S&W 686 vs Ruger GP100(KPG-161)

Unfortunately spoke too soon. Apparently a mix up on the web site inventory caused it to show the gun in stock - which it wasn't.

Guess I have to keep looking. There appears to be availability at a few dealers for the 4.5" but nothing for the 6".

Sad day today..........
 
I have very limited experience but have shot both the 4.25" and 6" S&W during a course. I felt that the 6" was muzzle heavy and poorly balanced compared to the 4.25". I bought the 4.25" and couldn't be happier. Perhaps you would be too? I think that the thing about the Ruger that I don't care for is that it is not a S&W, this is about brand not about quality or value.
 
in my experience with the 686 i found the 4.25 to be the ideal barrel length. you will be happy with whatever you end up with though. everything suggested here is a great gun

perhaps a picture of my 4.25 686 will sway your opinion?
P1000331.JPG
 
"Really the tradeoff between the GP100 and 686 should just be chalked up to cost vs. trigger pull. "

~ some dude.

Agreed. No amount of aftermarket modding will get the GP100 trigger to the point of the factory 686. The geometry is just better designed. The lock time on the 686 is fantastic and very very noticeable if you've spent time with both guns. FYI, I own two GP100's and love them both and will never sell. But credit is due where credit is due. The 686 trigger is far far better. The GP100 trigger is fine, and you'd only really notice if shooting one then the other right after.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom