blue vs stainless gun. As long as you take any normal care of it, it will last longer than you. Stainless is lower-maintenance, but it's not maintenance free. You have to take care of both.

As has been said, the Ruger is much stronger. For a concealed carry gun, neither is a good choice. The Ruger because it's heavy, and the 13 because it's a 4". I have a model 65-3 with a 3" that I really like. if I needed a gun to sit in the nightstand drawer and maybe go with me on woods walks, the Ruger would get the nod. Everyone says "as long as you're not gonna shoot alot of hot magnums, the K frame Smiths are fine", and they're right, but suppose down the road you get into shooting hot .357? The Ruger will do it all with no worries. The Smith needs to be babied a bit more. I just sent my 65 in for service (cylinder was binding), and I was talking to the tech on the phone. He complimented me on how nice the gun is, but emphatically told me to PLEASE limit your .357 use since they don't have any more barrels for the K frames. When a S&W gunsmith tells you to limit your .357's in the gun, you take it to heart. And while they don't make the 13 anymore, there are tons out there. You could always pick one up later if you had the itch.

Not a lot of Ruger love here. To me K frames are now .38 + P guns the Ruger is a true .357. The GP100 is a L frame size gun, if the choice was between a 4" M13 or a 3" 686 what advice do you think you would get? To me the SS and 3" barrel would sell me on the GP100, if it was a 3" M13 on the other hand I would jump on that.

Ruger GP100 "Wiley Clapp" 357 Magnum Revolver

Gunblast.com - Ruger GP100 "Wiley Clapp" 357 Magnum Revolver - YouTube



I'm thinking of getting one but I wish it had the short Lett grip instead of the full size one. But it's still a pretty decent looking setup.

I owned a 3" GP100 for years and it's the best balanced of the GP100 line, and absolutely loves full-house loads. I even got lucky and had a very nice trigger out of the box on my sample. Only the 3" model gets the small grip frame which I like compared to the larger grip frame found on other barrel lengths.

But since the M13 isn't available anymore, and that should be a sweet shooter, I'd probably grab it.

Wow, that new Ruger looks nice. However, I am 90% certain I will go with the 13. It reportedly is in very nice condition with a Tyler T Grip adapter...I've never seen one of those in person, so I'm anxious to see how it feels. I seldom shoot 357 magnum loads, even out of my 686. I prefer to shoot .38 Special at the range, and then +P for home protection/carry. I just don't like shooting .357 magnums, so it shouldn't be an issue with either of these guns. I personally know the owner and he is selling several guns...this was the one that jumped out at me. I asked if he had a 3" 13, and he said yes...however it was carried and shot a lot and was not nearly as nice...said he would let me have it for less, but it has some end shake. I asked a couple of gun friends here in town and they said get the nice, clean, tight 4" model and forget about the one that is more used. How do you fix end shake? Just add shims? I plan to look at the 4" and 3" 13's, along with the Ruger, but having not seen them yet (meeting tomorrow, Saturday) then I'm leaning toward the 4" 13 in good condition. Thanks for all the comments and advice. I've never had an old S&W gun tht I didn't like...B

How much were they asking for the GP? I am interested if the price is right.

__________________
Forum consigliere

I think he has folks lined up for all the guns at work...he was just holding these for me to look at tomorrow...sorry...B

Buy the GP and don't worry about end shake. It will handle the cartridges it was chambered for.

I have both a model 13-2 4 inch and a Ruger GP100 4 inch. My model 13 is better balanced, points better and has the better double action trigger. My GP100 along with my 686 are the two I shoot 357 magnums. Both will hold up longer.
I have read all the posts and several of them describe how the GP100 won't were out shooting full power 357 magnums. I suppose they mean the 125 gr full power high velocity rounds.
i will tell you this. The GP100 and S&W 686 will wear out sooner in the forcing cone area if you shoot alot of these rounds. I know of GP100s that wore the forcing cone out and one that split a forcing cone out by shoot a high round count of full power rounds.
Bottom line; My model 13 along with my model 19 and 66 are my best all around revolvers. I shoot mostly 38 specials but do shoot some 158 gr magnums on occasion. Again my GP100 and S&W 686 see 357 magnum rounds all the time. But I don't shoot alot of 125 gr high velocity rounds. If I were you I would buy the model 13. You can always buy a GP100 later.
Best of luck,
Howard

As expected the M13 has more fans here. Go to the Ruger forum and the reverse will be the case.

Both are excellent guns. The Ruger is tougher and will stand up better to more heavy magnum loads. The M13 is lighter, slimmer, trimmer and handles better to most, although this is subjective. The Ruger is still being made and will likely be easier to find later. However I have thought that of other guns, only to have them go out of production because I waited to long. To me blue v stainless is a non issue. Stainless requires less maintainance. Blue (usually) looks better. It really is a toss up.

__________________
Formerly know as Lucky Derby

In the end you will probably carry rhe 13 more. For reasons stated above.

Modern 38s like Buffalo Bore and Speer Short bbl loads push the old 38Spl load to a most respectable confidence inducing load. Unless you're planning on a shooting a boatload of 357s, I's go with the S&W

The 13 will always be worth more; even used.

Am a real fan of the model 13. Own several. However, a 3 inch GP100 is about perfect, looks wise, and feel wise. Oh, did I mention it will handle the 357 mag with ease. Buy the Ruger, simply because of 3 inch vs 4 inch.
JMHO, worth what you paid for it.
Tom

A 4" 13-2 has been my go-to piece for better than 25 years, and will be the one I keep when I'm down to selling my guns to eat. Buy the 13.

Larry

My first criteria for a carry gun is ""Stainless Steel"". I see no reason to constantly worry about sweat, pitting, bluing wearing off, rust, etc. Ruger vs Smith. doesn't matter, flip a coin.
If you have to have a smith, 66, 686, SS,Etc..
So, are you going to carry? ---think SS----
In Ten years, that SS will shine up.
Mike

OK...had the meeting. I bought two guns...a 3" K frame Model 13 and a 3" Ruger GP100. I left the 4" K frame for another co-worker. I'll upload a photo tonight or tomorrow. Thanks for all the input, but I liked both and worked a fair deal with the seller. Thanks, B

you are on a Smith website, do you honestly expect unbiased answers. com on now

Yeah. It's designed by gun writer Wiley Clapp for a distributor. Has a three or four inch barrel with a Novak fixed rear sight and grips that are a checkered rubber edition of the earlier grip with the wood inserts. The back of the grip is checkered. Looks very nice in photos.
Join one of the Ruger forums and ask for someone to post a photo, or Search for one. You'll probably want one, if you like the GP-100. Don't know the price.

BTW, there have been some runs of the GP-100 with five-inch barrels, too.

NOTE: this was posted before I saw the photo on Page 2 here. I posted for you on the Ruger board that I'm on. Someone may post another pic there. http://rugerforum.net/ruger-double-a...0-special.html Keep an eye on that thread.

I'm glad that you got both guns, and hope that you can repair the M-13. The best way to eliminate the endshake is for a KNOWLEDGEABLE gunsmith to put the yoke on a mandrel and tap it with a hammer to lengthen the yoke rod or whatever it's called. Some do use shims, but the former Dallas police armorer told me that the way S&W armorers taught him was to tap the part on a mandrel, I think he called it. That will correct the shortening of the part due to repeated recoil.

I think you'll like that Ruger, and if it's stainless, you can polish out any scuffs or scratches that aren't too deep. Stainless has a VAST advantage in a carry gun, especially in hot, humid climates or around saltwater.

Please do post photos. Let us know how they shoot. I'd have S&W fix that endshake and reblue the gun, but you're looking at some fairly serious money to do that. I'd have tried to find a M-65 three-inch in really nice shape and not had to refinish it or repair anything. As you might guess, in this case, I'd have bought the Ruger, if it's in better shape, and to get the stainless construction. Your short GP-100 probably has the smaller grip that Lett used to furnish. I think you'll be delighted at the way it fits your hand. But the longer Lett grip on my four-inch GP stuck to my hand in recoil and tore the skin. I replaced it with a Pachmayr Gripper and have been very pleased. Tackiness varies, and older guns are less likely to cause this problem, as the rubber seems to harden a little with age. Some Ruger actions and triggers are very much better than others.
Put a couple of drops of Break-Free down in your action and use the gun. It'll probably smooth up pretty well. But the SA trigger pull will usually have a little more creep than on S&W's. Still, you can do exceptional shooting with a GP -100. And the weight does handle recoil well.

You bought a couple of really good guns. Pity that the M-13 needs work. If it has the wooden service stocks, it'll kick a lot with .357 ammo. Pachmayr round butt grips will help. DO NOT use much of the hot 125 grain .357 ammo. It will erode the barrel throat and top strap and may split the forcing cone. Stick to 140-158 grain bullets. The heavier ones aren't needed, either, and will recoil more and probably increase endshake sooner.

The 3" Model 13 was actually in very good condition. Very little end shake...locks up pretty darn tight. I think my friend was a little too critical - it doesn't need repair at all. It will be a +P gun...I'll use the Ruger for the magnums. Photos tomorrow. B

The Ruger is the stronger of your two choices, but the Smith is the better revolver. Either one will serve you well, so get the one that feels best in your hand. Remember the M-13 is a K frame 38 special frame that can shoot .357 Magnum ammo, as needed.

__________________
Always Stay Strong!

I guess it all depends on what you want. If you want a collectors item and safe queen, get the S&W. It will not take a steady diet of 357 without shaking itself to pieces or cracking a forcing cone. It was made for shooting 38s and the occasional 357. Parts are getting hard to come by.

It you want a shooter that will reliably digest thousands of 357 rounds and and keep on going. Get the Ruger. If you do manage to finally break it, it is a production gun and parts are readily available. As previoulsy noted: one is a fragile throughbreed and one is a work horse that will get the job done.

Truth is most of us would be equally well served by either one if you shoot a lot of .38 Special. Truth be told, I shoot mostly .38's through all of my .357's anyway so I'm not worried about ever hurting my Model 66 and I am certainly not worried about my GP100's.

If you're the kinda guy who runs a few hundred .357's through the gun every range trip, go with the GP100.

If you adhere to S&W's original purpose of the K-Frame .357, the Model 13 3" will last you a lifetime. Train with .38's, load with .357's for carry. Plus the 3" 13 is much more packable than the chunkier GP100.

How about some pics from those of you that own 13's?

Hock a kid and get both, sell off something!

Excellently done sir! You can't go wrong with either, and both is even better. Ending up with the 3" M13 over the 4" was a good path as well.

Good purcahse all around.

Here they are...neither appear to have been shot or carried much. I've never had a blued gun (except my grandfather's rifles/shotguns), but this one does not look worn out. Locks up tighter than some of my other guns...both look very nice to me. I cleaned them up this morning before church and took a photo...B

My holster-worn not-so-shiny 13-1 with a Roy Baker. Action is like brand new.

Those Pachmyer grips work for my big hands, some day I'll get something nicer.

__________________
Marty 4513TSW 13-1 642 60-10

The 13is on the right and it is for sale with box.

__________________
May God Bless The USA

Here is my 13-2 4 inch.


Quote:It you want a shooter that will reliably digest thousands of 357 rounds and and keep on going. Get the Ruger. Quote

Not always. Here is a picture of a GP100 that cracked a forcing cone shooting 125 gr high velocity 357 magnums.

Even a "built like a tank" Ruger GP100 will split a forcing cone shooting light gr ammo just like a K frame magnum.

Howard

Caj...if no one answered your question...Lipsey's has them for $829. Saw one on Gunbroker, starting bid $749 "reserve not met"...seller out of MO.

Congrats on your purchase Bassoner, have fun, stay safe, good shooting!

Ahhhhh...... no.

That's an interesting picture, but it's something that I've never seen, nor have I ever heard of it before, and I've worked around Rugers for more than 30 years. I'm personally aware of torture tests of GP's, where more than 10,000 rounds of factory .357 were fired, with no parts breakage, and no measurable wear. On the other hand, I've seen more K frame .357's with split forcing cones than I can count.

Don't know what the story was with that gun, but to say that a GP100 will split forcing cones, "just like a K frame magnum", would be stretching the truth.

I, and most others here, may prefer our S&W's, but to deny the Ruger's strength is silly.

delete duplicate

Elmer I am not indicating anything about the strength of Ruger revolvers. I own three. A GP100, Service Six and a Blackhawk. There is no doubt in my mind that Rugers are strong. One the responses indicated that a person can shoot thousands of 357 magnum rounds in a Ruger revolver without problems. All I saying is any revolver can wear out sooner shooting different types of ammo that is hard on the forcing cone. It happens.
The GP100 is stronger than a K frame. And a K frame will most likely split a forcing cone sooner with large amounts of light grain high velocity ammo.
My point is that any revolver can suffer from a eroded forcing cone and possible spliting from certain types of ammo.
In the case of the picture the revolver was seening around 100 rounds a week. The ammo was a high velocity 125 gr round.
Bottom line: When others make a general statement about a revolver I will disagree if it is not true.
Regards,
Howard

No gun is immune to abuse.......the Korth revolver is supposed to be the made from the finest ordnance steel in existence and are made to exacting tolerances, and are very strong but I'm sure you could crack a forcing cone in one of those too with light bullet,super hot .357's and lots and lots of them.

Just as an apples to oranges example,the military HUMMVEE's are super tough too, they can take abuse that would destroy a civilian truck........ and keep going, and I've seen plenty of HUMMVEES break too if they get beat on enough, I could be like "I drove off a 5 foot dropoff, and then ran through a brick wall, and after that hit about 50 3 foot deep potholes and then I cracked an axle, those HUMVEES are weak".

These pics make the rounds around the internet, with no "back story". Until I know what really happened, regardless of whether it's a S&W, Ruger, Colt, etc. I take all these pics with a grain of salt.

There are plenty of pics of blown up Redhawks and they are used as "see Rugers aren't that strong" but the fact that the shooter used the wrong powder and tried to make some dinosaur killer handload is often not mentioned. Just like the pic of the 629 that was supposedly blown up with "Chinese ammo"

The proof is in the picture.... Just look at that erosion!
When the cone gets that eroded, it's just a matter of time before the steel splits. It's simple psysics.

100rds a week for how many weeks? How many total rounds were through that gun? What was the ammo load?

Yea...right

__________________
Forum consigliere

As a deputy in the 70's I carried a model 13 and loved it. For carrying it is great. Rugers are stronger and heavier. You can't lose with either.

Answer to question one. 100 rounds per week for a year. The revolver was used when the shooter bought it.
Ammo used. 125 grain Hornady XTP over 22 gr. of H110 with a Remington 5 1/2 primer. This is from the Hodgdon's data from their site. And they list the max pressure at 41500.I will admit that this is a hot load. But looking at the picture and seeing how the forcing cone was eroded convinces me that shooting light grain ammo at high velocities is hard on any revolver. The only reason I posted this is some of the responses claim that GP100 can shoot thousands of rounds of 357 magnums and not have a problem. A lot of this depends on the type of ammo.
Anyway I will take the blame for straying off the OP question.
My answer is buy the model 13. I have one and love it. I also have a GP100 4 inch and there a great revolver but given the choice I would take the model 13 anyday.
Regards,
Howard