686-4 or GP-100

[csdmann]

Hey guys, I am looking for input and opinions. There is a 2 1/2" 686-4 in the case at my LGS. I originally wanted a 4" barrel. But the 686-4 being a pre-lock is making me sway a bit. I am considering a GP-100 in a 4". I am a little concerned on the short 2 1/2" barrel. How is the accuracy compared to a 4" and are .357mags out of the 2 1/2" barrel any fun? I like the heavy frame on a GP-100. I will be mainly shooting .38spl+P out of it at the range with just a couple of cylinders of .357mags when I am at the range. Thanks for any input.

 

[Old cop]

There is very little difference in accuracy between the two, regardless of barrel length. If you're considering carrying I'd go w/the Smith, but I'd go w/the Smith anyway. Better trigger and better value down the road. Others may vote for the Ruger and it is a fine weapon, I just prefer the S&W.

 

[MH8675309]

You wont go wrong with either. A Ruger reportedly had a million rounds run through it.

 

[lowriderfxr]

I would buy the 686. Those short barrel 686s continue to demand a premium. You may get a different answer if you ask the same question on the Ruger forum.

 

[loeman]

The 686-4 is considered by many to be the most desirable of the 686s due to engineering upgrades and not having MIM parts and being pre internal lock. So regardless of barrel length the -4 will most likely increase in value over time. Also, I consider finding the 686 in a 2.5 inch barrel a plus. I never see them for sale around here.

I don't have any experience with the GP100 but I do have a six inch Security Six, the GP100s immediate predecessor. I was at the range with it just yesterday and noted how much better the triggers on my 686 and 681 are to the Security Six. Especially the 681. I like my Ruger and wouldn't sell it but if I was forced to choose I'd keep my Smiths and let the Ruger go.

So, unless condition is a significant factor between the two, I'd choose the 686.

 

[rwsmith]

Short barrel at the range.

I think it's harder to shoot a short barrel but some peopl seem to have gotten really good with them (see hitchcok45 on Youtube) IMHO starting in close and getting the right load for POA. Refine from there.

 

[Bobthegod]

I own both Smith's and Ruger's. Howevver I have 1 smith and 3 GP100's. A 4" .327 Mag, a 4" .357 Mag and a 6" .357 Mag. My smith has a great trigger and so do my Ruger's, now that Ihad them worked a bit. They're both great makers. You won't go wrong buying either. You're down to how do they feel and look etc. If you got the $$$ buy both, then shoot'em that'll tell which one to keep. BUT, I'd bet you'd keep both. I would!!!

 

[csdmann]

I just got back and did hold and play with both. The Smith trigger of course is Very Nice! The Ruger is nice and heavy. The Smith fit and finish is noticeably better. I am again just arguing with myself on the short barrel length.

 

[TrueTexan]

I have the 686+ in a 3 inch and love it for CCW also have a 6 inch model have Rugers in 44 magnum and love them can't go wrong with ether gun just depends what your going to mainly do with it. If CCW go with Smith. If range and fun or home defense go with the Ruger.

 

[JeepinSoldier]

The answer - of course - is to buy the 2 1/2" Smith 686 and then save and buy another 4" 686 later.

 

[jtcarm]

686, unless you absolutely need a 4".

The short barrel does not affect accuracy.
It does present additional challenges to the shooter.
The shorter sight radius doesn't reveal alignment errors as well, and recoil will be a bit heavier due to reduced muzzle weight.
All things equal, the only way a shorter barrel has a negative impact on accuracy is if the twist rate is on the slow side. The shorter barrel may not stabilize extra-long bullets as well. I've never heard if this in a .38/.357 revolver.

 

[Cpo1944]

Get the 686 you will never regret it!

 

[wproct]

I own a 686-4 in 2.5 in bbl, and a GP100 in 5 in bbl. If I were in your shoes, and the 686-4 was reasonably priced and in very nice condition, I would be buying it. It's the best version of the 686 revolvers IMO, and you can always pick up a GP100 4 in bbl revolver later. That short barreled Smith will just continue to gain in resale value.

 

[Hemi45]

I'm have nothing against Ruger but you better DIVE on that 686!!!

 

[ptgarcia]

Get the 686. You don't see 686-4s everyday, but you can pick up a 4" GP-100 just about anywhere.

 

[Tracer_Bullet]

Both are good revolvers. Given that choice, I'd get the 686 first and save up for the GP100 later. They aren't making 686-4s any more and the GP100 is still in production, so that would be the deciding factor for me.

 

[guskody]

csdmann,

any reason in particular you are hesitant about the 2.5" barrel?

do you mind saying what your LGS wants for it?

 

[csdmann]

Ok guys. I called and have the 686-4 put aside for me. I am going to go do my paper work tomorrow. It is in Great condition! I really like the fit and finish on the S&W. There is a big difference in the trigger feel and just in the fit of the cylinder etc. The Ruger looks and feels a little rough. I have never owned anything smaller than a 4" so this will be a new feel for me. I am looking forward to it. Thank you to all who gave input. I really appreciate all the information that all gave. Once I make it through the wonderful CA 10 day wait time I will post a couple of pic here.

 

[gr7070]

How about waiting for the gun you really want! Hold off till you find a 4" 686.

As knowledgeable as most here are, I, as usual, completely disagree with the buy everything and buy it now crowd on this board.

 

[shawn mccarver]

I vote "none of the above." Get a 4 inch 686! That said, that Ruger GP100 sure looks like a tasty dish! Yummo!