S&W and Ruger ...
- Thread starter rfd
- Start date
cowboy4evr
Member
The biggest " PLUS " I can see is that they both are " American made " . You just can't loose , which ever one you buy . Regards , Paul
cowboy4evr
Member
BTW : I was in a gun shop about a month ago . I spied a Ruger Security Six , nickel with a 4 " barrel that caught my attention . It was priced @ just $350 . I thought , " wow " that's cheap . I have never seen a gun so loose before . This poor " Six " was junk . I'm not bashing rugers or comparing rugers to smiths, but I sure was taken back at how loose it was . I've always heard how strong they were . Regards, Paul
So why did they drop the Six series in favor of the GP100?
ctxcummins
Member
- Joined
- May 11, 2017
- Messages
- 113
- Reaction score
- 158
Because the GP100 is cheaper to manufacture.
Last edited:
Vulcan Bob
Member
The K frame was asked to do a job it was not made for, the .357 Magnum. So came the L frame, problem solved.
Thats got me thinking, what if it was an ammo problem rather than a gun problem.
Like insufficient crimp and the bullets walked out of the brass enough to rub on the forcing cone.
In that case, X effort would increase.
white cloud
Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2009
- Messages
- 1,142
- Reaction score
- 1,561
This is really excellent advice. Internet "facts" can be useful but they need very careful filtering. If I had paid attention to the internet, I would have never purchased my RAM 3500 and it has been an excellent truck. While I admit that a lot of the 70s S&Ws were pretty shoddy guns, I have shot both S&W and Ruger revolvers a lot more than 1500 rounds without issue.
I've bought many Rugers - used and new - over the years, and like them. They are a very solid product. Not every one has been perfect, but 90% of the time or more they're outstanding.
I think their sa/da revolvers look and feel great, but I don't really like the cylinder release button configuration. Not all that natural or intuitive, IMO. But I can see why people like them and want Ruger revolvers.
I've never had an extractor issue on any of my S&W revolvers, but I'm not sure I've ever put 1500 rounds through any single one of them. S&W and Ruger are the Ford and Chevy of the gun world....but which one is which? Wow...that question could lead to some serious arguments!
I think their sa/da revolvers look and feel great, but I don't really like the cylinder release button configuration. Not all that natural or intuitive, IMO. But I can see why people like them and want Ruger revolvers.
I've never had an extractor issue on any of my S&W revolvers, but I'm not sure I've ever put 1500 rounds through any single one of them. S&W and Ruger are the Ford and Chevy of the gun world....but which one is which? Wow...that question could lead to some serious arguments!
cowboy4evr
Member
Most of the people bashing the K frame 357 smiths have never owned one . They are just going by what they have read somewhere . There are people out there still claiming the earth is flat , and some believe it .
9mmsubgun-m11
Member
I don't believe the ratchet wear has much to do with the power of the ammo or the round count. From what I have seen it could be the extractor was not properly heat treated or not cleaned good-maybe. My experience with this issue stems from a 29-2 I acquired which upon initial inspection I did not see the extreme wear to the ratchet knobs.When I received the gun I put in some snap caps and slowly checked the single and double action lock up which seemed ok.Trip to the range proved otherwise as it was shaving lead and at times cylinder would not rotate with double action pull.Close inspection revealed the ratchet wear.I was able to acquire a very nice used extractor from a forum member which fixed the problem.I did notice a little end shake and installed a bearing/washer to correct it.What is the root cause-I have no idea but now I pay close attention the ratchets keeping them clean and oiled.The second worn ratchet I have seen is on a Hickock45 video with the model 19 chapter 2. The gun is on the table with the cylinder open and his son zooms in on the extractor and if you look close you will see heavy wear on one or two of the knobs.
American1776
Member
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2014
- Messages
- 1,770
- Reaction score
- 4,271
If you take apart a Ruger double action and a Smith of comparable caliber, you'll quickly see the differences.
The Ruger has a much thicker and wider yoke tube. There is much more surface bearing material there. This allows the gun to withstand many more full power rounds before endshake goes out of spec.
The Ruger also has a different lock work. This allows the gun to remain 'in time' for much much longer than the Smith, and especially the old Colts.
Look how deep the ratchet start is on the Rugers. Very deep and sharp. The older Smith & Wessons were quite shallow, and prone to peening when the gun was rapid fired. This was exacerbated greatly with the N-frames, with the heavy cylinder spinning and stopping causing hell on the ratchet and the locking bolt and notches.
S&W are sleeker and have a shorter lock time; and can therefore be fired more quickly. Their triggers are generally smoother. However, Recently, I've felt some *very* smooth Rugers NIB. A Ruger revolver is easier to 'short stroke' on the trigger, which causes it to seize, than the S&W.
Each design has its strength and drawbacks. Ruger's will generally last much longer and stay within spec longer than a S&W of comparable size.
The Ruger has a much thicker and wider yoke tube. There is much more surface bearing material there. This allows the gun to withstand many more full power rounds before endshake goes out of spec.
The Ruger also has a different lock work. This allows the gun to remain 'in time' for much much longer than the Smith, and especially the old Colts.
Look how deep the ratchet start is on the Rugers. Very deep and sharp. The older Smith & Wessons were quite shallow, and prone to peening when the gun was rapid fired. This was exacerbated greatly with the N-frames, with the heavy cylinder spinning and stopping causing hell on the ratchet and the locking bolt and notches.
S&W are sleeker and have a shorter lock time; and can therefore be fired more quickly. Their triggers are generally smoother. However, Recently, I've felt some *very* smooth Rugers NIB. A Ruger revolver is easier to 'short stroke' on the trigger, which causes it to seize, than the S&W.
Each design has its strength and drawbacks. Ruger's will generally last much longer and stay within spec longer than a S&W of comparable size.
Last edited:
cowboy4evr
Member
I don't agree with the last part of the post above . The L frame smith is a time proven work horse . In this country and abroad .
American1776
Member
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2014
- Messages
- 1,770
- Reaction score
- 4,271
The L frame is better than the k frame. However, Load for load, the gp100 will outlast the 686 in terms of the yoke tube resisting peening and excessive endshake. It's a matter of physics with respect to how much material is physically in the yoke tube. Also: the Ruger design will remain safe to shoot with up to .005 endshake. Once you get to that point on an L frame, you risk serious problems.
While with the parent agency I did firearms instruction during that time period. The duty round was that .357/125 load. In the course of l5 years or so I fired what had to be CASES of that ammo through my personally owned Sixes. I wish I had kept a round count. That included some overpressure lots of that ammo that we were supposed to return. Of course it's an unspoken law that instructors NEVER return ammo, they just request more--we fired that, too.
I did have to send two Sixes in because they both eventually started serious spitting from throat erosion; one was rebarreled for free. No other issues at all. I still have and use both guns. As an armorer Ruger sent me a nice assortment of spare parts which I guard closely.
S&Ws are definitely prettier, but those old Sixes were workhorses. I prefer them to the GP-100s. Ruger could do worse than to bring them back.
I did have to send two Sixes in because they both eventually started serious spitting from throat erosion; one was rebarreled for free. No other issues at all. I still have and use both guns. As an armorer Ruger sent me a nice assortment of spare parts which I guard closely.
S&Ws are definitely prettier, but those old Sixes were workhorses. I prefer them to the GP-100s. Ruger could do worse than to bring them back.
SquarePizza
Member
The one thing I can say about Ruger is they are doing more to innovate and breath more life into revolvers than S&W is currently doing.
Ruger is offering a greater diversity of cartridges and offers more site and finish options per model than smith. I was never a ruger guy, but if I were buying an off the shelf brand new production revolver, there are more rugers that I would want than there is current production smiths.
Ruger is offering a greater diversity of cartridges and offers more site and finish options per model than smith. I was never a ruger guy, but if I were buying an off the shelf brand new production revolver, there are more rugers that I would want than there is current production smiths.
With the re introduction of the sp101 9mm and especially the PC 9mm carbine Ruger has demonstrated that it is light years ahead of the kid thats running Smith with regard to responding to market trends and its frustrating.
Imagine the return of the 940-no lock, either performance center/or custom............
They do work without the clips ??
Imagine the return of the 940-no lock, either performance center/or custom............
They do work without the clips ??
BigBill
Absent Comrade
I been a ruger guy first with my 76 police service six in 357/2 3/4" barrel. It's been shooting stout loads too. My python eats the same loads.
I'm new to s&w every gun has its limits. The smith can handle normal magnum loads nothing wrong with that. I lube my extractor star with moly and the arm too. Nothing ever wore out on me yet. I don't need and new stinking parts. I perfer a ruger, colt or a s&w firearm first for revolvers.
Investment casting ruger has been there a longtime. It's the process plus the quality of the steel there using.
I'm new to s&w every gun has its limits. The smith can handle normal magnum loads nothing wrong with that. I lube my extractor star with moly and the arm too. Nothing ever wore out on me yet. I don't need and new stinking parts. I perfer a ruger, colt or a s&w firearm first for revolvers.
Investment casting ruger has been there a longtime. It's the process plus the quality of the steel there using.
Last edited:
Similar threads
