Ruger GP 100 S&W comparison

[C Islander]

What size S&W revolver is close in size to the Ruger GP100. I know thre Ruger is bigger then a K frame.

 

[Dpris]

L Frame, 686 & so on.
Denis

 

[Ashlander]

Ruger created the GP100 to compete with the S&W line of L-frame revolvers. Ruger's previous Security/Service/Speed Six line competed with the S&W K-frames.

 

[C Islander]

That's what I thought. Thanks.

 

[Erich]

Where's that great '80s ad?

 

[stantheman86]

Ruger designed the Six series to compete with the S&W K-Frame .357's like the 19,66, 65 and 13.

Then, S&W brought out the L-frame in the early 80's to compete with the Ruger Six series and try to seize back some of the LE market.

The GP100 was not "designed" to compete with the L-frames, Ruger changed the way they cast the frames of the GP100 to save money.Bill Ruger claimed he made very little profit off the Six series, despite making over a million of them......... I don't know the exact method, I'm not a metallurgist but the cost-saving casting method resulted in a slightly beefier frame on the GP100. Most people think the GP100 is "stronger" than the Six series, but most of that is due to the crane lock on the GP, not frame size.

Overall, a GP100 is slightly thicker than an L-frame like a 686. A GP will fit in an L-frame holster but it will be just a little more snug. I have often carried one of my 6" GP100's in a holster made for a 586-686.

 

[Maximumbob54]

It feels to me more like it takes a N frame to match up with the GP100 than the L frame. This isn't a bust on the L frame, it's just that the Rugers are all so over built. That would be like comparing the N frame to the Redhawk. It just isn't the match up that some think. That would be about like comparing the 27/28/627 series to the .357 Redhawk... Yikes... Reeeeeaaaaaalllllyyyyyy different.

And for a Security Six to GP100 side by side:

 

[C Islander]

Thanks. I looked at a Wiley Clapp GP100 today. It was sweet!

 

[stantheman86]

Did someone say .357 Redhawk? Overbuilt is definitely the word! Mine is purely a bench rest target revolver.

The Redhawk is closer to an N-frame in size, again the Ruger is slightly bigger.

S&W rules the roost for finesse, shootability, classic looks and just makes neat guns. Ruger wins in the durability with super hot magnums dept.

Either way, not many of us are ever going to wear out an L-frame .357.

 

[fyimo]

I owned a 686 with 6 inch barrel and sold it and bought a Ruger GP 100 in 4 inch barrel. I never warmed up to the Ruger and then I bought another 686 to replace the GP100.

 

[wproct]

I have a 5 in bbl GP100 and a 6 in bbl 686-4, and the GP100 definitely feels like the larger revolver. I can't make up my mind if push come to shove which I would part with. Both fine revolvers.

 

[arizonarotors]

I own a 4" GP100 and a few Smith & Wesson revolvers. The S&W wins, hands down, in the smooth trigger department.....but not by as much as I expected.

I really enjoy shooting all of them and they are all pretty darn accurate.

Jim

 

[gumpys]

I own a 4" GP100 and a few Smith & Wesson revolvers. The S&W wins, hands down, in the smooth trigger department.....but not by as much as I expected.

I really enjoy shooting all of them and they are all pretty darn accurate.

Jim

Jim,
I own 2 Ruger GP100's and had action jobs done on both of them and they are smooth as butter, better than the 686 smith I had with action job as well, and better shooter's in my book as well. Now my Smith 586, that is tough to say
Eric

 

[G-Mac]

I ordered a 4" blue GP-100 as soon as they were introduced in the gun rags...before I'd even seen one in real life. I was going to get a 4" Security-Six, but wanted the "latest and greatest". No regrets, I still have that GP twenty-five years later. In that same time frame, many S&W .357 revolvers have come and gone. Although my taste in revolvers has shifted more to S&W, my GP is a keeper. You can't kill 'em!

 

[M3Stuart]

I'm with fyimo; the GP100 is bigger and heavier than the L frame. Both are very nice guns, but I settled on the 686 and no longer own a GP100.

Full disclosure; I like the SP101s but do not own one - yet. The new SP101 4" in .22LR is at, or near, the top of my list of guns to buy. They just can't build them fast enough right now. I like the feel and weight (30 oz) of it better than the M63. The size and weight of the SP101 puts them between the J and K frames. (closer to the J frames IMHO).

 

[uhittheuglytree]

I have a 4" GP100 and like it. No problems with it at all.

 

[Maximumbob54]

I would challenge anyone to find a three inch GP100 with the short Lett grip and see what they think of it. I may just buy the Wiley Clapp and swap out for the shorter grip. And I might just save up and buy the 586 L-Comp if they ever drop the (bleep).

 

[C Islander]

As I said earlier, the Wiley Clapp is sweet. I do like the grips much better then the Hogues Ruger is currently using..

 

[586L-Frame]

My GP100 6 inch and S&W 586-no dash 6 inch & 4 inch L-Frames.
586L-Frame

DLC’s .357 Magnums-Ruger GP100 6’, S&W 586L-Frame 6” & 4” Distinguished Combat Magnums.

 

[Ashlander]

Stan may have a point about Bill Ruger saying the Six series didn't make money for him, but see the following quote from GunWeek.com (October 2004):

"...[T]he introduction of S&W's L-frame guns must have surely brought market pressure to bear on Ruger. To compete, they needed a larger DA revolver suitable for police, military, and defense use. Bill Ruger wasn't going to fool around; he set out to design the new gun around the very hot ammunition it would have to use. His goal was to design the most durable DA .357 Magnum ever. The result was the GP-100, introduced in 1986."

So whether I was right or wrong -- I don't want Stan to think I just made it up. The article clearly ties the design of the GP100 to the introduction of the L-frame revolvers.