SW vs Ruger

[L. Boscoe]

I have an itch to buy a blued 357 to pair with my SW 686
4 in barrel that I have had for years.
The Ruger GP100 has the full shroud(?) and the SW does
not.
The SW is about $400 more, which is not a show stopper,
but it is a caution.
Any difference operationally between the two?
Durability- range shooting only, not a carry option.
Most likely bullseye shooting, as metal is boring.

[HighValleyRanch]

I shot with a 4" 586 for many years in my bullseye competition days. Accurate as all heck.
I shot a 94 once, with it at the 50 yard slow fire line, iron sights!
That would pair beautifully with your 696, but would not be like a different revolver.

[4V50 Gary]

Ruger is tougher. No screws to work loose (OK grip & sights).
S&W is forged/milled and has a superior trigger.

[Sevens]

Any difference operationally between the two?
Durability- range shooting only, not a carry option.

If you are talking new production now, I would choose the Ruger GP-100 over any S&W revolver made now.

However, I would absolutely choose an older used S&W revolver over any GP-100 and any new S&W revolver.

My comfort zone would be right around 1999 or older, and I find a real sweet spot between about 1983 and 1993.

Smith & Wesson made today has a pretty good chance of zero, and I mean literally zero QC inspection. That entire department has been outsourced to the consumer. If you buy a new S&W, and especially a revolver, you may get to try your hand at the fine reputation of their customer service and warranty. The problems you might see are unlimited. Frankly, it's a laugh riot. I'm a S&W revolver guy through and through and S&W QC today makes my stomach turn. It is revolting.

As for operational difference between GP-100 and a K-frame or L-frame S&W .357 Magnum:

Single action on the S&W is noticeably better

Double action on new S&W and GP-100 might be close comparison... S&W smoother but hits a heavy, obnoxious dead wall at the end that you have to bash through. The Ruger is springy and sproingy but mostly predictable -- the trigger stroke seems to take F O R E V E R but it gets there.

The S&W is more receptive to improvement in the double action feel if you are comfortable going inside the revolver.

The Ruger is far, far, far, FAR more bulletproof to issues with regard to timing and wear. To put this another way, you can go out and find a million S&W revolvers with timing that is a little off or a little slow or a little erratic, but it's half a miracle to find any Security Six, GP-100 or Redhawk with timing problems of any sort.

Summary:

1) get a S&W from 20+ years ago
2) get a Ruger GP-100 from whenever
3) get a new production S&W from right now and report back anything and everything you find that ain't right with it

[wild cat mccane]

I don't think a single claim about Ruger being stronger is supported.

The S&W plus with 7 rnds existed long before the Ruger 1771 7rnd, and Ruger had troubles fitting 7 in the cylinder...but then did.

The areas of "robustness" on the ruger are not problem areas on any revolver today--ie no one is blowing their 686 top strap off.

If anything, I would say the 686 is stronger than the Ruger. Less material, but better. Better trigger, and neither go out of time in any amount of normalcy. If neither break frames and neither go out of time...what's the measure for more robust of stronger?

S&W dominate the revolver competition area where revolvers are shot too fast and reloaded too fast.

The toughted "peg" of the GP100 that claims to offer more grip options has two (pirate peg and normal Lett) while the 686 has no less than 6+ grip angles on Altamont.

Having owned several of both, I see the appeal of some features on the GP100. I cannot see anything on the GP100 that isn't greatly overtaken by the 686 though. Not even person preference.

I shimmed and Wilson combat springed my GP100. I truly do not think claims that the GP100 can be made to even stock of the 686 is true. I also did the $160 S&W package to one of my 686. It was worth it and showed the 686 can also be improved too.

If someone likes their GP100 more, that's fine with me too

[wild cat mccane]

The blued GP100 used to go for 500-550 for the 4 inch.

I bet it's currently near a 568.

586 all day. The blued on the 568 alone will be worth it to the GP100.

Yep. A blue gp100 for 20 years going at 500 is now $660 on gun.deals or $780 for a 5 inch. Neither wood. The more desired 5" GP100 used to go at starting price of 686.

586 is $800.

To show you how screwed up pricing is, the normal $640 GP100 SS 4" is now only 20 dollars away from the cheapest/least desired blued GP100 4". No sense. They have gone up and haven't come back. S&W went up, but have started to return.

[L. Boscoe]

thanks guys, I have a 686, want a blued, still leaning to SW although Ruger is really good looking.

[jackmoser65]

If you are talking new production now, I would choose the Ruger GP-100 over any S&W revolver made now.

However, I would absolutely choose an older used S&W revolver over any GP-100 and any new S&W revolver.

My comfort zone would be right around 1999 or older, and I find a real sweet spot between about 1983 and 1993.

My thoughts exactly.

I don't think a single claim about Ruger being stronger is supported.

Except they are. Not as obvious in the medium frame 357s but painfully obvious in the large frame big bores to anyone that has done a lot of shooting with them. I rattled two of them loose and gave up on N frames for heavier loads. The difference in strength of material is negligible. The difference in strength of design is significant. It wasn't an accident that Bill Ruger eliminated known weaknesses in Colt and Smith designs in his guns. The side plate being a major one.

[JohnKSa]

If anything, I would say the 686 is stronger than the Ruger. Less material, but better.

Both revolvers weigh the same and fit in the same holster. So there's really not much difference in the amount of the material involved. As far as the quality of the material, I don't see anyone claiming that the GP100 has issues with wear or parts breakage that would suggest that the S&W material is any better than Ruger's.

IMO, any strength differences in the Ruger come from design choices, not from differences in the amount or quality of materials involved. In other words, I wouldn't advise making choices based on differences in material or differences in the amount of materials.

Some things to consider:

The GP100/SP101/Super Redhawk revolvers I've bought have all needed some significant work to deal with rough internal finishing. The inside of the trigger return spring channel, especially, is a bumpy, gravel road the way it comes from the factory resulting in a hitchy, gritty, hard trigger pull. The hammer to frame fit is pretty loose and it benefits significantly from shims. A lot of the internals have sharp edges, so you have to be careful taking the gun apart if you want to avoid cutting yourself. I just don't hear these kinds of complaints about the S&W revolvers.

The GP100s are quite easy to take apart and work on which means that if you do want to do your own gunsmithing, it's easier than with a S&W wheelgun. This is one reason why I have bought Ruger GP100/SP101 revolvers even knowing that the triggers were going to need a lot of work.

The wiggly ejector rod of the GP100 design can be off-putting if you aren't used to it. On the other hand, it never backs out and ties up the gun as can happen with the S&W. Neither is a show stopper--just two more things to consider.

I do like the GP100 grips better than just about any grip you can get for an 686. The peg design makes it easy to get a lot of rubber between the metal and the shooter's hand and that makes for more comfortable shooting. Don't know if that's a factor in target shooting since there's really no need to go with hot loads for that.

I don't know that S&W revolvers are actually prone to going out of time if they are treated properly, but I do know that you just don't seem to hear about the Ruger revolvers going out of time. Not saying it doesn't happen, it just seems to be very rare. You do hear about it happening with the S&Ws. Had one friend whose 686 went out of time twice--S&W fixed it twice on warranty and he finally sold it. I actually bought it--I think it was something he was doing wrong, not really so much an issue with the gun. But any way you cut it, the S&W's do seem to be a bit more fragile in that respect.

All that said, if I were going to get a companion revolver for a S&W, I'd probably get another S&W. It just seems like it's going to be a nicer set with two S&Ws, one blued and one stainless. No need to learn the slightly different trigger feel of the GP, the different cylinder release, etc.

[jetinteriorguy]

First off, I’ve been a S&W guy for about 40 years. About 6 years ago I boobooed and blew up my favorite 627 and was looking for a replacement. As a stop gap I traded one of my CZ’s for a 4” GP100. The trigger was heavy and a bit rough but I liked the nice uniform pull with no stacking. After some research I contacted TriggerShims.com and they talked me through how to figure what shims to order. I disassembled the Ruger, much much easier setup than a Smith. I polished the recommended parts and measured for shims. Then I ordered the proper shim/spring kit and put it all back together. Wow, was I surprised. The DA and SA surpasses/rivals all but one of my Smiths. The only Smith of the dozen I own that is better than the GP is my 4” Model 57 no dash. There is only one glitch in the Ruger, it has a slight false reset so when firing DA don’t short stroke the trigger pull. The only time it gets me is when shooting a lot of my 9mm’s and getting used to their resets I’ll get caught when switching back to the Ruger.

[TruthTellers]

As much as I have lost faith in both companies, I'd say Ruger is generally a better choice for the money, but that's not to say every DA Ruger is better than S&W. I personally hate the SP101 and if I were looking for a smaller frame .357, I'd go S&W. I have been thinking about a 10mm revolver and Ruger does make the GP in that chambering, but it has issues with light strikes when shooting .40, but the S&W 610 I'm not seeing reports of that issue, so for me I'd go with the 610 over the GP.

And that's pretty much it. I've mostly switched over to Taurus for revolvers on my list, the difficulty being their low availability.

[jackmoser65]

TK Custom moon clips resolve any issues shooting 40's out of the Ruger 10mms.

[L. Boscoe]

got the smith 586. Ruger still on the list.

[Pahoo]

Ruger is tougher. No screws to work loose (OK grip & sights).
S&W is forged/milled and has a superior trigger

This is pretty much, my opinion buy I would still enjoy shooting my Smith. I had a trigger job done on my 6"-GP and what a joy it is to shoot. I really don't think you could make a bad call, on buying either. One observation is that every hand-gunner wants a Smith but not every one, wants a Ruger .....

Be Safe !!!

[FITASC]

I also did the $160 S&W package to one of my 686. It was worth it and showed the 686 can also be improved too.

What is this package?

[44caliberkid]

Smith & Wesson 586 to be sure.

[Sevens]

One point I would like to pick at -- the Ruger's reputation for "much easier" disassembly.

Fine argument with regards to getting in to the guts however there is one LARGE difference, and that is when it comes to pulling the cylinder off the yoke. Royal pain in the backside on Ruger revolvers. I've done it with a Speed Six, GP-100 and a non-Super Redhawk and it stinks. With a S&W, it couldn't be much more simple.

Here's where someone tries to downplay the need to remove the cylinder from the yoke -- please don't. Anything and everything from old gun oil to carry lint to powder fouling to a mix of these causes the cylinder to drag, and ANY drag goes directly to stack on top of your double action trigger pull. Furthermore, please don't make the argument that you don't squirt an excess of anything in there which allows "you" to avoid this problem because I buy guns used and apparently every revolver owner in all of the land except you squirts goo in there.

S&W whups Ruger when it comes to pulling the cylinder from the yoke.

[JohnKSa]

Fine argument with regards to getting in to the guts however there is one LARGE difference, and that is when it comes to pulling the cylinder off the yoke. Royal pain in the backside on Ruger revolvers. I've done it with a Speed Six, GP-100 and a non-Super Redhawk and it stinks. With a S&W, it couldn't be much more simple.

I guess it's a little fiddly. I've never had any trouble with it. I do usually pull the cylinder off the yoke to clean in there when I strip the revolver and crud does tend to build up in there, especially if a wet lube is used.

You do have to watch what you're doing as there are some little tiny parts and springs that can get away if you're not careful.

[rc]

One of my first guns I bought as an adult was a 686 with the 6 inch barrel. It's been a great gun but it's a pre lock, no mim gun with the firing pin on the hammer. Paid maybe $350 on sale back in the mid 90s. I eventually got an SP101 because I wanted a 32 magnum to play with. Great gun. Couldn't afford to buy a rare Model 16. I like the push button cylinder latch of the Ruger and the action is pretty smooth. I just changed out the springs and polished it up a bit. Now I have a GP100 in 327. Good gun. I wouldn't mind getting a 357 mag GP100 too. The thing I like better about the Rugers now is they don't have the stupid integral lock! My smith may be a tad bit smoother but the Rugers are just as accurate. The 617 I picked up used is nothing to get excited about in the accuracy department.

[UncleEd]

Though a Smith vs. Ruger thread, don't pass on
considering new production Colt King Cobra or
Python.

The OP has already made his choice.

But I believe a lot of revolver enthusiasts
should again consider Colt and its offerings.
The selection is wide and seems to be
getting wider.

[ZEBRARANGER]

Ruger

[wild cat mccane]

Master Revolver Action Package ($165)

https://www.smith-wesson.com/custome...on-gunsmithing

So taking the better trigger better, within a reasonable amount of money.


Not to get dusty, but perhaps we don't hear about GP100s going out of time because GP100s aren't used in competition shooting sports. S&W are. So it's a legit point.

I don't know if I've read a post about someone's 686 going out of time...maybe ever.

[Don P]

S&W is forged/milled and has a superior trigger.

With a little bit of work one can achieve a trigger to give the S&W a run for the money. I have a big pat on the back from a S&W armorer about the trigger on my GP-100 match champion.

[JohnKSa]

I don't know if I've read a post about someone's 686 going out of time...maybe ever.

I posted on this thread about one that went out of time twice.

I wouldn't make a buying decision based only on one design being more likely to go out of time--in fact, I bought the gun in question after the previous owner decided to sell it.

[highpower3006]

My 586 is almost 40 years old and has always been a solid gun. I got it used about ten years ago and have no clue as to how it was treated before I got it. Judging it's general cosmetic condition, I don't think it was babied. I personally have always shot .357's through it and it is within a whisker of being as accurate as either of my M27's.

And it does indeed have a full length underlug: