GP100 vs 686

[Rebel Soul]

You can have all the opinions you want. But I don't think you can expect that on a discussion forum, no one will discuss them after you state them.

This actually makes sense. Good job.

However, this is an opinion thread. Which gun do you like? I gave my opinion which you quoted and said "obviously false". Get over yourself. Go outside and play with your kid and spend a little less time being an internet know it all.

I'm through with this. Peace.

 

[Rebel Soul]

Besides, I don't own a Rock..... As a matter of fact, I don't own any 1911's.
I wouldn't degrade my collection with one.

HAHA hilarious.

And agree with you - I'm a revolver guy too.

I have Rugers and Smiths as well. Got rid of a GP100 - still have a SP101 - which I love. If I could only have one brand though, it would be Smith and its not even close.

DISCLAIMER - this is only my opinion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[BobR1]

I have a 686-1 Power Custom Combat, I also have a 686-5 Power Custom Combat. My wife took over the 686-1 as her house gun 20 some years ago.

I also have a brand new Willy Clapp GP100 Stainless that I bought instead of a new 3 Inch 686-6.

In a 4, 5, or 6 Inch barrel the 686 and GP100 are pretty close. The Quick Change Front Sight on the GP100 is superior to a pinned on 686, and WAY Better than a machined on front sight 686's.
With a Round Butt 686 you have a better selection of grips.

The GP100 will take the Super RedHawk Hogue "Tamer" Grip. This will really take the sting out of Full House Magnum Ammo. Not a bad thing to keep in mind with Lady Shooters.

Both need a little tune up work from the factory. How much depends Gun to Gun.
I have slicked up several S&W's over the years. I have also worked on some GP100's.
My 686's have been to see the Old Master Ron Power for tune up work.
My brothers Willy Clapp has also been to see Ron Power for his Power Custom Combat treatment.
You can make a GP100 trigger as good as a carry gun needs to be. My brothers is a prime example. We have several shooters at our Range who have bought GP100's after handling my brothers.

NOW Lets Talk Concealed Carry:
This is why I have a Willy Clapp GP100 instead of a 3" 686.
For whatever reason S&W decided we do not need a short barrel 6 Shot 686 for concealed carry. We are stuck with the 686 Plus 7 shooter.
PROBLEM The selection of Speed Loaders Sucks compaired to a 6 shooter. With the 7 shooter you are pretty much limited to the Turn Knob HKS 587 and 5 Star.

The 6 Shot will take the Push Release Safariland Comp II, and III Speed Loaders, and the L Frame Jet Loader, as well as the Turn Knob HKS 586 and 5 Star.

I like to carry a reload or 2 on the belt when I conceal carry a revolver. I prefer to carry the fastest speed loaders available, which would be the Safariland Comp III and the more compact Jet Loader.

I have several Smith & Wesson Revolvers to include a 310 Night Guard, a 315 Night Guard and a 442 Pro in late model Revolvers. I like Smith and Wessons. I read of an issue now and again, however I have never had one that has had a flaw ever.
I have also had a few Rugers over the years to include 4 Super RedHawks. I believe Rugers quality is better today than it has ever been. My new SP101 does not have all the Bill Board Safety Garbage on it. BIG Improvement. I will need to do a little Tuning on the Willy Clapp, and take it by to see Uncle Ron for some slicking up and Chamfered Chambers. SAME THING I would do with a New 686 for the same reason. Both can be made a little better with a little more attention by someone who knows what they are doing.

At our Range in ICORE Revolver Matchs we have a good showing of GP100's. Infact ALL the NEW Revolvers showing up are GP100's.

Both are Great Revolvers. Bottom Line

Bob

Big Creek Kydex

 

[MikeyB]

I have both and like them both. Shooting the Lew Horton 686 2.5" vs. the GP-100 WC 3" I do prefer the WC over the 686.

 

[QuickDrawMcGraw]

.. Don't Even" want to go near the whole S&W vs Ruger debate,
I have several of each and love them All*
Have been in the market for a 686' for a couple years now,
just havent came across the right deal yet (but I Will)
That being said' I believe the GP 100 is a fine' weapon.
I own both the 4'& 6'in. and are the 2 most accurate
revolvers for my eyes at the range.
The Rugers might not be as "Pretty" as the S&W's in some respects,
... But don't count them out.

Was kinda tickled' to see that Hickock 45'
has a soft spot for them too.

Ruger GP-100 .357 Magnum - YouTube

~ Don

 

[Lockout]

Get both.

I did.

Enjoy both.

I do.

I agree with this suggestion.

 

[PurpleMountainOutdoors]

I agree with this suggestion.

Nice pieces


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lockout]

However, if I was forced to give up one of them it would be the Ruger.

 

[wolverine]

Morning PurpleMountainOutdoors;

Lots of info in this thread.

I have a couple of Ruger GP100 (4" & 6"), I really can't say anything bad about the GP100 as they are a durable good shooting gun with great sights.

The machine work isn't show quality but the Rugers do work good with no malfunctions or glitches.

I have been looking for a Smith 686 lately & the new S&W 686 machining & assembly really isn't any better than the GP100's I have.

My personal take on the GP100 vs the 686 is: for single action shooting the GP100 can have just as good of a trigger pull as the S&W 686. Both of my GP100's have super nice single action triggers (didn't come that way but didn't take much to make that way).

It's in the double action area that the 686 & the GP 100 seem to be different. Both of my GP 100's have decent double action trigger at around 7#. (BUT) they still stack a bit & like to be staged. If you shoot a double action from the staging position then you will probably really like the GP 100 trigger (obviously after you re-work it) as they seem to take to staging with a passion.

If you want smooth double action all the way through with little stacking then the 686 might be a better choice.

 

[rmw]

Smith=beautiful woman
Smith=smoother trigger
Smith=better firing mechanism (I thinks)
Smith=better cylinder release

Smith=beautiful woman - Yeah, ok. Gonna hump that thang anytime soon?
Smith=better firing mechanism (I thinks) - Huh?
Smith=better cylinder release[/QUOTE] - I totally disagree.
I have more S&W's than Rugers, but I can't fault them other than the heavier stock trigger.

 

[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.