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

Vladivar

Vladivar

Regular
Rating - 100%
17   0   0
Location
New Hamburg, Ontario
So i have decided it's time to get a DA wheel gun to go with my single actions and think I have narrowed the choice down to 2. They are the S&W 686 (6" barrel in .357) and the Ruger GP100 (6" in .357) both in stainless finish. First I must admit I have not fired either gun (that should change in the next week or so), but I am still interested in hearing opinions on function, build quality etc. If you own both and can do a direct comparison that would be great - but I am still interested for any thoughts on the pros/cons of either gun.

Thanks.
 
Let me just tell You that both revolvers are excellent choice, so You can't make a wrong decision here.
S&W has a bit better balance and trigger IMO, while Ruger has probably less parts and is slightly more rugged.
Still, You won't be living long enough to destroy 686. One thing that was problem for me with GP100 was trigger.
For whatever reason, every time I pulled the trigger I pinched my skin between trigger and trigger guard.
Never had such problem with 686. However S&W comes with the stupid hole in the frame, used to accommodate lock.
I don't care for any locks, so IMO it's a draw between GP100 and 686. Sorry :) Can't help You I guess...
 
I've owned both at the same time, but they were 4.2" :cool:

Overall Smith is a better gun, but if you cant afford one Ruger will do you well too.

Ended up selling them both...dont miss the Ruger but kinda wish I kept the Smith :/
sam0561wi.jpg
 
Had both- sold the Smith and kept the Ruger.

The Smith is a little nicer in finish and has a noticeably better trigger, but personally I didn't really see the value in the extra cost of the 686.

I would call the GP100 very utilitarian in nature. Everything about it is quite functional- I think for most mortals the double action trigger is very serviceable.

Both are really nice guns and you won't go wrong either way. If you're looking for something really nice I'd go with the 686, if you're looking for a token revolver to round out the collection I'd probably suggest the GP100.
 
Last edited:
686 is the better gun. Cast (ruger) vs. forged (S&W). <---- Maybe the cost difference? Hmmm...

Not to mention as said above, the trigger on the Smith is way better.
 
I own both and there is no question the S&W is a much nicer gun. The Ruger will do if you cannot afford or want to spend as much money as the Smith costs. There is a reason why S&W gets more money for there guns.

Graydog
 
If you're a glutton for punishing .357 magnum loads that'll kill your wrists and shoot them often, the ruger will likely hold up better to that kind of punishment. The Smith is the nicer gun overall, though...too bad IT HAS AN INTERNAL LOCK!!!! :(
 
I like the 686 better. My 686 is my most-used handgun by a pretty wide margin and after you swap out the factory grips for something more uniquely suited to your hands, I can't imagine somebody being disappointed with the gun. I don't mean to trash Rugers but I really dislike the triggers.

If you're looking for six-inchers, I'd strongly consider looking for a used 686 without the lock. They are floating around in the used market.
 
I've had both. currently rugerless. that said, with some work the trigger can be brought to within a hair of a smith trigger, and the DA can be just as good if you bob the hammer and add a spring kit and polish the moving bits. If you want to blast lots of heavy loads, the ruger stronger and more durable. The smith will hold a bit more value. The internal lock is a non issue, just ignore it if you don't like it. In thousands of rounds i've never had an issue with it. used it once on my 625 to see how it worked, then ignored it. i don't like the idea of it, but it doesn't affect anything either.
 
I love Ruger and I love S&W... but for different reasons

For a wheel gun I'll buy a Smith over a Ruger any day

For a Semi I'll take a Ruger over a Smith on almost all counts with few exceptions
 
I have both (well my S&W is a 586, same as a 686 but blue). With a polish and a wolfe spring kit, my GP is ALMOST as good as my stock Smith. I'm keeping the Smith and if the OP decides to go Ruger he can PM me.
 
I have had both at the same time. I kept my 4.2" 686. I was just a better overall gun. That is not to say the Ruger wasn't servicable, but the trigger, and overall fit and finish is just better on my Smith. I also have a M66 and Colt Python, and the 686 is used at least 10:1 on the other two.
 
i have the ruger but have shot both.
im not a big wheel gun guy so when it came time to buy one i decided to cheap out and save a few bucks.

for my token DA im not disappointed at all in my ruger.
it may be a little rougher then the smith and the trigger a hair sloppier but it is damn solid!

it was a much better thing to save the extra cash and roll it into my next purchase.

this whole discussion may be a waste though.... unless youve found a store that has finally gotten some Rugers in stock.
i havnt seen one in a store in well over a year.
 
I have both. Even after a Ruger trigger job the Smith still has a better trigger.

I find the GP100 heavy and clunky. I also have some Security Six Rugers, and they feel better.

If only buying one (a novel idea) buy the Smith, unless the gun will get a huge amount of use and abuse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom