Battle of the snubs 10-7 vs SP101

[tom327]

I've been fortunate to have found both of these revolvers--SP101 (.38 sp, 5 shot, 2.25" bbl., SS) ca. 1990 and Model 10-7 (.38 sp, 6 shot, 2" bbl., blue) ca. 1979 for $300 or less in the last couple of months. So, I decided to do a head to head comparison.

The caveats? The limited skill of the shooter, and the ammo. I wanted to use up some 130 gr. FMC, but I know they shoot better with 158 gr. loads.

The S&W has a lighter, smoother trigger, but it really doesn't stage. Every boom is a surprise. In contrast, the Ruger has a long pull, but there's a definite click and pause before the hammer releases. It's like cocking for SA via the trigger.

I shot SA and DA sets, but the DA results were better for both so I didn't bother to post the SA. Targets were at 25 ft.

Well, it looks like S&W beat Ruger, but I still like the SP101 as a rugged potential pocket gun.

-Tom

 

[tac803]

Couple of things to consider. I own model 10's, a 65, and a Police Service Six. The Ruger is BULLETPROOF. Stainless steel, indexes well, and has eaten up whatever I put through it. Ruger makes a fine product, but it spends most of it's time snuggled up in the safe. My Model 65, 10, or 36 are usually first out of the case when a medium to small frame revolver is called for. SP 101, 5 shots of .38 from a short bbl., model 10, 6 shots of .38 +P in a similar size package.

It comes down to personal preference...I like the Rugers, but I like Smiths more. Can't really go wrong with either.

Regards
Tac

 

[bennettfam]

Smaller Ruger for concealed carry, S&W for belt or bedside.