.357 Magnum Revolver Smith and Wesson or Colt?

Another vote for S&W. 686 acquired new to me almost 20 years ago still my favorite gun. Something about a big, heavy well built revolver--almost no kick for a 357 magnum lets someone like me with no eye/hand coordination shoot straight. Enjoy reloading for it.

Regarding work on the gun, in my dotage have learned how to do it for myself. You want it done right, after all :)
 
lyle1 said:
Thank you everyone that replied to my original post. I am still deciding which direction to go. A lot of good information here.

One more question I have is, since Murray Charlton has retired, who do we send revolvers to for action/trigger jobs, warranty work and general maintenance?
And this goes for S&W, Colt, or Ruger revolvers?
Click to expand...

Unless you get a Lemon neither the 686 or Ruger will likely ever need warranty service. If you truly are worried up warranty service here in Canada for your revolver I would look elsewhere for my toys. I have a smith in Kitimat that would look after any of my needs. I got him to install the trigger shims on my Ruger only because I am hopeless when it comes to things mechanical for the most part. I limit my gunsmithing to stripping down my guns to clean them. Stoeger does warranty on Uberti revolvers or they did. The manufacturers websites list warranty centres in Canada. Google is your friend.

Take Care

Bob
 
Canuck44 said:
Unless you get a Lemon neither the 686 or Ruger will likely ever need warranty service. If you truly are worried up warranty service here in Canada for your revolver I would look elsewhere for my toys. I have a smith in Kitimat that would look after any of my needs. I got him to install the trigger shims on my Ruger only because I am hopeless when it comes to things mechanical for the most part. I limit my gunsmithing to stripping down my guns to clean them. Stoeger does warranty on Uberti revolvers or they did. The manufacturers websites list warranty centres in Canada. Google is your friend.

Take Care

Bob
Click to expand...

Suspect it is not about the warranty but more about the magic Murray was able to create with the smiths when sent for trigger jobs. I haven’t heard of any others that have filled this void.
 
One thing I don't see mentioned is the quality of the new vs older revolvers.

Neither the new Colt or S&W offerings are as smooth operating as the older models of the same type.

I have a full size Colt 22 revolver that was used by the Toronto Police as a training piece. It functions through both double and single action buttery smooth and because of that, accuracy in both functions is very good.

I have S&W revolvers dating back to 1917 and their actions are equally as smooth.

I've tried the more recent manufactured pieces, offered by both companies and frankly, I'm disappointed in their smoothness.

All of the new revolvers I've handled over the last five years or so would have gotten trigger jobs and some honing if they were mine.

Ruger revolvers have always had gritty actions but were priced accordingly.

Taurus revolvers (S&W clones) were slightly better than Ruger and usually more accurate.

I recently shot an Alpha Proj and frankly, I was disappointed in it's operation as well. Price was good though and if the owner has the time and skills to smooth them up, they should be OK.

The very crude and cheap Arminius revolvers were OK but they didn't stand up to heavy use.

The old Iver Johnson revolvers were barely functional in my mind, but again, very cheap.

Other classics, like Korth from Europe are dreams come true as far as fit, function, smoothness and reliability go, but you definitely pay for it all.

Some of the French, Italian and Belgian knock offs can be very good as well and if they aren't, can be tweaked to a much higher standard.
 
Hi all, I am getting a revolver and feel a s&w 686 with 6” barrel will be my best option after lots of reading reviews.
 
bearhunter said:
One thing I don't see mentioned is the quality of the new vs older revolvers.

Neither the new Colt or S&W offerings are as smooth operating as the older models of the same type.

I have a full size Colt 22 revolver that was used by the Toronto Police as a training piece. It functions through both double and single action buttery smooth and because of that, accuracy in both functions is very good.

I have S&W revolvers dating back to 1917 and their actions are equally as smooth.

I've tried the more recent manufactured pieces, offered by both companies and frankly, I'm disappointed in their smoothness.

All of the new revolvers I've handled over the last five years or so would have gotten trigger jobs and some honing if they were mine.

Ruger revolvers have always had gritty actions but were priced accordingly.

Taurus revolvers (S&W clones) were slightly better than Ruger and usually more accurate.

I recently shot an Alpha Proj and frankly, I was disappointed in it's operation as well. Price was good though and if the owner has the time and skills to smooth them up, they should be OK.

The very crude and cheap Arminius revolvers were OK but they didn't stand up to heavy use.

The old Iver Johnson revolvers were barely functional in my mind, but again, very cheap.

Other classics, like Korth from Europe are dreams come true as far as fit, function, smoothness and reliability go, but you definitely pay for it all.

Some of the French, Italian and Belgian knock offs can be very good as well and if they aren't, can be tweaked to a much higher standard.
Click to expand...

Agree. Every new revolver I've handled in the last decade (aside from a very few from the custom shops) needed an action job. - dan
 
Bearhunter I have three Rugers. The two GP-100's came with heavy springs but the action wouold not be described as gritty. Lighter hammer and trigger springs in both and the trigger was equal to or better than my 686 No Dash for certain. I did find the biggest knock I have with the Rugers is they often need the cylinders reamed eg to .358. Three cylinders on my 4.2" Ruger were less than .356. Had them all reamed to .358 and now enjoy excellent accuracy with no leading from gas cutting using lead bullets. gdawg point is well taken. Find a good gunsmith and there is joy in the household.

Take Care

Bob
 
bearhunter said:
One thing I don't see mentioned is the quality of the new vs older revolvers.

Neither the new Colt or S&W offerings are as smooth operating as the older models of the same type.

I have a full size Colt 22 revolver that was used by the Toronto Police as a training piece. It functions through both double and single action buttery smooth and because of that, accuracy in both functions is very good.

I have S&W revolvers dating back to 1917 and their actions are equally as smooth.

I've tried the more recent manufactured pieces, offered by both companies and frankly, I'm disappointed in their smoothness.

All of the new revolvers I've handled over the last five years or so would have gotten trigger jobs and some honing if they were mine.

Ruger revolvers have always had gritty actions but were priced accordingly.

Taurus revolvers (S&W clones) were slightly better than Ruger and usually more accurate.

I recently shot an Alpha Proj and frankly, I was disappointed in it's operation as well. Price was good though and if the owner has the time and skills to smooth them up, they should be OK.

The very crude and cheap Arminius revolvers were OK but they didn't stand up to heavy use.

The old Iver Johnson revolvers were barely functional in my mind, but again, very cheap.

Other classics, like Korth from Europe are dreams come true as far as fit, function, smoothness and reliability go, but you definitely pay for it all.

Some of the French, Italian and Belgian knock offs can be very good as well and if they aren't, can be tweaked to a much higher standard.
Click to expand...

Yep. I had the opportunity to put 6 .38 specials through a no dash 686 WITH ORIGINAL STOCKS! AND THE CHECKERING WAS STILL SHARP!!??

I have a 629 that has had trigger work done to it and it's fine (really nice), but nothing like this old 686. That trigger was like cutting through a slab of butter! Just beautiful. No change from front to break.

We part ways on the Ruger comment though. My GP 100 isn't gritty. The trigger is very good, not Smith and Wesson good, but still very good.
 
bearhunter said:
One thing I don't see mentioned is the quality of the new vs older revolvers.

Neither the new Colt or S&W offerings are as smooth operating as the older models of the same type.

I have a full size Colt 22 revolver that was used by the Toronto Police as a training piece. It functions through both double and single action buttery smooth and because of that, accuracy in both functions is very good.

I have S&W revolvers dating back to 1917 and their actions are equally as smooth.

I've tried the more recent manufactured pieces, offered by both companies and frankly, I'm disappointed in their smoothness.

All of the new revolvers I've handled over the last five years or so would have gotten trigger jobs and some honing if they were mine.

Ruger revolvers have always had gritty actions but were priced accordingly.

Taurus revolvers (S&W clones) were slightly better than Ruger and usually more accurate.

I recently shot an Alpha Proj and frankly, I was disappointed in it's operation as well. Price was good though and if the owner has the time and skills to smooth them up, they should be OK.

The very crude and cheap Arminius revolvers were OK but they didn't stand up to heavy use.

The old Iver Johnson revolvers were barely functional in my mind, but again, very cheap.

Other classics, like Korth from Europe are dreams come true as far as fit, function, smoothness and reliability go, but you definitely pay for it all.

Some of the French, Italian and Belgian knock offs can be very good as well and if they aren't, can be tweaked to a much higher standard.
Click to expand...

I'v handled more than a few ruger revolvers, and some one may have had a gritty action, but I have yet to handle one that does. The Smith does not feel like a Ruger, and neither does a Ruger feel like a Smith; but neither one is better or worse than the other. Infact, after trying these, Alpha Proj, Taurus, Arminius, it was the actions of the Ruger and Smith that put them at the top of the list, and dropped the rest well below. I can not comment on Colt, as I have not ever handled them.
 
My first wheel gun was a 6 inch Smith & Wesson 686. I owned a 4 inch Colt Python as well. That was before I discovered Ruger revolvers. I sold the 686 and Python many years ago. If you want a tank that will handle anything, get a Ruger GP100. Maybe not as refined or pretty at a Smith or Colt but it will go bang every time.
 
I bought a used S&W M66, in 1986, since then I can say I have put through it conservatively 40,000+ rds of .38 Spl and .38 Spl+P. In 36 years it has required 2 firing pin replacements and 2 years ago the replacement of the pin that holds the hammer in position. It was a $300 purchase back in the day, I can say I'm very happy that I've got my money's worth out of it.
 
highlander said:
My Python, made in the 70's, has been regularly fired since I got it and I have yet to have to repair it other then to replace the barrel I shoot out.
Click to expand...

That's certainly not the experience of other Python owners I've talked to over the years. Very delicate wheelguns compared to S&W's.

Recently, a frequent flier at our LGS came into a vintage Python. Looked minty, probably shot very little. Two range session later & some internal part had failed. Last I heard he was looking for the needed parts to get it running & a 'smith willing to work on it.

---------
NAA.
 
In other words, Ruger GP-100, S&W 686 and Colt Python all do the same job but the Python does it with more class, if you attach importance to that kind of things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom