Is there proof that Ruger revolvers are stronger than S&Ws?

GunGuy34 said:
So we are probably splitting hairs with these revolvers as both Companies make great revolvers.
Click to expand...

From what I've read if you're running factory loads then yes. If you're loading really hot regularly, the S&W will give before the Ruger under the same loadings. We're talking only in the realm of +P ammo will this ever be considered an issue, or rechambering to a larger caliber. Regular use with the factory chambering I assume they are pretty close in durability.

So if you're punching paper this detail is more or less moot unless you like to abuse your firearms for entertainment.

Not an expert...just reading what people who should know what they are talking about said.(see the article links I posted)
 
GunGuy34 said:
So we are probably splitting hairs with these revolvers as both Companies make great revolvers.
Click to expand...

Of course. This one was made in 1918 and the lest time I saw it was perfectly serviceable. I sold it and made a small profit on it :) (looking for the modern version now).
IMG_0380.jpg

You know, most likely I won't live long enough to wear out any the S&W revolvers that I own. This one was made in the 60's and is in great shape as well (my current favorite actually).
IMG_1704.jpg

Food for thought.
 
GunGuy34 said:
My question with all of you talking about these top 44 mag loads is this. You cant hunt with the gun, all you can do is shoot paper or steel, so other then fun factor and the science behind it whats the point? The majority probably don't reload, so factory 44 mag loads can be handled fine by Smith & Wesson revolvers, cant they?
Click to expand...

I had an ATC for 7 years worked in remote wilderness areas of BC & Alberta I loaded, practiced with and carried the hottest loads I could develop started out with 10mm then 44mag, 45 Colt and ended up with a 4.25" Ruger Super Redhawk...

Had to many little issues with the S&W revolvers and have never had an issue with a Ruger...

You want a finely tune revolver for everyday range practice get a Smith if you want a revolver that will do everything you ever need it to do when you need to do it get a Ruger.

Another reason I developed top loads was I always have a rifle or two chambered in the cartridges that I carried in my handguns and hunted with them.

CC
 
OP question is, which of the 2 is stronger. Based on the replies above, i am convinced it is Ruger.

So i will buy the Ruger GP100 model in .44mag if available.

Awesome!
 
enefgee said:
None what so ever. Rugers are cast, and to achieve the same strength as forged parts they have to be thicker. Forged steel parts are stronger for the same weight. The reason the K frame .357's had issues with constant use of 357 is that they were primarily designed as 38's with the ability to fire 357's. Way back when, police would frequently train with 38 Special ammo and carry 357's for duty.
Click to expand...

You got it . . . Older S&W revolvers are works of art and so many of them are still shooting and will keep shooting for years to come. Pre model 5 screws are collector pieces that can be shot, and if properly maintained, will continue to increase in value.

Not taking anything away from Bill Ruger and his firearms because they have earned the respect and following they receive, but the older S&W and Colt revolvers are the high point. Handle and shoot a few and you'll see what I mean . . :)
 
I'm a die-hard S&W revolver fan.

On the question, I do believe Ruger wheelguns are stronger.

My preference for double action revolvers goes as follows:

1) S&W
2) Ruger
3) Colt

I don't list any others as I don't see myself owning any of the lesser competition. I say lesser as it's only a personal preference. I once owned a Llama Super Comanche in .357 with 8 3/8" barrel. It was servicable but not a S&W ;)

I was shooting full house .44 Mag back in the early 80's. It no longer holds any novelty for me. These days, as I have no wilderness ATC or any other need for full house ammo, I shoot or only plan to shoot mostly light target loads in my .44 - that would be 240 gr LSWC's at 800-900 fps. With occasionally a cylinder of JHP's or JSP's on the warmer side. And all of my own making. So, likely my S&W will last me a long time.

Camp Cook has it right though. For wilderness carry he uses full house ammo. And more importantly, he practices with the same. In that scenario, if it was me I'd be doing the same. And it would be off a Ruger platform.

2007-10-27_091302_1aCoffee.gif

NAA.
 
GunGuy34 said:
What does that one look like? Ill try googling.
Click to expand...
If my memory serves me correctly this was a Colt Bisley frame as the original platform for the Colt No. 5. (refered to in a Guns&Ammo article as the Grover #5, but in Sixguns by Keith merely as the Colt No. 5 the custom work done by Sidgley) I think it also sported adjustable target sights that Elmer prefered for precise/long range shooting. Bisley frames were among the first Colt revolvers with an all steel frame opposed to the older black powder iron frames of the famous Colt SAA. Elmer knew this and wanted to take advantage of the stronger frame for his stout handloads.
Later on all Colt SAAs too were to be made of steel, often signified by the change in position of the cylinder base pin retaining screw, on the front of the cylinder. Moved from the front to the side and easily viewed from normal pictures.
 
Last edited:
NAA said:
I'm a die-hard S&W revolver fan.

On the question, I do believe Ruger wheelguns are stronger.

My preference for double action revolvers goes as follows:

1) S&W
2) Ruger
3) Colt

I don't list any others as I don't see myself owning any of the lesser competition. I say lesser as it's only a personal preference. I once owned a Llama Super Comanche in .357 with 8 3/8" barrel. It was servicable but not a S&W ;)

I was shooting full house .44 Mag back in the early 80's. It no longer holds any novelty for me. These days, as I have no wilderness ATC or any other need for full house ammo, I shoot or only plan to shoot mostly light target loads in my .44 - that would be 240 gr LSWC's at 800-900 fps. With occasionally a cylinder of JHP's or JSP's on the warmer side. And all of my own making. So, likely my S&W will last me a long time.

Camp Cook has it right though. For wilderness carry he uses full house ammo. And more importantly, he practices with the same. In that scenario, if it was me I'd be doing the same. And it would be off a Ruger platform.

2007-10-27_091302_1aCoffee.gif

NAA.
Click to expand...

For my tastes, the order of preference would be a little different.
  • S&W
  • Colt
  • Ruger
Admittedly, that may be a little bias in that I have and have had only two Ruger double actions so length of experience with them is limited. I've had numerous Smiths and quite a few Colts. I do however agree with your take on the 'lesser competition'.

I do shoot a limited number of light loads in all my revolvers but those are far out numbered by the volume of heavy loads. Perhaps I'm wrong but for the most part, if I want to shoot lighter loads I'll usually opt for a smaller caliber or lighter cartridge. As example, 9mm instead of full house 357 Mag or 45 ACP instead of top end 45 LC loads etc etc.

IF allowed to pack in the boonies as personal protection, there are a few single actions that would be high on my list. Here, for the most part, Ruger would shine as #1 and a recent acquisition would probably be at the top, of my list. A SS Ruger Blackhawk convertable, 45 ACP/45 LC.

45LCRugerBlackhawkSS.jpg


SSRugerBlackhawk45LC.jpg
 
Johnn Peterson said:
For my tastes, the order of preference would be a little different.
  • S&W
  • Colt
  • Ruger
Admittedly, that may be a little bias in that I have and have had only two Ruger double actions so length of experience with them is limited. I've had numerous Smiths and quite a few Colts. I do however agree with your take on the 'lesser competition'.

I do shoot a limited number of light loads in all my revolvers but those are far out numbered by the volume of heavy loads. Perhaps I'm wrong but for the most part, if I want to shoot lighter loads I'll usually opt for a smaller caliber or lighter cartridge. As example, 9mm instead of full house 357 Mag or 45 ACP instead of top end 45 LC loads etc etc.

IF allowed to pack in the boonies as personal protection, there are a few single actions that would be high on my list. Here, for the most part, Ruger would shine as #1 and a recent acquisition would probably be at the top, of my list. A SS Ruger Blackhawk convertable, 45 ACP/45 LC.

45LCRugerBlackhawkSS.jpg


SSRugerBlackhawk45LC.jpg
Click to expand...

Thats a nice rig! what kind of holster is that?
 
curtmg said:
Rentals, are also subject to popularity. How many gun newbs know the name Ruger, now how many know the name Smith and Wesson? I guarantee more people have heard of and would ask for the Smiths, so they get used more, which causes them to wear out quicker. Unless the range kept some nature of round count, which would be very difficult to do, just saying which gun lasts longer, can be misleading.
Click to expand...

My experiences were exactly the same. The Rugers outlasted S&W revolvers by a wide margin. I am a S&W fan and would never personally own a Ruger revolver because I don't like the look, but there is no doubt in my mind that they are more durable.
The biggest problem with the S&W revolvers is that after a steady diet of magnum loads, the hammer or trigger pins fail. This becomes a beyond economical repair situation. The Rugers lend themselves to repeated parts replacements without having to scrap the gun.
 
I'm really not sure why some people seem to think Smiths are weak. My model 29 has never had any issues with hot 44 mag and my model 27 has been eating through a steady diet of ultra hot 357 JSP ammo for a while with so signs of damage...
 
tactical870 said:
I'm really not sure why some people seem to think Smiths are weak. My model 29 has never had any issues with hot 44 mag and my model 27 has been eating through a steady diet of ultra hot 357 JSP ammo for a while with so signs of damage...
Click to expand...

Me too as/one of my earlier posts:). A short while ago I did acquire my first two Ruger double actions so, if I keep them, I'll have to see how they hold up over time.

IMG_1328.jpg
 
I used to have my 2 s/s Ruger Bisley Vaquero's in 45 Colt on my ATC after a few very close black bear encounters while carrying them I realized that I had a personal issue with only having 6 shots and no way of being able to reload even if I had a chance too.

I am going to be applying for my ATC again right away I will be applying to put 2 different handguns onto my permit this time my 4.25" barreled Glock 29 10mm for the winter months or if I am jumping in and out of my truck a lot and my 4.25" barreled Ruger Super Redhawk in 45 /Colt/454 Casull for the rest of the time.

I will most likely never apply to carry a single action revolver again...

CC
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom