Ruger gp100 vs smith and wesson 686

graydog said:
I own and shoot both of these guns. They both work well. Don't buy into the stories that the S&W is not as strong, that story comes from the K frame guns and the 686 is the stronger L frame gun made to shoot 357 magnum.

Graydog
Click to expand...

Yes exactly, the K frame has much lighter build than the L. I can't remember every reading an article where someone had shot loose a 686. I'm not pushing the s&w (love rugers too) but good to use the relevant decision making criteria.
 
Last edited:
I had both the Ruger and S&W in my hands, liked the look and feel of the S&W better so I put my money down and she is my baby

I just seem to love S&W for wheel guns... semi's on the other hand, I loves my Rugers
 
After I bought my blued version of a 686 (586) I found my GP didn't get to go out and play any more. Both are great guns but even with a trigger job, the GP trigger was no match for the stock 586. The Smith L frame is plenty strong for .357 loads, that's what it was designed for, and with the grip size being the same as a K frame, there are lots of custom grips available. I wound up trading my GP (thanks again woodenpigeon) other than that I never would have sold it.
 
I own a blued GP100 4.2" and although I don't own a Smith I have shot many. 686's in particular, many, many times. Here's my take; grips can be changed on either gun, both guns have same or very similar excellent finish in either stainless or blue, both guns can get upgraded sights if desired so it really comes down to the triggers and build of the guns that vary.

It is very true to say the Ruger is over engineered in this department, but it is not accurate to say that the Smith is UNDER engineered. I'm certain that the 6/586's can and do handle full magnum house loads no problem, so we're down to the triggers or more accurately the trigger feel on these guns which do vary quite a bit...{in DA that is:)}

I personally don't notice much if any difference in the two guns (if they're stock) in SA. Both perform fantastically well with little more than a thought to touch off a round, DA is a different story.

In DA the Ruger has a noticeable staging trigger due to the transfer bar (the safety) vs. the Smiths smooth transition of internals to the point of discharge. If its a smooth DA trigger you want/need then hands down you want/need the Smith&Wesson. If however you're like me and appreciate the safety measure of a transfer bar and you can rationalize to yourself the trade off or compromise of a staging DA trigger, then the Ruger ought to be seriously considered.

My nickels worth.
 
I went through this debate about a year ago. I decided on the 686 and not once have I regretted the decision. The trigger is just so damn nice on the 686. I feed it magnum loads all the time, no issues yet, nor do I expect any. I also have to say that this gun makes me feel like I know what I'm doing. I've shot quarters at 15-20m fairly regularly and I'm no great shot.
 
I had both in 6" and I sold the Ruger. I found the Smith and Wesson was much nicer to shoot and fit my hands much better. I also think it looks much better than the GP100. I could easily see how someone could like the Ruger better, they are both good. Try to take a look at each one in person and dry fire them both. The trigger really made the differance to me.
 
I have a ruger Super Redhawk 9" in 44 mag and the S&W 686 6" (357). Both are stainless. In both cases the build quality is very good. The Ruger does look a little more, "utilitarian", maybe not the right word, perhaps "less embellished" somehow. The S&W just seems to sparkle differently and has a look to it that says "me, pick me".

Both shoot extremely well and I have had zero problems with either. The S&W might hold it's value a tiny bit better if you ever decide to sell, but also s gonna cost more up front. I think it comes down to fit to your hand really. Either way I think you'll enjoy whichever you buy.
 
Johnnyjellybean said:
I think Ruger's QC has slipped more than S&W's !!!!
Click to expand...

Yes, indeed! I agree.

As it hasn't been pointed out of yet, I will add: The Ruger gives the appearance of being "beefy" due to the fact that it is cast not forged like the S&W.

No to mention the previous points of looking better, trigger, QC, useable warranty (in Canada)

Hands down, I would choose the S&W. (yep, have both)
 
I prefer the cylinder release on The Smith. I just can't get used to the one on the Ruger. It seems a little less "natural" for lack of a better word.

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