S&W 686 Plus vs Ruger GP100

[RodTheWrench]

Ah, this is just like the endless Chevy vs Ford debate - BOTH have strengths and weaknesses and both have rabid fans that will defend their favorite ad nauseum.

I have both, earlier 6" models. My 686(no +) has the Power Port which I feel makes it quite a bit more manageable with stout loads. The triggers are comparable, the DA pull is nice on both.

So I guess buy the one you want. Then buy the other.

Next for me is a Dan Wesson 15.

[three-fifty-seven]

They're both in same class of handgun and both are excellent firearms.

However I do not think the Smith and Wesson is worth the extra money over a GP100.

[Nick_C_S]

I have never fired a GP100, but I'm sure they're fine guns. At the end of the day, you're not going to go wrong with your choice.

I have three 686's (no Rugers). An 8 3/8" barrel - and we'll leave that one out of this conversation, since it hardly applies.

I have a 6-shot 4" barrel I bought new in 1986. It's out-of-the-box-stock and I've put thousands of rounds through it; and it's one of my favorite guns to shoot. I shoot IDPA with it on a regular basis.

I recently purchased (NIB) a 7-shot 3" barrel with the "lawyer lock." I've got a couple hundred rounds through it now. The trigger is "funny" compared to the 6-shot I'm so used to. And it (the trigger) even has a bit of a "grinding" feeling just before hammer break. I'm not a big fan of the trigger. That said, however, I have basically gotten used to it and it shoots nice and straight. I enjoy shooting it. And even with the "funny" trigger, I have no trouble knocking the center of the target out with it. I'd still recommend it for anybody who is thinking about getting one. But I will be sending it in for trigger work ;-)

[Sevens]

re: 7-shot 686+

The trigger is "funny" compared to the 6-shot I'm so used to. And it (the trigger) even has a bit of a "grinding" feeling just before hammer break. I'm not a big fan of the trigger.

Bingo, same EXACT thing as my buddy's similar 686+, 4" barrel, and you were able to describe better than I could. On a double action pull, the whole works seems to pull smooth until it stops DEAD and the pull weight just rockets up and you have to tug THROUGH the dead spot to ka-CHUNK and discharge the round.

Frankly, I loathe it. It angers me because it looks like the 686 I know and love, but there's an evil demon living inside it. PUKE!

[Doc TH]

Curious. My 686+ no lock has one of the best DA trigger pulls I have ever felt. It is light, smooth & predictable. 7-round speedloaders are easily available in my locality.

[Sweet Shooter]

I haven't owned the GP100 but did own the SP101. I like the 686+ much better than all of them. The 686+ has the cylinder latch in stronger places because of the extra chamber. The DA on mine is like silk. The SA is like snapping a hair. If you can't get into a Python (and who can?) the 686+ with a full under lug is the next king of revolvers. Stop me if you've heard this one before, but I will never sell mine. Ever. I have already sold the SP101.

I'm not sure of the strength of the 686 frame in bigger calibers but in 357 is just a tank of a gun.

And if you are into buying/selling, the 686+ holds resale value better.
-SS-

[Water-Man]

GP100.

[buck460XVR]

Looking at buying one of these. Probably with a 4" barrel. Would like pros and cons of each. Durability, resale, performance, etc. Anybody have experience with both? Thanks.

Both are fine guns. Both will suit you well. Both will have similar performance with a slight edge to trigger and finish to the Smith. Resale value, the edge will always go to the Smith. But then, one usually pays a little more up front for them. My advice, pick the one that fits your hand, fits your pocketbook and tickles your fancy. Tale it home, shoot the 'ell outta it and enjoy.

As for the difference in trigger pull between a 686 and a 686+, I have models of both. Since they are generally hunting/range guns, I shoot them primarily in SA. My youngest son that usually only shoots our DA revolvers in DA, prefers the trigger of the plus models over those of the standard 686s, and his personal 686 is a standard. To me, there ain't much difference. Part of the issue I see from some is they are comparing a trigger from a older Smith that has been worn and polished to a trigger on a new gun that has not. My last 686+ had a gritty trigger too, for about a thousand pulls or so. Now it's every bit as smooth as the others.

[Sevens]

I'm willing to concede that the problem I'm feeling in my friends ILS-equipped 686+ is due -more- to the presence of the lock (or the drop of quality/finishing of newer revolvers) than it is due to the fact that it's a 7-shot cylinder rather than a 6-shot cylinder.

However, if you take the same exact cylinder size and instead add another ratchet so that it's indexing a bit shorter and locking a bit earlier than what you've previously been shooting for a quarter century -- I won't accept any argument that tells me "it's the same, just has one more shot." It is -not- the same.

I bought my 686-3 brand-spanking-new, shipped to my kitchen table FFL from his wholesaler in 1989 and I paid for it with saved up paper route money. This may have been a number of years ago, but man, it did -NOT- have that dead-stop hitch, crunch, and pull-through-to-discharge that my friends (also new) revolver arrived with. It was purchased new, from Bud's in Kentucky.

The newest (to me) S&W I own is a 19-3 and I first came across this revolver four years ago and it was offered as having been unfired and all the evidence with it backed it up. Even if someone had taken 6 shots from it, the point was the same -- it wasn't the difference between "meh, ya shot that one a thousand times and this other one is new" This 1974-built 19-3 had not been run, maybe ever, and the double action on this revolver is what you expect from a Smith & Wesson. My pal's 686+? Sucks. But it's not mine. If it were, it'd be headed to the east coast.

[coldbeer]

I like them both, don't own a GP100 yet but it's going to be my next purchase for sure. I think a 4" GP100 would complement my 8 3/8" 686 nicely. Their both good looking accurate and strong revolvers. You Can't go wrong with either really. They're kinda hard to find right now though.

[1911A1Bob]

I own and use both, I'd trust and carry either. My gut says the GP-100 will outlast the 686+, but who knows? Try them both in your hand and get the one you like the best. Or buy whichever costs less and use the extra for a good holster and ammo. I don't think you can go wrong with either of them.

[Ozzieman]

I will stay away from the lock/pre-lock part of the discussion, because it's my hope that my comments and experience will help the OP and not derail the thread.

I didn’t know that bring up the fact that I didn’t care for the newer lock was a restricted subject here at TFL sorry that I stepped over the imaginary line of some members.

[skidder]

I didn’t know that bring up the fact that I didn’t care for the newer lock was a restricted subject here at TFL sorry that I stepped over the imaginary line of some members.

Ya, you gotta be careful in this new age of "Tolerance". You should only state your opinion if it agrees with the majority. We don't want to offend anybody.

BTW: I hate that stupid lock too.

[KMAX]

I didn’t know that bring up the fact that I didn’t care for the newer lock was a restricted subject here at TFL sorry that I stepped over the imaginary line of some members.

Don't sweat it Ozzieman. I am the OP and I welcome all comments as long as they are not insults. I have decided to go with the GP100. Now stainless or blue? But I'll decide that on my own.

[dgludwig]

I've shot thousands of rounds through various Smith revolvers over the years (J,K,L and N frames) and many through both the six and seven round L frames and have never discerned any significant differences in terms of da trigger pulls between the two versions (other than what you might expect in terms of differences resulting from manufacturing tolerances and degree of usage between any two revolvers of like configuration) In fact, a friend's Model 686 Plus has one of the best unmodified da trigger pulls that I have ever tried on any Smith revolver. I don't dispute the fact that some people say they have and nobody has to "accept my argument" to the contrary. I'm only reporting my personal experience with the two revolvers in question (686vs 686 Plus) and it's my opinion that the da trigger pulls on each are the same, everything else being equal in terms of usage, wear, year of build, etc.
As others have noted, I don't think you can go wrong with either the Ruger or the Smith. Both are very nice revolvers.

[Winchester_73]

Well don't forget that the Ruger was tested against atomic weaponry and survived, completely intact, so if you want a revolver which can withstand nuclear explosion and subsequent fallout, don't get a paper mache S&W

[Sevens]

I didn’t know that bring up the fact that I didn’t care for the newer lock was a restricted subject here at TFL sorry that I stepped over the imaginary line of some members.

With a smiley in here, you'd come off a bit less obnoxious, but I suppose that wouldn't deliver your message as it was intended. FWIW, -many- of us all feel the same way about ILS-equipped revolvers and no, the conversation isn't restricted. It just seems to muck up and take over a lot of otherwise productive threads. But I'm not the playground lady, so please, continue to throw in snark to the best of your ability.

and it's my opinion that the da trigger pulls on each are the same, everything else being equal in terms of usage, wear, year of build, etc.

I hear ya and also agree that each person's experience is his own, but it does occur to me that no matter how close two revolvers can be in all the other ways...one of them is still pushing the cylinder a smidge more and the other a smidge less and it seems like simple physics is going to stick it's head in to the trigger pull. There's going to be resistance in the lever when you add the work of cylinder turning to it -- and likewise, that work ends/stops when the cylinder stops turning. I suppose the hope is that the END of the work is at the same point and it's only the start of the work that is perceptible in the lever.

This is one of those times where no matter how hard any of us try, we can't convert to text on a screen precisely what we want. I want to put this 686+ that belongs to my buddy in some hands. If I owned it... I have no doubt that I'd be on the phone to S&W.

[jmstr]

maybe I don't shoot enough. Maybe I'm not skilled enough. I just can't feel a significant difference in the triggers of the Ruger DA revolvers vs S&W DA revolvers.

I had a 6" GP100 and a 6.5" S&W Model 629-4. Both felt equally good to me, honestly. I did sell both, and go a 4" GP100 as I realized I'd prefer to carry it year around camping and stuff. I then sold my 629 to get a SuperRedHawk 7.5" barrel. Again, the trigger felt just as good to me on the SRH as on the 629. I am equally [in]accurate with either.

Since I can't feel a noticeable difference in the triggers, I went with the ones I am less concerned about shooting loose with full-house loads.

I am with the poster who likes their revolvers to be 6 guns.

All three of my centerfire revolvers are 6 guns: no 5s, 7s or 8s. However, my .22lr is an 8-shot SP101.


BTW, I am NOT that skilled. I shot both a Python and an Anaconda, and couldn't feel what all the fuss was about. They were no more accurate in my hands [full-cylinder fired from each] than my GP100 or SRH. Nice, but didn't feel 'better': just different.

I know: heresy!

[buck460XVR]

Originally posted by dgludwig:

I've shot thousands of rounds through various Smith revolvers over the years (J,K,L and N frames) and many through both the six and seven round L frames and have never discerned any significant differences in terms of da trigger pulls between the two versions (other than what you might expect in terms of differences resulting from manufacturing tolerances and degree of usage between any two revolvers of like configuration) In fact, a friend's Model 686 Plus has one of the best unmodified da trigger pulls that I have ever tried on any Smith revolver. I don't dispute the fact that some people say they have and nobody has to "accept my argument" to the contrary. I'm only reporting my personal experience with the two revolvers in question (686vs 686 Plus) and it's my opinion that the da trigger pulls on each are the same, everything else being equal in terms of usage, wear, year of build, etc.
As others have noted, I don't think you can go wrong with either the Ruger or the Smith. Both are very nice revolvers.

Pretty much what I tried to say in my first post, but done much more effectively.

As I said before, most of my DA shooting is done with my SD revolvers....my 686's are range and hunting tools and I personally shoot them the majority of the time SA. Thinkin' I may have been wrong in my reply I got all 4 of them out and tried them side by side, Dry-firing in DA, one right after the other. In different order every time and with right and left hands. Even tried to pick them up and dry fire them with my eye's closed to see if I could tell them apart by the triggers. I have(should say had) 4 686's, all bought new, a -1, a -4(that I gave to my youngest son on his 18th birthday), a -5 and a -6 which is the plus model. I couldn't tell much difference. Goin' as slow as I could, I could feel the click-click a tad more with the plus, but again, that handgun has probably at least 5000 rounds less thru it than the other three. Squeezin' them thru like one is suppose to shoot them, they all felt similar.....smooth and crisp. The son that always shoots them DA claims the pull is a hair shorter with the plus, which is why he prefers it. Again....I dunno.


I do know that not every revolver is the same and some have much worse triggers than others, even within the same model line. I also know every ones hands are different and this dictates how well a handgun feels and balances in their hand. Distance from grip to trigger and length of pull vs length of finger, all kinds of variables. Having a preconceived dislike can make a difference too. Like dgludwig, I don't doubt other folk's experiences and can respect their likes and dislikes, even when they differ from my own. I only ask others do the same.

[Ozzieman]

Now stainless or blue?
In my opinion, the blue Rugers are a lot better looking but the Stainless is hard to beat. I’m not a big fan of stainless due to the reflection of sun light but Ruger does a very good job machining lines along the top length of the barrel that reduces reflection.

that the da trigger pulls on each are the same
I would respectfully disagree that that statement. Both are good but the S&W has a shorter take up on single action but I prefer the double action of the Ruger, it seems to be more consistent through the pull.
That’s not to knock ether both are good, just slightly different. Would I pick one over the other for their trigger? No


You’d come off a bit less obnoxious,
Really, I’ll keep that in mind the next time I add to a thread where you’re involved.

[dgludwig]

that the da trigger pulls on each are the same
I would respectfully disagree that that statement. Both are good but the S&W has a shorter take up on single action but I prefer the double action of the Ruger,

Ozzieman, the quote that you cited from my post was comparing the da trigger pulls between the Smith 686 and 686 Plus models, not between the Ruger and Smith & Wesson revolvers. I agree that the da pulls between the Ruger and the Smith are, at the least, "slightly different". I disagree with your preference in that I much prefer the da pull on the Smith as compared to the Ruger. But these are just subjective opinions. Neither is intrinsically "better" than the other; it's only that some shooters will prefer one over the other for their own individual reasons.

[FairWarning]

I've never seen this debate here before.

Bottom line, performance is comparable and upper class. But one is drop dead sexy, the other utilitarian. I believe the sexy one tends to maintain more resale also, although before someone pipes up with an Excel spreadsheet comparing all GB transactions, I haven't done a scientific research project on that subject.

[KMAX]

But one is drop dead sexy, the other utilitarian. I believe the sexy one tends to maintain more resale

So you are saying the GP100 will hold a higher resale? Looks are a matter of personal choice. I think the 686 is "prettier" but the GP100 in blue looks "tougher". Neither word really accurately describes either gun. It is just a matter of personal perception. I do believe the Smith would hold a higher resale value because of past reputation. Whether it is deserved or not I would not even question because that opens up a "whole new can of worms."

[Sevens]

I do believe the Smith would hold a higher resale value because of past reputation. Whether it is deserved or not I would not even question

The thing is...
...the folks who really like the 686's prefer the older ones, thus they are a finite market. The GP-100's are still being made in the configuration that has made them so popular. To get the Smith & Wesson 686 that is "the most popular", you are dipping in to a group of revolvers that has a set number that will not grow.

You can absolutely strip all the emotion and opinions from it and continue to demonstrate that "value" and/or "price" simply will be affected by REAL, tangible things.

[seeker073180]

I took my 4" GP100 out today with a rental 6" 686+. Granted, the rental probably has a few more rounds down it, but the trigger was notably smoother with less stacking and a more linear effort. 4" barrel feels more natural and pointable though.