One of those Smith VS Ruger questions

Gillis2

Gillis2

CGN frequent flyer
Super GunNutz
Rating - 100%
222   0   0
Hi,

I read a lot of people saying that the Ruger GP 100 is built like a tank and that it is more solid/durable than a Smith 686 or 586. But I also have read that the Ruger is cast steel and the Smith is forged. Today, I found several ingeneering articles on steel that clearly say that forged steel is much stronger than cast.
What say you?

Thanks for your opinions

Gilbert
 
There are too many factors involved to just say forged is stronger than cast. I've read a lot about the smith vs ruger thing, and I came to the conclusion that people say the smith trigger is nicer out of the box, but the ruger is more solid. I chose to save the $400 or so, a lt of trigger work can be done for that and you still have the tougher gun after. But to each his own.
 
The Smiths are tough enough.

I have both (and a colt) but it is my Smiths that I take to the range the most. The trigger is perfect on the Smiths.

If I need to hammer in some fence posts or something, I will use the Ruger and spare the Smiths.
 
Last edited:
Cast....forged....:confused:
I doubt it makes that much of a difference. The different fan groups of each will chime in shortly, but honestly, buy whichever you like or can afford (then talk smack and patronize the other guys :p)
I have a foot in both camps. Ruger KGP-141, S&W 28-2/460V & 500 :rockOn:.

(E) :cool:
 
RMXC51 said:
There are too many factors involved to just say forged is stronger than cast.
Click to expand...
Agreed. While generally speaking forging is an improved process over casting, there's a lot more involved to say which is stronger—type of steel used as well as the dimensions of the frame. I don't think I've ever heard of anyone shooting either a GP100 or an L Frame loose. It really comes down to personal preference. After years of shooting no revolvers other than S&W I picked up a GP100 a couple of years ago and really like it.
 
Pugflop said:
Also keep in mind that S&Ws have the "Hillary hole". I refuse to purchase any gun with such a stupid thing, so I went with the Ruger. Love it! Lots of fun at the range!
Click to expand...

What about all the wonderful lettering and safety warnings stamped all over the Ruber barrels?

Graydog
 
The Ruger SP-101 in .38/.357 is a beautifully proportioned revolver, and shoots very well. A few dollars and a bit of time to buy the Wolff spring set, (install the 10 pound hammer spring and 8 pound trigger return), and Hogue grips at Brownells is well worth the effort. Sweet gun.
 
I have 4 older Smiths and only one Ruger (Super Redhawk).

While I like my SRH, it's DA and SA trigger cannot be compared to my old Smiths. Not even in the same neighborhood.
 
Have both, and doubt I'll wear either out since I don't shoot max loads day in and out.

The Smiths are better guns, though. Better finish, better trigger. Like Greydog said - don't have idiot roll marks all over them.

If you don't like the key hole, buy an older one.

They cost a few hundred more, sure, but if you're playing that game then go buy an Alfa and save some more.
 
Thanks all for your answers.
Money is not a big issue in my decision.
I will ponder all your advises.

Thanks

Gilbert
 
One thing I forgot to mention earlier is that the early GP100 grips (the hybrid wood-rubber ones) are the best fitting revolver grips I've ever used--and I've used a bunch of different rubber and wood ones. Comfortable, too, even with magnum loads.
 
It was the older smith K frames that had the durability problems and that was mainly with a steady diet of 125gr full house ammo. As mentioned by others, I've never heard of anyone shooting an L frame loose.
 
I don't think I'll shoot my Smiths enough for it to be an issue. But then again…I prefer N-frames (if that makes a diff)
 
Pugflop said:
Also keep in mind that S&Ws have the "Hillary hole". I refuse to purchase any gun with such a stupid thing, so I went with the Ruger. Love it! Lots of fun at the range!
Click to expand...
Damn I forgot about the "Hilary Hole".....lol.....bad decisions on S/W back then sucking up to the Clintons !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom