Ruger GP-100 vs. Smith 586 and 686 both in .357 with 6 inch barrels.

[gotboostvr]

They both balance pretty well, and have good factory grips, and a plethora of aftermarket choices.
Weight isn't really far off either.
I'm really tempted to buy a Ruger just to put them head to head.
But if I get another 357 it'll be a 3" carry, or a Coonan,cause those are just cool.

 

[stinger 327]

They both balance pretty well, and have good factory grips, and a plethora of aftermarket choices.
Weight isn't really far off either.
I'm really tempted to buy a Ruger just to put them head to head.
But if I get another 357 it'll be a 3" carry, or a Coonan,cause those are just cool.

well made machines.

 

[gotboostvr]

well made machines.

To be honest, I've rarely met a 357 I didn't want!
I had a 357 blackhawk that I sent along.
It was a nice gun, but I thought it was too heavy for "just" a 357.
Ive since rectified that with a 41mag blackhawk!

 

[stinger 327]

To be honest, I've rarely met a 357 I didn't want!
I had a 357 blackhawk that I sent along.
It was a nice gun, but I thought it was too heavy for "just" a 357.
Ive since rectified that with a 41mag blackhawk!

wEll those Ruger LCR revolvers in .38 +P and .357 will bite you back real hard. But for carrying you got to love em and perhaps if the time ever does come they will save your life when they blow up in your hand-OUCH!

 

[greyling22]

If I was going to shoot thousands and thousands of rounds through one and expect it to stay intact, it would be the ruger. And I like the balance and feel of the ruger better. That said, I kept the smith. The trigger just turned out SO much better after the action work than the ruger's did. And I shot it a lot better.

Neither is a bad gun though.

 

[stinger 327]

If I was going to shoot thousands and thousands of rounds through one and expect it to stay intact, it would be the ruger. And I like the balance and feel of the ruger better. That said, I kept the smith. The trigger just turned out SO much better after the action work than the ruger's did. And I shot it a lot better.

Neither is a bad gun though.

Have you ever shot those Buffalo Bore loads? Talk about a world of hurt those are some real hot loads and if either of these two revolver can withstand that ammo you can't go wrong with either of these two .357 revolvers. If in doubt I have always got both but got to watch the expenses right now.

 

[Huntolive]

Why do you want a 6" for "Personal Protection?"

The GP100 is definitely a solid gun that i seriously doubt would ever let you down, and i've heard great things about the 686 as well. I also had the Sp101 and can't imaging anything ever going wrong with one of those rocks.

You asked also about 8 shot 357: I just picked up an 8 shot 627 5" PC S&W I couldn't resist. And I intend to use that for hunting on occasion.

So I just don't see why you want a 6" brl for "personal protection" ?

How about a 4" ? Or the 5" 8 shot? How about the S&W 44 Mag 329 PD, which only weighs a fraction of what these other weigh IF the gun is for defensive purpose?

 

[Ex]

Between both of these revolvers which one is made better, more accurate and better for personal protection?
Take note the Ruger that I know of does not make 7 shot revolvers.
The Smith comes in both 6 shot and 7 shot revolvers 586 and 686.

The Smith & Wesson brand is always more expensive than its Ruger counterpart.
Which one would you pick and why for the above purposes?

Read this, then decide. The main argument from S&W folks is the trigger. Takes very little to get the Gp100 trigger just as nice!

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=776592

And the Ruger IS the tank. if given the choice, go 6" SS

 

[Dave in Hawaii]

I have only owned S&W revolvers. I would like to try a Ruger. I hear the security six can be worked over and have a better trigger than S&W.

If you plan on shooting it then be sure to figure in a trigger job. That helps me a lot with DA accuracy.

Speaking of accuracy...
All these targets are shot at 25 yards (from sand bags).

This little gun blows me away. It outshoots it's 5" big brother.






I clean the barrel when accuracy drops.

I have XL hands and prefer the feel of the N frame 627 over the L framed 686.



Having said that...a 22 revolver that's where everyone should start. The 4" 617 is SWEET.



Good luck.
Dave

 

[old lady new shooter]

Everybody keeps telling me, take the one that fits your hand the best.

I tried holding both of those at the gun store and the S&W fit my hand a lot better, the Ruger had a sharp corner at the top of the grip that was very uncomfortable for me. Then other people told me you can buy different grips... so to me that really confuses the first advice, i.e. isn't the grip the main thing that determines how it fits your hand? I have no idea whether that corner is only on the grip.

I did check on both to make sure I could easily get the first joint of my index finger on the trigger.

 

[stinger 327]

The GP100 is definitely a solid gun that i seriously doubt would ever let you down, and i've heard great things about the 686 as well. I also had the Sp101 and can't imaging anything ever going wrong with one of those rocks.

You asked also about 8 shot 357: I just picked up an 8 shot 627 5" PC S&W I couldn't resist. And I intend to use that for hunting on occasion.

So I just don't see why you want a 6" brl for "personal protection" ?

How about a 4" ? Or the 5" 8 shot? How about the S&W 44 Mag 329 PD, which only weighs a fraction of what these other weigh IF the gun is for defensive purpose?

I have had 4 inch models before.
I love the feeling of the 6 inch magnums and at the same time I can shoot them at the range for best accuracy and they are capable to do double duty for home protection.

Just curious what are the model numbers of the Smith's that have 8 rounds and do they come with 6 inch barrels?

 

[stinger 327]

Read this, then decide. The main argument from S&W folks is the trigger. Takes very little to get the Gp100 trigger just as nice!

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=776592

And the Ruger IS the tank. if given the choice, go 6" SS

It looks to me the Ruger is the more robust model over the Smith. Just depends if I want 6 shots, 7 shots or 8 shots in a revolver.
Whatever I get I want it to be good right out of the box like a Sig P-220. I do not want to do any modifications.
Thanks for the info.

 

[Caswell Ranch]

Ruger would be my pick, 4". It will keep going for many years, I have shot thousands of rounds through the GP's, a friend I used to shoot with has 20,000rds of .357 mag through his and is still shooting strong.

 

[Ex]

Go the Ruger. Heavier frame... and even if the trigger on that piece isn't as nice as the S&W,
it can be made as nice for free. i own TWO GP 100's and would not trade them under any circumstance!!!

Not to say that I don't want a 686 but I'd still take the Ruger

 

[ColtPythonElite]

Yep, a Ruger has a heavier cast frame compared to the Smith's forged frame.

 

[bannockburn]

At one time I had a Ruger GP100, a Colt Trooper Mk.V, and a S&W Model 686. Needed money for school so I had to keep one and sell the other two. The GP100 was the first to go as it never felt as good in my hand as the Security Six used to; it just seemed to be a bit unwieldy in terms of balance and handling. The Colt Trooper was very well made and had the best factory grips on any of the three revolvers. The 686 had the better DA/SA trigger on it and also felt perfectly balanced with its 4" barrel. So I sold the Colt and kept the S&W and have been very satisfied with my decision.

 

[burk]

Yep, a Ruger has a heavier cast frame compared to the Smith's forged frame.

True, and while some would argue the forged frame is more durable, many would argue the cast frame absorbs recoil better. I will tell you that I haven't shot any more brutal guns for recoil than the S & W 4" full frame revolvers in either .44 mag or .357 mag with serious loads. My Ruger Super Redhawk had probably half of the felt recoil as my 29. Now in fairness to Smith, my 29 is a 4", not ported. My Ruger was a 7 1/2" and ported. But those forged frames recoil more there is no doubt in my mind about that.

 

[Richard Head]

I have a 686 with a 8 3\8" barrel and GP100 with 6" barrel. They're more alike than different. The Smith definitely has a better single action trigger. double action trigger is close but I prefer the Smiths again. The GP100 is supposedly a stronger revolver, but I've been shooting the 686 for 30 years and it's still as tight as the day I bought it. The Ruger is cheaper and can do whatever the 686 can for a couple hundred bucks less. Flip a coin they're both excellent revolvers.

 

[stinger 327]

True, and while some would argue the forged frame is more durable, many would argue the cast frame absorbs recoil better. I will tell you that I haven't shot any more brutal guns for recoil than the S & W 4" full frame revolvers in either .44 mag or .357 mag with serious loads. My Ruger Super Redhawk had probably half of the felt recoil as my 29. Now in fairness to Smith, my 29 is a 4", not ported. My Ruger was a 7 1/2" and ported. But those forged frames recoil more there is no doubt in my mind about that.

If you get a chance know someone or perhaps someone at the range or at rental shooting range, try out the Ruger LCR. .38 with the +P load. This is brutal to the bone. Like an explosion in your hand with extreme pain every time you pull the trigger. I cannot imagine what the recoil and feel of the LCR .357 with full .357 loads would feel like. Torture?
The LCR .38 +P is painful enough but a great gun for conceal and carry with an exceptional trigger feel for DA second to none (up close in range with a barrel less than 2 inches) because of its weight and size.

 

[stinger 327]

I have a 686 with a 8 3\8" barrel and GP100 with 6" barrel. They're more alike than different. The Smith definitely has a better single action trigger. double action trigger is close but I prefer the Smiths again. The GP100 is supposedly a stronger revolver, but I've been shooting the 686 for 30 years and it's still as tight as the day I bought it. The Ruger is cheaper and can do whatever the 686 can for a couple hundred bucks less. Flip a coin they're both excellent revolvers.

This is good in either case. The consenus is that the Smith has the better trigger pull out of the box. In comparison it would seem that there is about a $150 difference between the two comparable models of the Ruger and the Smith. The only other criteria is 6 shot in Ruger vs. 6, 7 or 8 in the Smith since Smith has those two other options of 7 or 8 shots..

 

[mavracer]

6" 357

It's all about coordinating, so since you said 6" most defiantly a Ruger GP100 as it goes so well with the 3" SP101.

Now if you'd have asked about a 4" then I'd have said the Smith as my 686 SSR is a perfect match for my 60 Pro.

 

[C5rider]

better for personal protection

THAT right there makes me say the Ruger. Will the S&Ws do it? Most certainly, but when it comes to work-horse reliability, I just give the nod to Ruger.

I own both Smiths and a Security Six, not a GP. For something to carry I can't help but bring up Ruger's excellent "non-warranty". Has ALWAYS been there those few times when I needed it and always exceeded my expectations.

Can't go wrong with any of them, but there are those with which you can't go wrong--- LESS!

 

[jamesinalaska]

Have to agree with post no.13.

I too have had both, a Ruger GP100 and a S&W 686. Although the 686 was smoother, I eventually sold it in favor of the GP100 which is much stronger. I reload stout a .357 cartridge and the GP100 handles it with aplomb. The GP100 is the sidearm I carry into the woods.

 

[PO2Hammer]

These days both companies are capable of putting out some real lemons. I wouldn't order either sight unseen. Watch for rough chambers and bores, over-torqued barrels, muzzle imperfections, recoil shield roughness.....

I compared a 686 SSR and a GP100 and went with the GP. The Smith had rough chambers and crown damage. The GP was very smooth inside with glassy looking chambers and bore and a clean crown.

The next 2 offerings might be reversed, inspect closely.

 

[stinger 327]

Have to agree with post no.13.

I too have had both, a Ruger GP100 and a S&W 686. Although the 686 was smoother, I eventually sold it in favor of the GP100 which is much stronger. I reload stout a .357 cartridge and the GP100 handles it with aplomb. The GP100 is the sidearm I carry into the woods.

Or shoot factory Buffalo Bore loads if you don't reload. These are hot loads.