m67skc
Member
Is there anyone who can give unbiased comparisons between these 2 357 mags?
Thanks.
Thanks.
M686 or Ruger GP100?
- Thread starter m67skc
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Titegroups
Member
Most significant difference is the trigger is better in the smith. I have a 586 and the g, with many thousandsmof rounds through them both. By the smith if you want more refined, but the gp if you want to shoot mass quatities of ammo though it. You cant go wrong either way.
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2005
- Messages
- 8,020
- Reaction score
- 7,100
No. But, I direct your attention to the Ruger-burger ads of the late 80s.
Attachments
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2005
- Messages
- 8,020
- Reaction score
- 7,100
I don't think Bill Ruger saw the humor in it. That Ruger-burger ad came, if I recall, after a Ruger ad comparing its forging process and its resultant "thick" frames to S&W's frame with its thin sections, etc.
S&W responded with the Ruger-burger ad.
Ruger responded, if memory serves, by telling every distributor that they had to choose between S&W and Ruger. Distribute one or the other. Ruger pulled its distributors who kept S&W.
After a few short years, Ruger reconsidered its policy and allowed its distributors to begin carrying S&W again.
It sort of got "ugly" for a while.
SJshooter
Member
The Smith is forged, the Ruger is cast. Out of the box, the Smith has a better trigger. S&W carries a lifetime warranty, Ruger customer service is good but they don't make the same offer. The Smith has a better resale value. I like the Smith cylinder release better than Rugers. I think the Smith is pretty like an old Cadillac while the Ruger is like a tank. Both are stout and will enjoyably shoot all day without fail. Never met anyone who bought either and didn't like it. But this is a Smith forum, so you ont be surprised when I say go for the Smith and don't look back..
jeffrey
Member
It's really a matter of taste. I have both Smiths and Rugers, but I will say that I prefer the looks of the old "six" series (Security Six, Speed Six and Service Six) to the looks of the current production GP100. But that's not to say that I would turn up my nose to a GP100 (I only have one GP100, as opposed to several older Rugers and three 686s and one 586).
If you like to tinker with the innards of a revolver, you might find that it is easier to work on a Smith as you can see how it all the moving parts at once when you remove the side plate. On the other hand, the absence of a side plate probably makes the Ruger a stronger design. But as many people mostly shoot .38 special out of their .357s, that probably doesn't matter all that much.
By the way, this is a query that comes up pretty often on the Ruger boards, not so much here. That may tell you something. I'd look there too.
If you like to tinker with the innards of a revolver, you might find that it is easier to work on a Smith as you can see how it all the moving parts at once when you remove the side plate. On the other hand, the absence of a side plate probably makes the Ruger a stronger design. But as many people mostly shoot .38 special out of their .357s, that probably doesn't matter all that much.
By the way, this is a query that comes up pretty often on the Ruger boards, not so much here. That may tell you something. I'd look there too.
My son has the rare 5" GP100 and I have a 6" 686-3. The GP100 is super solid and has a nice trigger easily as good as my 686. My 686 is "prettier" but doesn't feel as stout as the GP100.
Difficult choice and like has been said it depends on what is most important to you.
If the choice is between a new 686 with the lock and MIM and a new GP100, I would chose the GP100 hands down.
Difficult choice and like has been said it depends on what is most important to you.
If the choice is between a new 686 with the lock and MIM and a new GP100, I would chose the GP100 hands down.
lhump1961
US Veteran
That about sums it up...
I have all Smiths but my son-in-law has Rugers that I have shot. Nothing against Ruger's at all but the Smith's are a step up IMHO. The kicker is that when my son-in-law wanted a carry .357 revolver he did some homework and ended up talking me out of my 66-3 2 1/2"!
(not to worry, I have others and it stayed in the family!)
lhump1961
US Veteran
Good for you for finding a GP100 with a good trigger. I have never handled a Ruger revolver that could compare with any of my L frames for smooth action. As for "stout"...that, of course, is a debate that I won't rekindle here!
Personal opinion aside...both good guns.
I would have to research it but I'm sure Ruger uses MIM parts as well. I'm not aware of a production gun that doesn't these days.
Last edited:
Dstyles75
Member
Interesting experiment. I bet you would get the same replies, but in favor of the GP100, if you posed the same question on a Ruger Forum.
Thats why you shouldn't be surprised when I say, "686 All The Way!"
Thats why you shouldn't be surprised when I say, "686 All The Way!"
gutterman
Member
I have and have had both. I still have my 686 and will never part with it-- cant say the same for the ruger.
Hillbilly77
Member
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2012
- Messages
- 6,183
- Reaction score
- 18,481
I have had both. I had a 6" GP100 and a 4" 686, and still own a 4" 586.
The Ruger is a fine firearm. The trigger is not as smooth as a Smith, but does have a nice, crisp break. The trigger can be vastly improved with a simple spring swap. You can get new springs for a couple dollars from Wolff Springs, and they swap out fairly easily. Also a little polishing with some 2000 grit sandpaper can do wonders.
Not to mention the several hundred dollar price difference. You can buy a Ruger for hundreds less.
They do not come out and say "Lifetime Warranty" like S&W does, but I have heard nothing but good reviews about Ruger's Customer Service when it comes to fixing problems.
The Ruger is a fine firearm. The trigger is not as smooth as a Smith, but does have a nice, crisp break. The trigger can be vastly improved with a simple spring swap. You can get new springs for a couple dollars from Wolff Springs, and they swap out fairly easily. Also a little polishing with some 2000 grit sandpaper can do wonders.
Not to mention the several hundred dollar price difference. You can buy a Ruger for hundreds less.
They do not come out and say "Lifetime Warranty" like S&W does, but I have heard nothing but good reviews about Ruger's Customer Service when it comes to fixing problems.
Last edited:
357-RevolverGuy
Member
I own a 686 and GP100 and enjoy shooting them both about the same. I paid about $200 less for the GP100 and over the years it seems to be the more accurate shooter when handling .357 rounds. Both handle .38 the same... The accuracy on the GP100 I think has to do with the rear and front sights being better aligned. My 686 took many range trips before I was finally able to sight it in accurately.
What I like most about the 686: smoother trigger and hammer action, more refined steel, hammer feels great, a lot more selection on grips (just about every maker has some variety of grip style to choose from), option for 7 shot, more barrel lengths to choose from.
What I like most about the GP100: Nice balance, nicer grooves on top of the barrel, more accurate rear/front sight (front sight easy to change out), I'm one of the few that like the cylinder release button (it doesn't get in the way of speedloaders)
Nice thing is most holsters you buy for one will fit the other the same. Someone mentioned the 686 has better resell value but I am finding that both are selling very well at my local gun shops. Ruger has hit a homerun with the Wiley Clapp GP100 and S&W has their Talo edition 686 which are both hot sellers.
What I like most about the 686: smoother trigger and hammer action, more refined steel, hammer feels great, a lot more selection on grips (just about every maker has some variety of grip style to choose from), option for 7 shot, more barrel lengths to choose from.
What I like most about the GP100: Nice balance, nicer grooves on top of the barrel, more accurate rear/front sight (front sight easy to change out), I'm one of the few that like the cylinder release button (it doesn't get in the way of speedloaders)
Nice thing is most holsters you buy for one will fit the other the same. Someone mentioned the 686 has better resell value but I am finding that both are selling very well at my local gun shops. Ruger has hit a homerun with the Wiley Clapp GP100 and S&W has their Talo edition 686 which are both hot sellers.
BobR1
Member
I have a 686-1 and a 686-5 Both are Power Custom Revolvers.
My brother has a Willy Clapp 3" GP100 that Ron Power has also worked on.
After Ron Power working on all 3 revolvers the triggers are very similar on all 3.
My brother is Left handed, and likes the GP100 cylinder release better than a S&W.
If I were looking for a 3" Barrel version I would pick the Ruger. I like to use Safariland Speed Loaders, and they only come in a 6 shot version. The 686 with a 3" barrel in a 6 shooter is a little hard to locate.
Both are very compairable. Both can have a great trigger if worked on a little. If you are looking at a 4 or 6 inch barrel guns with adjustable sights, the Ruger quick change front sight is nice. If you like nice wood grips, the 686 has the edge.
Between the two choices I still own the 686's.
I also handgun hunt. I own a pair of 480 Ruger Super RedHawks. I much prefer the SRH to a S&W X Frame for my hunting revolver.
I also own an LCR 22. I looked the LCR 22 and the 43C over, and spent my money on the Ruger. Although I am not impressed with the 43C's aluminum cylinder, if the 43C had been priced the same as a 442, I would have been more inclined to have spent my money on the 43C.
Ruger on the other hand has the LCR 22, LCR 22M, and the LCR 38 all priced about the same, like they should be.
Bottom line, they both make quality products.
Bob
My brother has a Willy Clapp 3" GP100 that Ron Power has also worked on.
After Ron Power working on all 3 revolvers the triggers are very similar on all 3.
My brother is Left handed, and likes the GP100 cylinder release better than a S&W.
If I were looking for a 3" Barrel version I would pick the Ruger. I like to use Safariland Speed Loaders, and they only come in a 6 shot version. The 686 with a 3" barrel in a 6 shooter is a little hard to locate.
Both are very compairable. Both can have a great trigger if worked on a little. If you are looking at a 4 or 6 inch barrel guns with adjustable sights, the Ruger quick change front sight is nice. If you like nice wood grips, the 686 has the edge.
Between the two choices I still own the 686's.
I also handgun hunt. I own a pair of 480 Ruger Super RedHawks. I much prefer the SRH to a S&W X Frame for my hunting revolver.
I also own an LCR 22. I looked the LCR 22 and the 43C over, and spent my money on the Ruger. Although I am not impressed with the 43C's aluminum cylinder, if the 43C had been priced the same as a 442, I would have been more inclined to have spent my money on the 43C.
Ruger on the other hand has the LCR 22, LCR 22M, and the LCR 38 all priced about the same, like they should be.
Bottom line, they both make quality products.
Bob
Last edited:
Exact same in my case. The 686 is just more appealing to the senses. Better looking, better trigger, better 'feel' and holds its value. My GP's were very good revolvers which were accurate enough for any normal sporting, hunting or defense purpose. One had thousands of hot magnum rounds through it and still locked-up tight as new. In the end the GP's were traded toward more S&W's.
I got a kick out of seeing the ad "What's thicker got to do" Sherry Collins, who is a friend, was ad mgr. with S&W at the time and countered with that ad . I thought it was a cool way of "countering" Ruger's ad campaign with humor. I have since lost track of Sherry, but always enjoyed her company.
Maximumbob54
Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2010
- Messages
- 7,202
- Reaction score
- 1,928
Bought it brand new a few years ago. Went in to buy a 686+. Found one. When I woke up on the floor from having passed out from sticker shock I went back to the GP100 and bought it. Added the old style grip and now it's near perfect.
