If1HitU
Member
If you had to choose between these two .357 Magnums,which one would you choose and why? The two Magnum are Ruger GP 100 .357 Magnum 4" Match Champion & S&W 686-6 .357 Magnum 4".
Ruger GP 100.357 Mag.4" & S&W .686 .357 Mag.4" your choice why?
- Thread starter If1HitU
- Start date
- Status
I went with the 686 SSR because it looks really good with my model 60 pro, for a GP100 I went with a standard 6" cause it looks better with my 3" SP101 they're all stainless and the Rugers have the Lett grips with faux ivory inserts.
Personally, whichever one I'd get, it'd be in the standard (i.e. full underlug) configuration. I don't know what your intended use it, but when things speed up, the extra weight under the barrel makes a difference. The extra tuning in the MC & SSR is minimal, so spending the difference on action work on a standard model will result in a nicer gun, IMO.
So, as far as the MC or SSR, it's a tough call. I'm a fan of the 686, but always been impressed by the GP100 and wouldn't hesitate to get one. Both models have their pros and cons. I tried to rattle a few of them off in a post earlier this year, so I'll just cut and paste from that post. In no particular order...
The S&W has a reputation for being a bit more refined and having a better factory trigger. Truth be told, with some very rare exceptions, neither factory trigger is on par with what it could and should be with some good tuning. Both the 686 and GP100 respond really well to tuning. I'm an admitted trigger snob, and one of the best triggers I've ever felt was on a tuned GP100.
You'll hear a lot about the superior "strength" of the Ruger, generally referring to the tensile strength of the frame & cylinder. Maybe so, but both are plenty strong enough for anything you ought to be shooting through it. More relevant are differences in design that can affect durability. One of the Achilles heels of the S&W design is the yoke screw, IMO. It's the only thing keeping the entire yoke/cylinder assembly from falling off the front of the gun when the cylinder's open. It's generally not a problem, but if you plan on doing quick reloads with speed loaders, it can become a problem very quickly if you use a weak hand reload to slam those rounds home.
Another Achilles heel of the S&W design is that the cylinder assembly locks in front via the ejector rod, and the ejector rod turns as the cylinder turns. A bent ejector rod, then, can affect the quality of the DA pull. In extreme cases, it can tie the action up. In contrast, the GP100s ejector rod doesn't turn, and the cylinder locks up front at the yoke.
GP100s use a coil mainspring, whereas the 686 uses a flat leaf spring. The latter (leaf springs) have a reputation for producing a more consistent DA trigger pull.
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).
The S&W cylinder release gets pushed forward with your thumb, whereas it gets pushed into the frame on the GP100. Personally, I think the S&W push-type is more intuitive and faster. Likely not an issue unless you're competing and going for über-fast reloads. And even then, I've seen some pretty darned fast GP100 competitors.It really comes down to personal preference.
At least the 4" GP100 comes with an interchangeable front sight, which is a very nice feature. The red ramp front sight of the 686 is mediocre. It's a jack-of-all trades front sight. If you're going to do anything serious with your 686, it needs something better. Fortunately, I believe the SSR front sight is the interchangeable type.
Finally, replacing some GP100 parts requires a trip back to the factory, and if it does go back to the factory, it'll come back in factory-stock condition. Something to be aware of if you modify and/or tune your gun. AFAIK, most parts that might ever need replacing on a S&W are available via commercial vendors, and there are numerous aftermarket parts for the 686 as well.
So, as far as the MC or SSR, it's a tough call. I'm a fan of the 686, but always been impressed by the GP100 and wouldn't hesitate to get one. Both models have their pros and cons. I tried to rattle a few of them off in a post earlier this year, so I'll just cut and paste from that post. In no particular order...
The S&W has a reputation for being a bit more refined and having a better factory trigger. Truth be told, with some very rare exceptions, neither factory trigger is on par with what it could and should be with some good tuning. Both the 686 and GP100 respond really well to tuning. I'm an admitted trigger snob, and one of the best triggers I've ever felt was on a tuned GP100.
You'll hear a lot about the superior "strength" of the Ruger, generally referring to the tensile strength of the frame & cylinder. Maybe so, but both are plenty strong enough for anything you ought to be shooting through it. More relevant are differences in design that can affect durability. One of the Achilles heels of the S&W design is the yoke screw, IMO. It's the only thing keeping the entire yoke/cylinder assembly from falling off the front of the gun when the cylinder's open. It's generally not a problem, but if you plan on doing quick reloads with speed loaders, it can become a problem very quickly if you use a weak hand reload to slam those rounds home.
Another Achilles heel of the S&W design is that the cylinder assembly locks in front via the ejector rod, and the ejector rod turns as the cylinder turns. A bent ejector rod, then, can affect the quality of the DA pull. In extreme cases, it can tie the action up. In contrast, the GP100s ejector rod doesn't turn, and the cylinder locks up front at the yoke.
GP100s use a coil mainspring, whereas the 686 uses a flat leaf spring. The latter (leaf springs) have a reputation for producing a more consistent DA trigger pull.
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).
The S&W cylinder release gets pushed forward with your thumb, whereas it gets pushed into the frame on the GP100. Personally, I think the S&W push-type is more intuitive and faster. Likely not an issue unless you're competing and going for über-fast reloads. And even then, I've seen some pretty darned fast GP100 competitors.It really comes down to personal preference.
At least the 4" GP100 comes with an interchangeable front sight, which is a very nice feature. The red ramp front sight of the 686 is mediocre. It's a jack-of-all trades front sight. If you're going to do anything serious with your 686, it needs something better. Fortunately, I believe the SSR front sight is the interchangeable type.
Finally, replacing some GP100 parts requires a trip back to the factory, and if it does go back to the factory, it'll come back in factory-stock condition. Something to be aware of if you modify and/or tune your gun. AFAIK, most parts that might ever need replacing on a S&W are available via commercial vendors, and there are numerous aftermarket parts for the 686 as well.
vba
Member
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2008
- Messages
- 345
I recently made this same decision and went with the Ruger Match Champion. The main reason being the silly safety on the S&W and based on my experience, I believe the Ruger is the stronger gun. The latter excepting the old cast vs. forged frames.
I've seen arguments that forged is stronger and doesn't have to be as thick as cast but if one compares a forged L frame to a cast GP100, with the same barrel length the weight is the same.
The trigger on my Match Champion is just great and the gun is much more accurate than me.
I've seen arguments that forged is stronger and doesn't have to be as thick as cast but if one compares a forged L frame to a cast GP100, with the same barrel length the weight is the same.
The trigger on my Match Champion is just great and the gun is much more accurate than me.
bannockburn
Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 26,297
I had earlier versions of both guns at the same time. Had to sell one. Kept the S&W Model 686 as it had a better feel and balance to it, had the best DA/SA trigger of any revolver, and was more accurate than the GP100. I would find the GP100 Grand Champion very tempting but would probably go with the S&W Model 686-6.
I'm an S&W fan so I would get a standard 686. I don't much care for the looks of the PC slab side barrels.
That said, you won't go wrong with either the 686 or the GP100 so get the one that looks the best to you.
(I do have a 44 Special GP100 and a 45 Colt RedHawk so I am familiar with the operation of the Rugers. They just look frumpy to me
. But looks are in the eye of the beholder.)
That said, you won't go wrong with either the 686 or the GP100 so get the one that looks the best to you.
(I do have a 44 Special GP100 and a 45 Colt RedHawk so I am familiar with the operation of the Rugers. They just look frumpy to me
. But looks are in the eye of the beholder.)
WrongHanded
Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2017
- Messages
- 4,771
It depends entirely on the particular guns. Here's why:
At one LGS, they have both of these. The S&W is beautiful. Feels good, great fit and finish, lovely trigger. The Ruger is a total dog! Average trigger for a GP100, awful fit and finish, and the cylinder is stupidly tight to swing out.
But, I've had GP100s that I much preferred to most of the 686s I've handled (which is only maybe half a dozen or so). Especially for any back country carry.
The 686 SSR in my local store I would buy right now if my wife would let me. Stupid internal lock and all.
At one LGS, they have both of these. The S&W is beautiful. Feels good, great fit and finish, lovely trigger. The Ruger is a total dog! Average trigger for a GP100, awful fit and finish, and the cylinder is stupidly tight to swing out.
But, I've had GP100s that I much preferred to most of the 686s I've handled (which is only maybe half a dozen or so). Especially for any back country carry.
The 686 SSR in my local store I would buy right now if my wife would let me. Stupid internal lock and all.
Tacoma
Member
I've owned both (at the same time.) Normally, I'm a fan of the S&W L frames hands down as they give you more aftermarket grip choices and their actions slick up better. Fit and finish is usually superior too. That said, I really liked the MC in this case. Likely the best balanced, best fit, smoothest running Ruger revolver I've ever handled.
Personally, I don't think you can go two wrong with either.
Personally, I don't think you can go two wrong with either.
Zaydok Allen
Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 13,274
I've got two 686s and they are both great shooters. The stock trigger is better in them than any GP I've ever handled. That being said, Ruger triggers smooth out a lot with regular use and it's not like I'm handling a bunch of GP100's or 686's each day.
Both are good models, I just prefer the 686.
Both are good models, I just prefer the 686.
Last edited:
- Status
