GP100 vs 686

[LBussy]

Turns out a friend at work has a 686 so I'm going to get some range time on Friday. No GP100 to shoot, I'll just have to "remember" how it was I guess.

[DPris]

Since FM weighed in, I will.
Three years ago I did a head to head.
After which, I bought the Ruger & returned the Smith.

The Smith shot fractionally tighter at 25 yards off the bench, but the Ruger had cleaner machining in the barrel.

Both triggers can be worked on.
I don't much like the sights on either.

I dislike the internals & lock on the new Smiths.
I'm not happy with the MIM trigger on the GP, but MIMs are minimal in the GP.

The new Smith uses an electro-chemical rifling that doesn't always work well with lead.
The Ruger still uses conventional rifling methods.

I trust the Ruger to be more durable & to be less inclined go out of time over the long haul.
The Smith can be tuned to a "better" trigger, but not by much.

I find the Smith easier to get the guts out of, down to the individual part level.
The Ruger's modular trigger group is not as simple to break down.

Both brands have been subject to Canted Barrel Syndrome in recent years.
Both brands tend to need grip replacements.

My latest make-over revolver project was a vintage 686 4-incher, which (among other things) got Bowen sights and custom grips.
My current not-yet-finished make-over revolver project is a 7-shot Ruger GP with 2.5 barrel in .357, which has Bowen sights so far. More work scheduled.

I own a handful of GPs, and my oldest is 30.
I had an L-Frame Smith 35 years ago, when they first came out.
I've had a couple since.

I think the edge for durability is clearly Ruger, the edge for refinement clearly S&W.
Both can be upgraded, accuracy about the same on both.

The only two issues I'm aware of with Ruger's sights are a tendency for the rear sight pin to walk (easily fixed), and the way the rear sight's designed.
In some holsters (and rare cases) that bear against the sight enough to depress it, the elevation screw can work loose under continual wearing, changing point of impact.

I've never experienced that, and never known anybody who has.

I've started to go with Bowen's sights on revolver upgrades in both brands, mostly for visibility.
The white-outline rear blade can be a little dim in both.
Staying factory, S&W probably has a better rear sight

When my son-in-law recently decided he wanted a .357, I steered him into the Ruger, now at the gunsmith getting a work-over.
Of the two brands in CURRENT manufacture, I think the Ruger is the best choice for longevity & quality overall.

Both need after-factory work to maximize beyond factory levels.
Either one will be adequate out of the box for most shooters, aside from the QC issues common to both.
Denis

[Guv]

I have had both and both are fine, still have my Smith.
Really depends on your personal likes and dislikes.
S&W has an awesome SA trigger, both have a decent DA.
For myself, I like the exposed back and front strap on the Smith. Lends itself to some nice looking grip options (panel grips with a Tyler Grip Adapter).
I do wish the new ones had the fine vertical lines of the older ones though.

So it all comes down to this; which one would Dirty Harry buy?

[FrankenMauser]

So it all comes down to this; which one would Dirty Harry buy?

Yep.
...The Wildey.

[wild cat mccane]

An answer to what's wrong with the GP100 sights. There are more than just this guy saying it.

http://www.grantcunningham.com/2008/...00-inaccurate/

[sarge83]

I have a 4 inch 686 and a 3 inch barrel GP 100. The GP 100 stays in my home office desk ready for use, the 686 stays in the safe. Nothing against the 686 but the slightly smaller GP is more to my liking.

[Buckeye!]

I lean toward Rugers ... But the 686 is a heck of a revolver ..
You can't go wrong ... Both are great

If you want a six shot .. the Security Six is my choice .,

[DPris]

Thanks Cat.
I've had to have a front sight cleaned up on one Ruger, but otherwise I've not noticed a major problem with the Ruger sights.

I understand the mechanical possibility for the rear to wander, but I've never had it happen in any of mine, going back to 1976.

I do agree with Grant that the best sights for the Ruger (AND the Smith) are Bowen's.
Denis

[4V50 Gary]

GP100 if you want longevity and low maintenance. Back in the days ('70s), Ruger Security Six (and its stable mates) would absorb more abuse than Colt (Python, Police Positive & Detective Specials) or S&W (name your model revolver) and keep working. I believe that still applies today.

[Doc Holliday 1950]

My review is based on today's production of both Ruger and Smith and not the Smith or Ruger of yesterday year. I'm being quite stubborn on this. I can't compare the older versions. I can only compare the 2 that I have bought in the past 2 years. Anytime a company states that there's a 4 month waiting time to to simple repairs, that leads me to believe that they are having more problems then they would like the Public to know. I believe all of you about Smith being a better revolver but that's "IN THE PAST". We, the average Joe's, are concerned with today not yesterday. We don't have the expertise to do this or that. We just know enough that one is a better fir that that other & for me it's the Ruger.

[DPris]

Today, among current production, I feel the Ruger is the better gun, overall.
And that's after comparing both head to head.

I do not like what S&W has done to the 686.
Denis

[HighValleyRanch]

Do the Bowen sight fit onto a Ruger security six?

[shafter]

As "internal safeties", GP100s use a transfer bar, whereas the 686 uses a hammer block. They essentially do opposite functions. The transfer bar of the GP100 transfers the energy of the hammer strike to the firing pin. I can't say I've ever measured it, but logic tells me some "oomph" is lost in the transfer and, as a result, the GP100 action can't be tuned quite as aggressively as the S&Ws. Logic also tells me the GP100 is instantly disabled if the transfer bar breaks, whereas a broken hammer block won't disable a 686 (unless the broken piece falls into the lockwork and ties it up).

This is true. I had a transfer bar break on a Vaquero. Ruger made it right, but while it was broken the guy was out of commission.

[jmr40]

I've had several examples of both over the years. I think DPris summed it up pretty well. I don't disagree with anything he said. But I still had a slight preference for the Smith even though I thought the Ruger would hold up to abuse better.

But after buying a used Smith 28, I sold both the GP-100 and 686.

[Radny97]

Just to throw in something other than the binary choices discussed above i recommend you try the new Dan Wesson. (Your budget allowing) You’ll be impressed with the build quality and accuracy. Swapping out the springs for some Wolff springs makes it feel like a $400 Smith trigger job.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[603Country]

To retire my Python to the ‘inactive’ list, i wanted a replacement as close to as good as the Python as I could get. I handled a lot of pistols, including the Ruger, but bought the 686+. It felt great in the hand, with the Hogue grip. I preferred it over the Ruger. The 686 shot great, but wasn’t as smooth in DA as the Python and the SA trigger pull wasn’t as good. So, off to a local gunsmith for a tuneup, and now i have a terrific shooting pistol. The SA trigger pull is perfect and the DA pull might now be better than the Python’s. I really thought i’d miss the Python, but I don’t. I do prefer the target type hammer on the Python, and the Python is shinier. Man, i can shoot that 686 though.

[DPris]

You'd need to talk to the Bowen people about a Security-Six.
If he doesn't have a standard sight that'd fit, he could probably do you a custom fabrication.
Denis

[Brutus]

I was in a similar situation as 603country. Being something of a big bore fanatic the only .357 I have ever owned is the Python bought 40 some years ago. Quit shooting mags out of it ages ago. Decided I wanted a new .357 to shoot some boomers out of. Started looking around and couldn't find any pre-lock 686's in either 4 or 6 inch configurations and just couldn't warm up to the Ruger offerings. Decided to go with a new Dan Wesson 715 and couldn't be happier for the following reasons:
Great trigger pull both DA and SA.
Shortest DA pull I've ever experienced.
Interchangeable barrel lengths.
No locks.
Only complaint is I can't find a set of Roper style grips for it.

[Model12Win]

686 pre lock.

Not a fan of what Ruger is doing to the GP line, but they are solid guns. I still like the Smith, but only if it's an older 686.

[603Country]

Brutus, it’s interesting that you and i were thinking about the same thing in wanting a new revolver to handle fullpower loads. I didn’t want to damage the Python. I did not consider the Dan Wesson, not knowing it was an option. As for lock/prelock on the 686, i didn’t care. I did get the 7 shooter, and i suppose that’s a Plus (no pun intended).

After the tuneup, i can’t imagine a more accurate pistol than this new 686. If the Dan Wesson was more accurate, I’d never know it. I’m a decent shot, but more accuracy than i have would be wasted on me.

[John D]

I've had my GP100 since about 1990 and have never had the rear sight issues that were discussed in the link. I replaced the front sight with a Hi-Viz sight and have been very happy with that.

I don't have a 686, but I do have a model 66 for comparison; I carry it every day. Both the Ruger and S&W are great revolvers that have given me solid service. (I also have a 3" original 357 magnum from 1956, but that's an unfair comparison!) Either one of these guns shouldn't disappoint.

[dhom]

I have owned both and they are both great revolvers. Seemed to me with a variety of light to hunting loads the Smith was a bit more accurate or should I say easier to load for but, I have always found loads for the GP 100 that were very accurate. If I were to give you advise I would tell you to put both in your hands and pick the one that feels better to you. IMHO you can't go wrong with either choice.

[Real Gun]

I have both and would urge you to avoid the S&W if it has ECM rifling, assuming you want to shoot lead bullets or be able to have that option. The Ruger doesn't lead near like the newer Smiths do, and you can see that the rifling is better defined. The Smith trigger is seductive, but it just means you don't have as much skill on a trigger and don't pull the gun off sight, when the touch is light. The Ruger requires that you follow through 100%, maintaining that sight picture.

[LBussy]

Originally Posted by Radny97

Just to throw in something other than the binary choices discussed above i recommend you try the new Dan Wesson. (Your budget allowing) You’ll be impressed with the build quality and accuracy.

Oh great, another option!

It's a little pricier and I'm not likely to find one at a range to shot, but it is tempting.

[dahermit]

The Ruger doesn't lead near like the newer Smiths do, and you can see that the rifling is better defined.

Correct cast bullet loads do not lead. If there is leading, something is wrong...too small throats, too soft of an alloy, too hot of a load. How the rifling is formed has naught to do with leading.