Ruger GP 100 S&W comparison

My 2.75 inch security six sits in the safe while i shoot the snot out of my 581 and my 28-2. The Ruger just does not feel as “right” in balance and mechanical action as the Smiths.
 
Glad I didnt go cheaper

When I was ready to buy my 686 (always wanted a SS .357) I went to the local gun show and went to pick up my first 686 4" and right next to it was a GP100 Rugar. I grabbed the Rugar first (it was $100 cheaper) Well, I have S&W already and am used to a smooth quiet action with the classic "clicks" and all. The Rugar felt like something was broken inside....very clunky. So I put it down and picked up a second Rugar GP100....it was the same. Put that one down and picked up the 686 I now own and there was the familiar solid quiet smooth reliable action I have grown to love. OK, I know its personal preference and Im really not saying the Rugar is a bad gun, just didnt like the balance the feel and the action near as much as the S&W686
 
I would challenge anyone to find a three inch GP100 with the short Lett grip and see what they think of it.

Like this one?

gp100 3inch.jpg

I like it. Shoots just as well as any of my Smiths, and can be carried in crossdraw pretty easily too thanks to the compact grips. Concealment is not an issue with a loose shirt, and weight is not bad. Fits an L-frame holster (Galco Summer Special molded to fit the L-frame) easily, so they are very close in size.
 
Last edited:
My brother used to own a nice little Security Six. I did shoot it a few times. It functioned and grouped just fine. Just not my cup of tea compared to my 686. I know comparing the 686 to a Security Six isn't a fair comparison, but going on just the feel of the trigger pull I like my Smith alot better. In the looks dept, IMHO Rugers don't look as finished and refined as a Smith. BTW, not saying I would never buy a Ruger, I think they work just fine. Just my first choice is a Smitty.

I also like Smith's cylinder release best of any wheelgun I have fired to date. Colt's are the WORST with that pull backwards with your thumb deal they have going.

BTW, little brother traded in that Security Six on the scoped 29 Classic he now owns and has a 586 on lay-away right now! I don't think he's planning on going back to Ruger any time soon....
 
Last edited:
I would challenge anyone to find a three inch GP100 with the short Lett grip and see what they think of it.

You mean like this one?

DSCN88501.jpg


Or this?

DSCN8842.jpg


Yeah ~ they're GREAT shooters! Haven't had them very long and only put 250 or 300 rounds through each but .... they're keepers. My 686-4 is a keeper too but ...... these are a couple of my favorites.
 
You mean like this one?


Yeah ~ they're GREAT shooters! Haven't had them very long and only put 250 or 300 rounds through each but .... they're keepers. My 686-4 is a keeper too but ...... these are a couple of my favorites.


Those are sharp!:cool: Especially like the grips.
 
I have two 3-inchers, both with the "short" or fixed sight grip.
The blued one I've had for about 12 years, carried it after I retired in early '99 till 9-11. It sits here in the office now, I'm about halfway through talking myself into going back to it.
The stainless one sits in the vault.

Those two are a near perfect fit in my hand. Wish the grips were still being made.
Denis
 
Dpris, I have recently seen the rubber portion of the original grips, I believe at Midway and/or Brownells. I think you have to buy the grip locator separately. You can get wood inserts for them at Altamont grips (the inserts for the SP101 fit). So if you don't mind spending a few dollars you can get something that approximates the originals. You might also find some on an auction site. I keep thinking about getting another one in stainless and was looking for something as close to the original grips as possible.
 
To the 3" GP100 posters:

YES!!!

And again, this isn't a knock on S&W. I'm just shocked that these three inch guns aren't more popular and the short Lett grip only makes them better. I prefer the visual difference that the older models have to the newer ones with the full underlug barrel shroud while the older ones it didn't go all the way to the end as much. But it's just a personal look preference. I can say that the one and only three inch 586 did make me drool pretty hard. If I ever see a three inch 581 then I do believe a credit card may slap down on the counter. But the GP is just a three inch beast!!!
 
Let's compare apples to apples... a full-shrouded 4" six shot GP100, KGP141, weighs 40 oz. The full-lugged 4" 6-shot 686, SKU #164222, weighs 39.7 oz. Keep in mind that the Ruger is cast SS; the S&W is hammer-forged and heat treated. The Ruger has a solid frame with an easily removed trigger group. Further dissassembly requires a ziploc baggie. The sideplate seems stout enough on S&W's - the frame material is inherently stronger. Besides, they use the same construction for N-frame .44 Magnums and X-frame .500 Magnums. The S&W construction is decidedly more costly, MSRP $829 vs the Ruger's $729 MSRP.

Of course, all of this info - and I only have one 686 - actually, a 7-shot 686P. Why? I like partial lugs - my 5" 686P is a partially lugged 'Stocking Dealer Exclusive' - an oddball in the 686 world. I prefer partial lugs - like the old 66 series K-frame .357 Magnums or the 627 Pro N-frame 8-shooter. If the GP100 floats your boat, I'm sure you'll be happy with it. If the short shroud models were available again, I would look them over, too. It will take a lot, however, to pry my 4" 627 Pro from my hands... unless I need a snubby - my 2 5/8" PC627 UDR will suffice there. Something nice about a x8 .357 Magnum...

Stainz
 
The GP's in 3, 4 and 6 inch were available in half-lug as well.

My personal preference however, is still the K-Frame sized Security / Service and Speed Six's.
 
If the 66's (and 19's) didn't have that danged flat milled into the bottom of the barrels then I would say they are near perfect. Then they "fixed" that problem with the L frame. (I don't feel like that is the right word, but don't know a better one) Then they made the 686 Mountain Gun and they dropped it. And they long since dropped the 586's with the exception of the one Performance Center model made in very limited numbers. Then they did the (bleep). Now they are making them in EDM barrels that don't like lead bullets. I can't help but feel left behind a little. :( That is why I struggle to desire a new S&W while I will buy a new Ruger no problem. And I don't mean to second shelf Ruger either. I love the beast and would love for them to bring back the half lug models or even better yet the Security Six series. But just as much, I would love for S&W to bring back the 586's, 581's, Mountain guns, and Combat Magnums. And leave out the (bleep) and make nice sharp cut rifling like they are supposed to have. If they had to cost more then I would pay it. And then again, pigs may fly... :rolleyes:
 
TB,
Thanks, I may try to scare up another set.
Never hurts to have spares. I have those on the two 3-inch GPs, a fixed-sight older half-lugged 4-inch GP, and a 4-inch adjustable sight GP.
They are just a great fit for me.
Denis
 
If the 66's (and 19's) didn't have that danged flat milled into the bottom of the barrels then I would say they are near perfect. Then they "fixed" that problem with the L frame. (I don't feel like that is the right word, but don't know a better one) Then they made the 686 Mountain Gun and they dropped it. And they long since dropped the 586's with the exception of the one Performance Center model made in very limited numbers. Then they did the (bleep). Now they are making them in EDM barrels that don't like lead bullets. I can't help but feel left behind a little. :( That is why I struggle to desire a new S&W while I will buy a new Ruger no problem. And I don't mean to second shelf Ruger either. I love the beast and would love for them to bring back the half lug models or even better yet the Security Six series. But just as much, I would love for S&W to bring back the 586's, 581's, Mountain guns, and Combat Magnums. And leave out the (bleep) and make nice sharp cut rifling like they are supposed to have. If they had to cost more then I would pay it. And then again, pigs may fly... :rolleyes:

Which raises a question I have....Why the heck DID they discontinue the 586's, 29 Classic and other such models???? Not everybody likes stainless....
 
My favorite GP100 is this 3" fixed sight model, which I did a little, er, "polishing" on... and an action job... the action is now as buttery smooth as the finish is.

KGPF331_LF.jpg


KGPF331_R.jpg


I love high polished blued guns, but gotta say, SS is such a joy to "touch up".
 
If I was going to carry a 6 shot 357 Mag it would be a 2 1/2" Mod 19 or 66, or a 4" Mof 19 or 66. I prefer adjustable sights.

I do not see the point, for me in carrying an L frame or an N frame 357 mag, I would carry a N frame 44 Mag instead. In fact I am wearing a 629 Mountain Gun in a Milt Sparks Summer Special as I type this.

As it is hunting season, and I am between hunts, I will carry the Mountain Gun even between hunts, to and from, and when hunting, till after the season. Then I will go back to the 1911 in 45 ACP.

However a couple of years ago I shot a buddies pair of 8 shot 357 Mag S&W snubbies. If a person is a 357 Mag kind of guy, and you will carry a BIG gun they are definately worth a look...

IF I was S&W I would make an 8 shot Scandium framed 3 1/2" "Mod 27".
 
Let's compare apples to apples... a full-shrouded 4" six shot GP100, KGP141, weighs 40 oz. The full-lugged 4" 6-shot 686, SKU #164222, weighs 39.7 oz. Keep in mind that the Ruger is cast SS; the S&W is hammer-forged and heat treated. The Ruger has a solid frame with an easily removed trigger group. Further dissassembly requires a ziploc baggie. The sideplate seems stout enough on S&W's - the frame material is inherently stronger. Besides, they use the same construction for N-frame .44 Magnums and X-frame .500 Magnums. The S&W construction is decidedly more costly, MSRP $829 vs the Ruger's $729 MSRP.

I'm not gonna get into the debate over whether what Ruger or Smith was designed to compete with whatever. Frankly, don't know, don't care. When I was younger, my budget didn't allow for many S&W revolvers, so as an alternative I bought Rugers & Tauruses. Tauruses are all gone now and my Rugers are on the way out.

I'm not a metalurgist. If I understand the process correctly, steel investment casting uses all reclaimed material of largely unknown steel composition. They smelt up a batch and test for the desired composition. If they find the batch lacking in the qualities they desire, they take a "best guess" addition of more scrap steel to achieve the qualities they want. After the casting process, heat treating would have to be performed to achieve the desired toughness. The process would be identical whether it's carbon or stainless.

Forged ordinance steel on the other hand is made from virgin steel and scrap steel of known heritage. It all boils down to "Better ingredients, Better Pizza" Papa John's.

It doesn't end there. Forged anything is denser than cast anything, thus stronger. That's why Rugers seem so overbuilt. They have to build them bigger and thicker to equal the performance of forged ordinance steel.

Bill Ruger practically invented the investment casting system used today in the USA. He owns one of the largest investment casting facilities. There's nothing wrong with investment casting as long as you realize you're gonna end up with a larger part than if you started with known high quality material and you forge rather than cast. I'd imagine that if Ruger forged their investment steel then their guns might be a tad smaller and stronger. But, I suspect hodgepodge steel doesn't forge well. Ruger only uses a tiny percentage of their overall production of investment steel to make their guns. The rest is sold to customers from various industries.
 
Back several years ago, probably late 1970's, I bought a SS Security 6 in a 4". It was and still is a tack driver. The X still has it. It reminded me of a 28 S&W. Every 28 I have ever shot was very accurate. Same deal with that 6, it just plain shot great.
Lately I have owned 4 Super RedHawks, 2 in 44 and 2 in 480 Ruger that I still have. My little brother has handled the Supers a little, and being a South Paw prefered the cylinder latch on the Rugers.

Anyway we shoot an outlaw IDPA match every month at our Sportsman's Club. I have been shooting my 625, 610, and 64 in SSR Division. (We only have 1 Revolver Division like IDPA started with, No ESR Division) Anyway my brother has an old original JM 625, but he did not have a 38 bigger than a J Frame to shoot. He was also wanting a carry 38/357. He did a little research, and ordered a new Willy Clap GP100 3" Stainless. They got most of it right. I originally thought they had the grip right, just sorta. It is the old insert style, and dolled up nicely with better rubber, and some super looking inserts. The only thing is it isn't the compact grips on it. Not sure how they screwed that up. I have a set of compacts if he decided to change them for carry. He got his Lobo Enhanced Pancake for it this week, and he has been carrying it all week. Looks like it conceals about as well as my 3" Smiths. It shoots ok, but we have a spring kit for it to make it better. We will find time shortly to do a little polishing, and get the springs in it. Then I figure a road trip to see Ron Power at Power Custom to get the chambers chamfered, and have him look it over. I am starting on a new 64 S&W build that I will need him to do a little majic on. I think I will have him put a Loc screw on my old 64 strain screw while i am up that way. No idea why I did not have him do that last trip up to see him.

Bottom line I like his 3" GP100 just fine. It would have been better with Dolled Up Compact Grips.
I noticed a trend with 3" GP100. You can find all you need NEW. No used ones anywhere.

Note TALO has a Blued 3" Willy Clap in the wings. Dealers catalog shows it coming.

Bob
 
Back
Top