Want to pickup a new gun -- like the idea of a 7 shot or possibly 8 short 357 mag -- Ruger makes 7 shot GP 100 or 8 shot redhawk or is the SW 686 7shot or 8 shot S&W (sorry don't remember mdl) the way to go-- Main reason for this purchase is backup while hunting with single shot rifle
686 7 shot or Gp100 7 shot?
- Thread starter esoldfuzz
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
derek45auto
Member
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2012
- Messages
- 441
- Reaction score
- 813
686
I've heard the new GP100 7 shot has trouble with some case rims being too big to fit.
I've heard the new GP100 7 shot has trouble with some case rims being too big to fit.
muddocktor
Member
I personally prefer a S&W over a Ruger, so for me it would be a choice between a 686 and a 627 Pro/PC. Seeing that I already own a 627 Pro, the choice is already made. 
It's a sweet gun with a great trigger and it is accurate and the 4" barrel isn't obtrusive either. The N frame is a little bigger frame than the L frame of a 686, so try both out and see which feels more comfortable to you. I don't know about the 7 shot GP-100 but I do know that the Redhawk Ruger 8 shot is darn near a pound heavier than the 627 Pro I own. Since you plan to pack while hunting, I would think weight would be an issue to think about.
It's a sweet gun with a great trigger and it is accurate and the 4" barrel isn't obtrusive either. The N frame is a little bigger frame than the L frame of a 686, so try both out and see which feels more comfortable to you. I don't know about the 7 shot GP-100 but I do know that the Redhawk Ruger 8 shot is darn near a pound heavier than the 627 Pro I own. Since you plan to pack while hunting, I would think weight would be an issue to think about.mauiblue
Member
Another vote for the S&W 686 Plus. I have the 4" barrel version and it is accurate. Amazing gun and value.
Ashlander
Member
I have a 3" 686-6 Plus as well as a 3" GP100 6 shot. I like the GP100 better, though both are very good guns. The trigger of the GP100 is slightly better to my feel (slightly longer double action pull helps me keep my trigger pulls smooth). That said, I suggest to hold both and go with the one that feels best to you.
Both are good guns
I was thinking that I could only afford the Ruger, but I held out for the S&W.
I was thinking that I could only afford the Ruger, but I held out for the S&W.
gfors
Member
Don't know the regs in SD, but here in CO, any sidearm carried while rifle hunting must have a minimum 4" barrel, produce, at least, 550 ft lbs energy (I believe) at 50 yards. That pretty much eliminates a .357. I carry a 4" 629-6.
There are some pretty stupid gun laws out there.
Smiths usually have better triggers, are lighter, and (to me) look better than Rugers. The trigger is pretty simple to improve with a spring kit too. My vote goes to S&W.
OLDSTER
Member
Not "7 shooters", but an example of problem solved. Get one of each like I did.
I am normally a Ruger fan, but my GP100 - 7 shot binds up a lot, and has been back to the mothership twice. I will be selling it. The 6 shot version runs like a dream, and I love it.
I don't really trust the 7 shot. I think it is having "new model" growing pains.
I don't really trust the 7 shot. I think it is having "new model" growing pains.
Well Armed
Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,127
- Reaction score
- 1,392
Not to be funny or condescending, but this is a S&W forum. I'm almost positive that if you asked this same questionon the Ruger forum, the consensus will be the complete opposite. Might be a good idea to ask both places, go handle and shoot both firearms for yourself, and then choose what's best for you...
UncleEd
Member
No doubt about it, on this forum the Smith has a
better trigger and is more refined.
No doubt about it, on the Ruger Forum(s) the
Ruger has a better trigger and is more robust.
On the Taurus Forum, no opinion.
better trigger and is more refined.
No doubt about it, on the Ruger Forum(s) the
Ruger has a better trigger and is more robust.
On the Taurus Forum, no opinion.
I'm with UncleEd on this one, responses will vary by which forum the question is posted on. I do not own a 7 shot revolver but I have owned multiple 686 and GP100 revolvers. Today I only own the GP100. In my opinion the 686 is a more nicely finished revolver and has a nicer, crisper single action. The GP100 had a more easy to control double action and I like the no side plate construction. I understand that the GP100 7 shot revolver has problems with certain ammunition. Both are very nice revolvers and you can't go wrong with either.
That's an interesting question to ask on a S&W Forum. I wonder what answer you get from a Ruger forum?
Flyingfool
Member
Is that for HUNTING during rifle season. Or just to carry a sidearm in addition to the rifle? The OP stated that it would be for back up in addition to a single shot rifle.
Where I hunt there are timber wolves that can exceed 200 lbs. so having a weapon available to defend yourself from such dangerous critters who also travel and hunt in packs makes good sense. Especially if only a single shot.
Always the Smith.
OP
I appreciate all the quick answers I figured that good SW users would point out any negatives of the ruger pistol but I found this very constructive. As I failed to mention in the post, This would be last line of defense not a hunter . Also have looked at 10mm mostly found in auto's more shots but I like revolvers may just go with 44 mag
Benchrest1
Member
S&W all the way.
white cloud
Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2009
- Messages
- 1,142
- Reaction score
- 1,562
I have the 7 shot GP100. I looked at both the 686 and the GP100. It was a hard choice. Both revolvers are excellent but I had trouble with the "hole".
I carry it in a Simply Rugged Sourdough while working around the farm. It works well in that role. The binding issues to date have been limited to WW white box.
I carry it in a Simply Rugged Sourdough while working around the farm. It works well in that role. The binding issues to date have been limited to WW white box.
I had the same problem about a year ago. I went to the big gun show thinking I was going to walk out with a six-shot, six-inch stainless .357. It would be either a GP-100 or a 686. I still wasn't sure when I walked in.
After examining both, I just like the way the Smith felt in my hand. It just seemed more "refined," somehow. It was about $80 more than the Ruger, which means, for me, that price wasn't an issue. Plus two of my friends who were at the show ran across me, and urged me to go Smith.
So I walked out with the 686, and don't regret it. Not that there's anything wrong with a GP-100.
Same thing happened just a few months ago. I decided I wanted a .44 Mag as a reloading platform. I walked into that show thinking strongly in favor of a Redhawk. Much stronger gun than a 629, heavier. But then I played with a 6.5 inch 629. Again, it just seemed more "refined," somehow, and felt better.
Since I had no intention of loading mega-bomber loads, I chose the 629. Now, if I was going to push loading to the redline, I'd have gone ahead with the Redhawk; no question it's a stronger platform than the 29 series.
So I ended up with two Smiths.
After examining both, I just like the way the Smith felt in my hand. It just seemed more "refined," somehow. It was about $80 more than the Ruger, which means, for me, that price wasn't an issue. Plus two of my friends who were at the show ran across me, and urged me to go Smith.
So I walked out with the 686, and don't regret it. Not that there's anything wrong with a GP-100.
Same thing happened just a few months ago. I decided I wanted a .44 Mag as a reloading platform. I walked into that show thinking strongly in favor of a Redhawk. Much stronger gun than a 629, heavier. But then I played with a 6.5 inch 629. Again, it just seemed more "refined," somehow, and felt better.
Since I had no intention of loading mega-bomber loads, I chose the 629. Now, if I was going to push loading to the redline, I'd have gone ahead with the Redhawk; no question it's a stronger platform than the 29 series.
So I ended up with two Smiths.
Not to heave a stick of dynamite in the discussion but what if you wanted to handload some "zippier" rounds? Would you still stick with the Smith? I got a Ruger so I could build some bomber loads. If it goes boom I didn't destroy my beautiful Smith.
muddocktor
Member
If I want bomber loads, I would buy something chambered in 454 Casull, 460 S&W Mag or 500 S&W Mag. No use trying to make a 44 Mag something it isn't. A 29 or 629 with the full Endurance Package will handle any SAAMI spec loads.
I have one of the early 2.5-inch .357 7-shot Ruger GP snubs.
Out of over 70 different .38 & .357 loads I test-loaded from the shelves here, exactly three gave me rimlock.
Two different WW whitebox magnums & the Federal HST .38 Special.
That's less than a 2% "failure" rate in terms of fit.
All three loads did load 7 and allow the cylinder to be closed.
All three needed extra steam to punch rounds back out again, but did punch out.
All three would have fired all 7 rounds.
None of the three would I normally shoot or carry in that gun, which I happen to like very much.
I could have returned it to Ruger for a trade on another 6-shot GP snub, but for me it's simply no issue whatever, and they had no other .357 GP snubs with adjustable sights.
I just don't load it with ammo I'd never use anyway, and check out what I do load it with in advance.
Ruger was working on correcting that slight issue last year, I'd assume it's no longer a problem by now.
I have no slavish brand loyalty to either company.
Both manufacture models I find useful.
Both manufacture items I would not own as gifts.
I own two 3-inch .357 GPs, one 3-inch .44 Special GP, and this 2.5 7-banger GP.
I also own two Smith 2.5-inch vintage 66 snubs, one unfired.
Those I am VERY fond of.
Among all of them, if I could only keep one, it'd be the 2.5 7-shot GP.
The ammo thing is only an issue if you make it an issue.
Denis
Out of over 70 different .38 & .357 loads I test-loaded from the shelves here, exactly three gave me rimlock.
Two different WW whitebox magnums & the Federal HST .38 Special.
That's less than a 2% "failure" rate in terms of fit.
All three loads did load 7 and allow the cylinder to be closed.
All three needed extra steam to punch rounds back out again, but did punch out.
All three would have fired all 7 rounds.
None of the three would I normally shoot or carry in that gun, which I happen to like very much.
I could have returned it to Ruger for a trade on another 6-shot GP snub, but for me it's simply no issue whatever, and they had no other .357 GP snubs with adjustable sights.
I just don't load it with ammo I'd never use anyway, and check out what I do load it with in advance.
Ruger was working on correcting that slight issue last year, I'd assume it's no longer a problem by now.
I have no slavish brand loyalty to either company.
Both manufacture models I find useful.
Both manufacture items I would not own as gifts.
I own two 3-inch .357 GPs, one 3-inch .44 Special GP, and this 2.5 7-banger GP.
I also own two Smith 2.5-inch vintage 66 snubs, one unfired.
Those I am VERY fond of.
Among all of them, if I could only keep one, it'd be the 2.5 7-shot GP.
The ammo thing is only an issue if you make it an issue.
Denis
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
