I have a tried and true method of choosing a revolver. If I’m considering between two models I watch a ton of RUclips reviews on both of them then make an informed decision by buying BOTH of them. Works every time.
Same. I love how in depth he goes into his reviews or comparisons for revolvers. Not many channels review revolvers as much or are as knowledgeable regarding revolvers. I usually just skip all the other TYM videos unless it's a review or comparison these days.
When the wife and I went to get our first handgun (almost 18 years ago) we chose a GP100. Still have it and shoot it and love it. It was more affordable than the S&W and I'd already tried one previously. As far as style, I do prefer the swept underlug of the Ruger.
@@Gideon_Judges6 Any decent lawyer will get any modifications made to a carry gun to increase reliability and shootability tossed out of court. Now I'm not suggesting you put "Die Criminal Scum" on the barrel crown. But my issuing authority doesn't care what we do as long as we qualify with it.
Exactly! I’ve got a 3” 686 + “Talo type” edition with the unfluted cylinder and fancy wood grips and I got a 6” GP 100 but not in 357 but 327 federal magnum which is also a 7 shot! Love them both! 👍🏻
@@coyotebrown2294 if you buy second hand or surplus ruger and smith and wesson can both be had for cheap, found a few smith and wesson semi automatic pistols for less than $300, my s&w 5906 just needs a good polish
@@TheDrinkyDude Trouble is guys who have old S&W revolvers often all think they got a rare classic and it's worth a gold nugget or two. So they want prices far too high for what they're worth. Ruger isnt much better as guys want the value of a new GP100 for that of an old Security 6.
You have always had a bias against Ruger guns, but then, you apparently aren't as budgetarily constrained as I am. Bang for the buck: Ruger beats Smith & Wesson.
People seem to have a misconception as it pertains to the price difference between the two. At one point in time there was a huge price difference, but now, the price difference is negligible. Meaning, get the one you prefer.
So the Ruger is not stronger, except the stronger lockup at crane & the stronger unibody design which you half admitted later, the slightly more girth of the frame, and the angle of the forcing cone that you've never mentioned nor the taller teeth that wear down way less w dry fire or long time usage!
@wee bastard78 the Ruger is not stronger......and I like Rugers.....I put my smith and my ruger in a box....when I opened the box the ruger had its grips pulled down and had hickeys all on top of the barrel.
The Ruger also has an changeable front sight and Ruger has never intentionally sold handguns with the barrel cocked off to one side like S&W did. Ruger has never supported the destruction of the 2nd amendment like S&W did in the Clinton admin. I can't see how a firearms lover can support smith and feel good about themselves.
@@russellkeeling9712 what are you talking about? They both are gun manufacturers that want you to buy their guns. If you like one better just say that but it's got to make sense. Ruger is built like a tank, Smith is built with very fine finishing touches. That other stuff you said is crazy talk.
One obvious difference that wasn’t mentioned is the springs used. Roger uses coil springs and Smith uses the cheaper flat springs. And don’t even mention those crappy two-piece barrels Smith uses on many of their guns. I bought a GP100 in .44 Special and it just feels right, like an honest to goodness wheel gun that will never need to go in for repairs. The absence of a “Screw you” frame lock that Clinton foisted on Smith’s previous owners is just icing on the cake.
@@dw7284 Right, its just numbers. I have the same caliber S&W gun 3 times with all different numbers based on finish and the generation. It's almost like Glock doesn't make the Glock 17 in multiple calibers, you want that same gun in a .40 its a G22 now.
I never understood your pain tell I said that “a revolver was perfectly fine for a new shooter” on a Facebook comment and I found out glock fanboys really do take everything personally
It is perfectly fine for a new shooter. But to say that the average person taking up shooting for the first time especially if we're talking .357, I could definitely see the argument for a Glock (preferably in 9mm) as the go-to first gun. Just like glock fanboys get sensitive, so do the old heads who think a 4 inch .357 is the end-all be-all carry gun and call Glocks "plastic".
@@JJ_SDWRI don't see starting a new shooter out with a gun that is cocked and unlocked as a first gun. Fine for an experienced shooter but too unforgiving for a starter IMO.
I own a S&W 686+ with 4" barrel and a Ruger GP100 6" in SS A few points I would like to add from my experience: The hogue grips that come with stock GP100 is excellent, the ones on a stock 686 were too thin for me, changing to thicker rubber grips was a significant improvment. I like the hair trigger SA pull on the 686, however I prefer the GP100's "staged" trigger on its DA. I find the sight replacment is easier on the Ruger than the Smith With all being said, I too would take the Smith over the Ruger. 10 years ago, I would've chose the Ruger, back then a new GP100 was ~$150+ cheaper than a new 686, but now the price gap is closer, ~$75 different, and with that in mind, I'd say the S&W has a higher value for its money.
I'm pretty sure my sp101 has a triple locking system for the cylinder. Makes a real nice carry gun if you dont mind the weight and only having 5 rounds. That trigger you're not fond of can be fixed quick with a $10 spring kit and about 30 minutes of work. Both are excellent guns,I'm just more of a ruger guy.
If you plan to shoot a lot of magnum loads, the Ruger will handle a more steady diet of Magnum loads than the S&W. Having had both S&W and Ruger revolvers and shooting a lot of magnum loads I've had S&W's come out of timing and other problems when firing magnum loads with regularity. My Ruger's on the other hand... hasnt been a problem. Ruger revolvers are often reinforced in areas to help aid in frame strength when using said loads. Hence why many companies load "Ruger/Thompson Center" only loads. Other revolvers simply wont handle them. For my use in daily carry my SP101 does just fine. If I was going to carry a larger gun, I'd likely go with the GP100 as I dont usually shoot "target" loads like .38 Special or the sorts. I shoot what I plan to hunt or defend myself with. It's a costly venture but I want what's going to last under those circumstances. Now, if I was say an LEO using a revolver, I'd take the S&W because all the extra weight I'd be carrying in addition to the gun. I watched your video way back making the claim that Ruger's arent stronger but the industry doesnt agree with you. Science doesnt agree with you either. Look at the frame construction, more metal in critical areas, adds weight, adds frame durability. While I agree most people wont see much of an appreciable difference, if you're shooting magnum loads with regularity you will.
@Heywood Jablome Forged is stronger when the same amount of material is applied. Notice Ruger's use more material in key areas that are known to be stressed when firing magnum loads consistently. More importantly, there's a reason several loads out there are rated for "Ruger's only" for consistent use. It's like running +P in a gun not rated for it.. Sure it might fire and run. But how many times before you blow it up? Nothing you've said detracts from facts that have been proven when put to the test vs what it says on paper. People like to say a lot of things. This isnt one of those things people just "say".
@Heywood Jablome Not conflating issues? And no, they arent just because they have longer cylinders. Has a lot more to do with pressure and stress of the frames. You go ahead and shoot some of those .45 Colt "Ruger Only" loads in something like a S&W Model 25 or a modern .45 Colt S&W revolver and it will blow the gun up. You obviously havent tested or researched this issue. Evidence points to the fact I'm right on this and not you. You can do the research yourself and I encourage you do. Cant help the willfully ignorant in this case.
Ruger only loads are for Redhawks , Blackhawks and 1st model Vaqueros. These are made to withstand very high pressures. Another key difference is the lockwork, S&W lockwork is traditional from designs originating in the 19th C. Rugers more modern design is basically stronger better able to cope with the shock of modern magnums. Probably contrnibutes to why you cant seem to get Rugers as glass smooth as S&Ws . As to the relative strength of investment castings, that debate is 35 years out of date.
Hickock 45 says loves 686 and yes says cones on 100 are superb to smith and ruger loads and smiths are not option u figure it out ruger loads are on many magnum loads says ruger only 4 a reason
Heywood Jablome A forging is only marginally stronger than a properly executed casting, all else being equal. I have no love for bulky, clunky Rugers, but a GP100 is substantially thicker than a 686 in all stress-critical areas and is considerably stronger. Won’t really be noticeable to those who aren’t in the habit of regularly firing nuclear handloads, though.
Steve I think it's part of being an education based channel , in range should be different though , as a Canadian I envy the second amendment of the USA I wish we had the same stay safe brother
what makes the ruger stronger ... and it is ... is where the notches are located on the cylinder. every reloading manual lists " ruger loads only. " no manual lists " S&W loads only ."
I would go with the Ruger if I had to choose. Always been a Ruger fan. I guess it's just the gun guy version of the old Ford vs Chevy debate that there will never be a real conclusion to.
If you were gonna pistol whip someone, Ruger all day long. If you had a tight budget, also Ruger. If you are a fancy boy, Smith. I’m a fancy boy, but throw in a box of ammo and I will straight up whip a pimp with my Ruger.
Dearest YM really enjoyed the video and the one about front sights, although I recognise you have a fight on your hands over there it was great to see a gun video and no politics. I came over to the states a couple of years ago and of course my son and I went shooting, we shot as many guns as they would let us, the 686 was my favourite over the Glocks and all the other guns we shot, it also produced a very respectful group considering we are not allowed hand guns in England, I would say that makes it very user friendly on top of everything else. If I moved to the US it would be my first purchase! Anyway you and your family stay safe!
Hey Marshal, your bias is showing. I own both and many other examples from 22lr to 454 Casull (Ruger) from both manufacturers. Bottom line: the Ruger is a tank and is a much stronger revolver and with their 2 spring system the Ruger has a better trigger. I wouldn't give you 2c for a late model Smith trigger and I own a few, I've had to work on all of them. IMHO your comments are all BS, your are right about one thing, you are an internet expert. I've made my living working on these models and mostly the only thing I've ever had to do to a Ruger is add a spring kit. The Smiths need the full treatment (That's why they need to have a custom shop) including stoning the contact surfaces. I personally had a 625 with a dragging cylinder so I opened it up and saw a disaster of floating chips and machine marks, even the frame was compromised and it took a full day to bring it into any form of acceptable function, good thing it was only a 45acp. I seriously hope no one takes you seriously as you listen to the clicks. lol
I'm gonna get hate for this, but when. I was considering both of these for a first handgun and couldn't decide.... I ended up not getting either and going with a Taurus M66. It was cheaper, and, although most won't believe me, has by a wide margin the best trigger of the group. It still runs well too, even though now I do also own a gp100 and like it enough. Point being, weigh all options, and just because someone tells you a budget gun is junk, doesn't mean it is.
After trying both, I ended up going with the Ruger GP 100. When looking to purchase there were absolutely no deals to be found on a S&W 686 but I was able to get a very good deal on a new .357 Ruger GP 100, a little over $200 less than the 686. Mine came with the Hogue grip that were comfortable but a little large for my hand. So I change them out for the small size old school Ruger, rubber and wood grips that I really liked (so add $50 to my purchase). They look great on the firearm, fit my hand really well, are comfortable to shoot with and make it easier to carry the firearm concealed, (something I do with this firearm when camping). The Ruger trigger is easy to stage, which makes it nice to shoot accurately double action when target shooting, but it does makes it a little more challenging to develop a smooth double action trigger pull. Overall very happy with my choice. Now you may want to take this opinion with a grain of salt since I also own a Chiappa Rhino 200 DS :) .
I have several wheel guns and my all time favorite is my Ruger Match Champion. To each their own. You can't go wrong with either make, both great !! IMHO
Asking me to choose between my Rugers and Smiths is like choosing between my kids- some are better looking than others and some are definitely more functional.
For the 200-250 dollar difference I'll "round" the edges and live without the "Hillary Hole" that the S&W comes with. The cast is "tank like" and not an issue. Also there are shooting ranges that report a half million and more rounds on the GP100's with no issues of significant wear or maintenance. Out of the box the trigger on the Ruger feels better to me. Especially since I can do a trigger stoning and spring change in about 5 min. on the Ruger. "Lifetime no hassle guarantee", no matter who owns it. You can keep the S&W. For a carry everyday, workhorse revolver - Ruger. For investment and appreciation - S&W. If I need something I can put in the safe and sell years later for more money the - S&W it is. If I want something I can beat a gorilla with, leave outside for about a week and run over with my truck. Then soak in vinegar for 10 minutes, spray with ballistol then wipe it down and go to the range then the Ruger it is. That's the way I play it.
People who like Ruger revolvers should never look inside Ruger revolvers. This isn't a knock against their strength or functionality, it's just that they look like a high school shop class belt sander project. That being said I would never feel undergunned with the Ruger.
I bought a gp100 a month ago and pulled the whole thing apart and it looked fine to me, a few sharp edges in places that don't matter but other than that everything was nice and smooth. Same for my sp101 that i got year's ago
After buying my GP100 I took it apart and polished the non seer engaging surfaces of the internals and took feeler gauges to the gaps and shimmed everything to closer tolerances. Worlds of difference afterwards.
I prefer Ruger..to me the cylinder release is more intuitive and the internals are easier to take apart to polish and swap main springs for a more refined trigger. Ruger's are getting more refined with their Match Champ & Custom Shop guns and their quality control seems more consistent than S&W's Performance Center
I used to have a Ruger GP 100 in .357 with a 3 inch barrel and the rubber grips with the faux wood panels... I've never found another wheel gun that was as smooth of a shooter. I miss that piece.
Of 3 S&W I had, two were factory bad, one barrel over torqued and by 1/8” to the left and wanted $200 to fix it, sold it after 6 shots. My 29 had a bad primer pad that was not set all the way, that cost me $150. Roger all the way, and dude, just wrap more tape duct tape. The Ruger comes apart with a dime, shell rim or finger nail. This should be called a S&W advertising.
The only revolvers I have ever had a malfunction with are 2 of my 3 Rugers. Now I only have 1 Ruger left in my collection. I like both but the S&W is a better gun hands down.
I love my GP100 22 LR 10-shot with 5.5 inch half-lug barrel. I chose it over the S&W 617 10-shot 22 LR. I do not like their full lug barrels. Just my taste and aesthetic sense. Also, Ruger has three points of cylinder support versus only two points of cylinder support with the S&W 617.
Besides the constant problems I had with light primer strikes due to the strain scores backing out, I live the 686. I'd say to go ahead a blue loctite the strain screw in if you buy one.
Josh Benware : I've been shooting S&W revolvers for dang near 40 years of my life, and in those years I've had one strain screw back out untill an oldtimer gunsmith showed me how to put the kybosh on that problem, I'll pash that along if I may right here and now, the first thing he told me was CLEAN the crap out of the threads both on the gun and screw with a degreaser like alcohol, then using a very high quality and perfect fitting gunsmith screwdriver (these are special made for a reason so DO NOT use a standard joe blow screwdriver) just thread the screw in and crank that bastard down like you meen it (his exact words), unless you are king kong or the screw was defective you will not break the screw, I've never managed to break one in all these years and by no means am I weak (I'm a retired logger/mechanic so my arms are pretty darn beefy), anyhow don't want to see anybody mess up thier gun so you do have to use your head and if it doesn't feel right then by all means don't continue to king kong on it, but if the screw does break it ain't the end of the world their cheap and easy to get and fit a ton of different models so if ya get one get an extra just in case, anyhow using some blue locktite is not the worse thing, but there is just something about seeing it on such a pretty shinny gun,not that you can see it on it with the grips on but somehow just knowing the stuffs there somehow just bothers me for some reason, guess we all have our wacky hang ups LOL, there is one other trick through the years I've used to keep crap from backing out like that and that is for lack of what else to call the slightly bugger the threads up method, just like it sounds you just very ever so slightly mar the threads so that when they thread together you feel a slight resistance to turning, then once they tighten down they kinda lock in that position, it wiorks pretty darn good but if you remove and replace it more than a couple times it will not hold so well so it's more for a once and done thing, and if you over do it with the marring you can realy mess stuff up so it's a use with caution at your own risk sort of deal, anyhow just a couple things to keep in mind if ya ain't got locktite handy, that stuff can b a bit pricey if ya got to run out a get a tube for one little old screw....but you could steel a thing of your wife or girlfriend's nail polish and coat the threads with that let it mostly dry then assemble, that works darn good, but just make sure you color match with your atire we can't look like a bunch of heathens running around with miss matched crap now, and you might want to ask her first because she's liable to beat the crap out of you if ya run off with her pink passion delight nail polish LOL.
I went into a gun shop, saw both revolvers, and held both. They were both used. But the 686 caught my eye instantly. It was actually a 686+ deluxe, with a gorgeous wood grip, 6 inch barrel, and a 7 shot cylinder. The gp100 had a 6 inch barrel also and a nice textured rubber grip. In this particular shop, the 686 was a couple dozen dollars cheaper. I could not stop eyeing that gun, and didn't want to stop holding it. It just felt right. Ended up locking in on the 686+ and have not regreted it at all. It just feels so premium, and I got such a good deal on it.
After feeling the trigger difference in hand, I decided to wait on a 686+. 7 years of casually perusing the used cases at my local shops...I found one in excellent condition for $400 at Cabela's of all places. Needless to say I'm glad I waited and saved about $200 on the average used price in my area for similar condition used revolvers.
Just a data point for a worn out topic, but. For anyone who hates the S&W lock there are companies that make lock plugs that are reasonably easy to install. Yankee is right in his assessment of the functionality of the lock as well, my 686 and 649 (.357 & stainless steel) have never had problems, but my 329NG (.44 & scandium/aluminum alloy) would partially lock up when firing 44mag. It wouldn't fully engage the lock, thumbing back the hammer would remedy the situation, but first time home from the range and one of those plugs was in my shopping cart instantly. Installed and problem solved, the 329NG is a "never sell" for me.
@@shanekingsley251 lol still just the one. Ive only been able to shoot it 2 times. I havemt even got to shoot 357 out of it only 38 special. But man i love it.
Ruger has much more modern, updated design styling, particularly the left side plate area where the cylinder swings into the frame, the cylinder release button and half-moon metal that creates the back wall of the frame. S&W has exposed slotted screw on the cylinder latch which just looks like a horrible after-thought; whereas RUGER integrates the cylinder button with a smooth rounded housing that is part of the frame. S&W has what looks like an extra piece of metal strap shaped to help guide the cylinder back into the frame. S&W continues to produce revolvers with hideous design elements whereas Ruger has a much more integrated look and feel particularly re left side plat, cylinder latch and rear of cylinder frame. I agree roll marking on Ruger is not as nice. S&W usually has nicer checkering and wide spur hammer, and knurling on ejector rod is better looking that Ruger. So, it is a tough comparison ... best to have at least one of each.
One other thing to consider. The grip on the Ruger allows you to use one of the cushioned grips like the ones from Hogue. With the S&W, you are feeling the recoil through metal. Always. To most, it doesn't matter, but to those of us that shoot hundreds of rounds at a time, it might, and I don't see how you could brake one of those Hogue grips. I agree on the fit and finish, though, there is no comparison. As far as the price, I have found that there is usually more than $100 difference, and the money saved could be used to improve the trigger. I have both also, and I did just that, and I find that i shoot the Ruger with the trigger work more accurately than the Smith, and that hurts me to say, because I got the Smith first, and for a long time, I didn't want to admit it, because I really liked it.
Yea my buddy bought a 686 a year and a half ago online and never realized the barrel was canted until just a few months ago when I told him to check it. He was pretty disturbed by it and sent it to S&W for repair(took forever) and when he finally got it back, it was still canted. He ended up selling it and lost money.
What kind of grips are on your Ruger? The factory Hogues are pretty huge and clunky. I'm sure they're great recoil tamers but I really like traditional wood
Love revolvers! Have shot many SW and Rugers and own a GP100 among other Rugers. Outside of Bodyguard revolvers, can’t see anything bad and a lot great about SW, but still love my Rugers.
While I wish the Ruger had a full-sized grip frame (Ruger options seem to be fairly limited compared to other makes) and a little more attention in terms of machining, I just can't get past that internal lock shoehorned into the S&W. Ruger wins for new purchases.
I've had my 5866 for 26 years and have put at least 10,000 rounds thru it with good results. Then again it was my first hand gun so I might be a slight bit biased.
Smith 686 plus. I bought it online. Once I got it, the finish was uneven and scratched. I sent to smith, they polished and returned no charge. But, that was annoying. Overall, excellent piece. What static rig do you suggest to wear this piece.
Yankee, funny enough the Ruger used to have a full frame grip in the Security 6. Other than trading in the full frame grip for a full under lug, I couldn't find any appreciable difference between the Security 6 and GP100. I was disappointed because in a large frame .357 with a full under lug 6 inch barrel, what's a few extra ounces weight, right?
I was looking at the S&W and the GP-100 ,, this may sound silly but the reason i picked the GP-100 over the S&W was ,, i couldn't get passed what just looked like a hole on the S&W by the cylinder release button ..I guess its the "safety" screw or whatever but at a glance it just looks like someone drilled a hole in the gun ....Im not a S&W hater i love my older Model 19
About 5 years ago, I walked into a gun store to buy a S&W 686. I walked out with a Ruger GP-100 Match Champion. There wasn't a S&W in the store that had a better fit & finish or trigger than the Ruger. (And I own 5 Smith revolvers). But Ruger makes a hell of a gun,
My Smith & Wesson Model 629 6" got knocked out of time and begin skipping after about a hundred rounds of my handloads. Also ejector rod came loose. I screwed up a Model 66 the same way, and I screwed up a Taurus 357. However in my opinion the Taurus is a poor excuse for a Smith & Wesson. All three of these revolvers we're out of time and skipping and the ejector rods came loose. My handloads were stout but not exceeding any published load data. I sent the 629 back and Smith & Wesson customer service was fantastic! The 629 was back from Smith & Wesson within 3 weeks, tight as a drum better than new. I gave that gun to my brother. I have a Red hawk a GP100, a Super Blackhawk Hunter and a 6-inch Blackhawk. My ruger's eat all of the Buffalo Bore and heavy handloads I can feed them, never any timing issues not once! It sucks because I really really love Smith & Wesson's. They don't need to be as blocky as a Ruger because they are forged, they are beautiful and their quality is fantastic. When for the love of God is Smith & Wesson going to beef up some of their internal parts like the hand, and totally go to a crane locking into the frame system as they have done on a few or their revolvers currently? I can't be the only one who loves Smith & Wesson's but has experienced these issues.😕
I have a tried and true method of choosing a revolver. If I’m considering between two models I watch a ton of RUclips reviews on both of them then make an informed decision by buying BOTH of them. Works every time.
😂lol
I use the exact same method! Sometimes I even through in a 1911 just to make me think less about which revolver is actually better
@@gvines 😂😂😂excellent strategy!
Brilliant! 😂😂😂
Lol, i own/buy both as well
I've been missing this style of TYM video. This is what I subbed for.
Same. I love how in depth he goes into his reviews or comparisons for revolvers. Not many channels review revolvers as much or are as knowledgeable regarding revolvers. I usually just skip all the other TYM videos unless it's a review or comparison these days.
When the wife and I went to get our first handgun (almost 18 years ago) we chose a GP100. Still have it and shoot it and love it. It was more affordable than the S&W and I'd already tried one previously. As far as style, I do prefer the swept underlug of the Ruger.
nice name
Was anyone really all that surprised when he said he wasnt really a fan of the "tang"? Lol
Nice slam
He asked for that one.
He is a self described liberal.
In conclusion. Get one of each. That way when you've got one going in for custom work, you can carry the other. :)
Will-W now you're talkin simple as that problem of deciding fixed LOL
Or... don't do custom work on a carry gun other than maybe change grips? 🤷♂️
And if you want another a S&W Performance Center Model 19 Carry Comp. I have a Performance Center 460XVR, that single action trigger is to die for
@@Gideon_Judges6 Any decent lawyer will get any modifications made to a carry gun to increase reliability and shootability tossed out of court. Now I'm not suggesting you put "Die Criminal Scum" on the barrel crown. But my issuing authority doesn't care what we do as long as we qualify with it.
Exactly! I’ve got a 3” 686 + “Talo type” edition with the unfluted cylinder and fancy wood grips and I got a 6” GP 100 but not in 357 but 327 federal magnum which is also a 7 shot! Love them both! 👍🏻
Ruger is for people who know a good value they're not the best but for the money you get their products at they're hard to beat
@@coyotebrown2294 if you buy second hand or surplus ruger and smith and wesson can both be had for cheap, found a few smith and wesson semi automatic pistols for less than $300, my s&w 5906 just needs a good polish
@@TheDrinkyDude Trouble is guys who have old S&W revolvers often all think they got a rare classic and it's worth a gold nugget or two. So they want prices far too high for what they're worth. Ruger isnt much better as guys want the value of a new GP100 for that of an old Security 6.
@@coyotebrown2294 They really are not a budget price anymore. For sure.
@@Predalien195 that is consistent with what I see in my area. Used to be a security 6 was 350 in 2012 or so.
I've spent some coin on Performance Center SWs, never again. Nothing but problems for me personally, next wheel gun will be a ruger
Always, Ruger. Their customer service is far superior to, not only S&W, but almost any gun manufacturer that I can think of.
How often do you have to contact CS about your Ruger guns? Not sure that's a good sign. ;)
Rugged, reliable..., Ruger. I have both and love them equally. But the Ruger is a beast. If I could only keep one it would be the GP-100.
@@robertofurno947 le gusta las dos pistolas....pero le gusta un poquito mas la pistola de Ruger.
You chose...poorly.
@@wehrewulf Dumb.
@@wehrewulfwhy?
After years of wanting the 686…when the time finally came, I had to go with the Ruger GP100.
Same
Your mistake.
I own both and I have to go with the 686 hands-down
@@lenzielenski3276 Dumb.
This is one of those “can’t go wrong either way” choices. I have a 686 but would get a gp100 if I could. Both great revolvers.
You have always had a bias against Ruger guns, but then, you apparently aren't as budgetarily constrained as I am. Bang for the buck: Ruger beats Smith & Wesson.
And for pure strength, ruger will beat the snot out of Smith. Not many revolvers are stronger than a ruger.
I agree, they're a lot closer in price-- I chose Ruger because they're built like tanks.
People seem to have a misconception as it pertains to the price difference between the two. At one point in time there was a huge price difference, but now, the price difference is negligible. Meaning, get the one you prefer.
PsychoticBovine The security six maybe, but do you have any evidence to suggest the GP100 is magically more durable than a smith?
PsychoticBovine S&W is a drop forged frame. Ruger is cast which makes it look heavy duty but is actually weaker.
So the Ruger is not stronger, except the stronger lockup at crane & the stronger unibody design which you half admitted later, the slightly more girth of the frame, and the angle of the forcing cone that you've never mentioned nor the taller teeth that wear down way less w dry fire or long time usage!
@wee bastard78 the Ruger is not stronger......and I like Rugers.....I put my smith and my ruger in a box....when I opened the box the ruger had its grips pulled down and had hickeys all on top of the barrel.
@wee bastard78 let's meet up..u have ur ruger and ill have my smith.. let's see who does who first?
@wee bastard78 lmfao!!!!!
The Ruger also has an changeable front sight and Ruger has never intentionally sold handguns with the barrel cocked off to one side like S&W did. Ruger has never supported the destruction of the 2nd amendment like S&W did in the Clinton admin. I can't see how a firearms lover can support smith and feel good about themselves.
@@russellkeeling9712 what are you talking about? They both are gun manufacturers that want you to buy their guns. If you like one better just say that but it's got to make sense. Ruger is built like a tank, Smith is built with very fine finishing touches. That other stuff you said is crazy talk.
I enjoy your presentation, and reaffirms my choice in owning a Ruger.
"Someone" just got the 686+ yesterday, good timing on this vid YM.
One obvious difference that wasn’t mentioned is the springs used. Roger uses coil springs and Smith uses the cheaper flat springs. And don’t even mention those crappy two-piece barrels Smith uses on many of their guns. I bought a GP100 in .44 Special and it just feels right, like an honest to goodness wheel gun that will never need to go in for repairs. The absence of a “Screw you” frame lock that Clinton foisted on Smith’s previous owners is just icing on the cake.
I'm going with the gp100 match champion.
I like the Ruger's option for many different calibers in one platform.
Smith has just as many caliber variations within frame sizes.
@@dw7284 Right, its just numbers. I have the same caliber S&W gun 3 times with all different numbers based on finish and the generation. It's almost like Glock doesn't make the Glock 17 in multiple calibers, you want that same gun in a .40 its a G22 now.
I have the S&W 696 in .44 Special (5-shot) which is a dead ringer for his 686+.
I never understood your pain tell I said that “a revolver was perfectly fine for a new shooter” on a Facebook comment and I found out glock fanboys really do take everything personally
It is perfectly fine for a new shooter. But to say that the average person taking up shooting for the first time especially if we're talking .357, I could definitely see the argument for a Glock (preferably in 9mm) as the go-to first gun. Just like glock fanboys get sensitive, so do the old heads who think a 4 inch .357 is the end-all be-all carry gun and call Glocks "plastic".
@@JJ_SDWRI don't see starting a new shooter out with a gun that is cocked and unlocked as a first gun. Fine for an experienced shooter but too unforgiving for a starter IMO.
I own a S&W 686+ with 4" barrel and a Ruger GP100 6" in SS
A few points I would like to add from my experience:
The hogue grips that come with stock GP100 is excellent, the ones on a stock 686 were too thin for me, changing to thicker rubber grips was a significant improvment.
I like the hair trigger SA pull on the 686, however I prefer the GP100's "staged" trigger on its DA.
I find the sight replacment is easier on the Ruger than the Smith
With all being said, I too would take the Smith over the Ruger. 10 years ago, I would've chose the Ruger, back then a new GP100 was ~$150+ cheaper than a new 686, but now the price gap is closer, ~$75 different, and with that in mind, I'd say the S&W has a higher value for its money.
Rugers are stronger. Sorry, but that's truth. No sideplate. That does make a difference.
I doubt it.
@@tedjob21 Many reloading manuals show loads marked "Ruger only" for revolvers.
FACT
Any practical difference? A big enough difference to MAKE a difference? No.
@@exothermal.sprocket a big enough difference for reloading manuals to have loads marked "For Ruger Only".
I'm pretty sure my sp101 has a triple locking system for the cylinder. Makes a real nice carry gun if you dont mind the weight and only having 5 rounds. That trigger you're not fond of can be fixed quick with a $10 spring kit and about 30 minutes of work. Both are excellent guns,I'm just more of a ruger guy.
I love the GP100; yet I can't disagree about the trigger. S&W 686 trigger is in a different league.
I used to own both, sold the 686, the GP100 was just a more comfortable gun to shoot.
If you plan to shoot a lot of magnum loads, the Ruger will handle a more steady diet of Magnum loads than the S&W. Having had both S&W and Ruger revolvers and shooting a lot of magnum loads I've had S&W's come out of timing and other problems when firing magnum loads with regularity. My Ruger's on the other hand... hasnt been a problem. Ruger revolvers are often reinforced in areas to help aid in frame strength when using said loads. Hence why many companies load "Ruger/Thompson Center" only loads. Other revolvers simply wont handle them.
For my use in daily carry my SP101 does just fine. If I was going to carry a larger gun, I'd likely go with the GP100 as I dont usually shoot "target" loads like .38 Special or the sorts. I shoot what I plan to hunt or defend myself with. It's a costly venture but I want what's going to last under those circumstances. Now, if I was say an LEO using a revolver, I'd take the S&W because all the extra weight I'd be carrying in addition to the gun.
I watched your video way back making the claim that Ruger's arent stronger but the industry doesnt agree with you. Science doesnt agree with you either. Look at the frame construction, more metal in critical areas, adds weight, adds frame durability. While I agree most people wont see much of an appreciable difference, if you're shooting magnum loads with regularity you will.
@Heywood Jablome Forged is stronger when the same amount of material is applied. Notice Ruger's use more material in key areas that are known to be stressed when firing magnum loads consistently.
More importantly, there's a reason several loads out there are rated for "Ruger's only" for consistent use. It's like running +P in a gun not rated for it.. Sure it might fire and run. But how many times before you blow it up?
Nothing you've said detracts from facts that have been proven when put to the test vs what it says on paper. People like to say a lot of things. This isnt one of those things people just "say".
@Heywood Jablome Not conflating issues? And no, they arent just because they have longer cylinders. Has a lot more to do with pressure and stress of the frames. You go ahead and shoot some of those .45 Colt "Ruger Only" loads in something like a S&W Model 25 or a modern .45 Colt S&W revolver and it will blow the gun up.
You obviously havent tested or researched this issue. Evidence points to the fact I'm right on this and not you. You can do the research yourself and I encourage you do.
Cant help the willfully ignorant in this case.
Ruger only loads are for Redhawks , Blackhawks and 1st model Vaqueros. These are made to withstand very high pressures. Another key difference is the lockwork, S&W lockwork is traditional from designs originating in the 19th C. Rugers more modern design is basically stronger better able to cope with the shock of modern magnums. Probably contrnibutes to why you cant seem to get Rugers as glass smooth as S&Ws . As to the relative strength of investment castings, that debate is 35 years out of date.
Hickock 45 says loves 686 and yes says cones on 100 are superb to smith and ruger loads and smiths are not option u figure it out ruger loads are on many magnum loads says ruger only 4 a reason
Heywood Jablome
A forging is only marginally stronger than a properly executed casting, all else being equal. I have no love for bulky, clunky Rugers, but a GP100 is substantially thicker than a 686 in all stress-critical areas and is considerably stronger. Won’t really be noticeable to those who aren’t in the habit of regularly firing nuclear handloads, though.
I’ve just watched Forgotten Weapons, and it is obvious to me that I would prefer a Tranter .577 !
I watched that this morning also. That was an awesome gun. 👍
The Tranter is ALMOST as ridiculous as that Hellboy gun!
Steve I think it's part of being an education based channel , in range should be different though , as a Canadian I envy the second amendment of the USA I wish we had the same stay safe brother
@steve naylor Don't look into his politics. If you enjoy his content, his political affiliations will ruin his channel for you.
I love Gun Jesus. He is a historian, history teacher, and does a great job preserving firearm history via videos.
i'll take the GP100. that's why some ammo say's only shoot in the Ruger only.
The Rugers action sounds like my grand dad cleaning his teeth with a toothpick
what makes the ruger stronger ... and it is ... is where the notches are located on the cylinder.
every reloading manual lists " ruger loads only. "
no manual lists " S&W loads only ."
You're picking fly shit out if black pepper
@@jasonvoorhees2701 and you're making stupid comments.
if you do not understand basic engineering you should not comment.
your point ?
S&W is a fine gun. If you mostly shoot .38 special and occasionally shoot 357 you should be ok.
I like the push button on the Ruger.
I wonder if anyone would have a preference in between getting hit with a smoother angles gun or rough angle gun?
I own both, and love both. If you made me choose, I’d go with the Smith. Can’t go wrong either way though.
I agree with you and generally prefer the Smith and Wesson, however either is a fine choice.
I would go with the Ruger if I had to choose. Always been a Ruger fan. I guess it's just the gun guy version of the old Ford vs Chevy debate that there will never be a real conclusion to.
If you were gonna pistol whip someone, Ruger all day long. If you had a tight budget, also Ruger. If you are a fancy boy, Smith. I’m a fancy boy, but throw in a box of ammo and I will straight up whip a pimp with my Ruger.
@@john-paulsilke893 agreed..both great..but if I had to choose 1..ruger gets it just for sheer slugging strength if you're outta rounds lol
@@justinloughner9777 or Korth if you’re fancy. 🤣
Dearest YM really enjoyed the video and the one about front sights, although I recognise you have a fight on your hands over there it was great to see a gun video and no politics. I came over to the states a couple of years ago and of course my son and I went shooting, we shot as many guns as they would let us, the 686 was my favourite over the Glocks and all the other guns we shot, it also produced a very respectful group considering we are not allowed hand guns in England, I would say that makes it very user friendly on top of everything else. If I moved to the US it would be my first purchase! Anyway you and your family stay safe!
Hey Marshal, your bias is showing. I own both and many other examples from 22lr to 454 Casull (Ruger) from both manufacturers. Bottom line: the Ruger is a tank and is a much stronger revolver and with their 2 spring system the Ruger has a better trigger. I wouldn't give you 2c for a late model Smith trigger and I own a few, I've had to work on all of them. IMHO your comments are all BS, your are right about one thing, you are an internet expert. I've made my living working on these models and mostly the only thing I've ever had to do to a Ruger is add a spring kit. The Smiths need the full treatment (That's why they need to have a custom shop) including stoning the contact surfaces. I personally had a 625 with a dragging cylinder so I opened it up and saw a disaster of floating chips and machine marks, even the frame was compromised and it took a full day to bring it into any form of acceptable function, good thing it was only a 45acp. I seriously hope no one takes you seriously as you listen to the clicks. lol
I'm gonna get hate for this, but when. I was considering both of these for a first handgun and couldn't decide.... I ended up not getting either and going with a Taurus M66. It was cheaper, and, although most won't believe me, has by a wide margin the best trigger of the group. It still runs well too, even though now I do also own a gp100 and like it enough. Point being, weigh all options, and just because someone tells you a budget gun is junk, doesn't mean it is.
Ruger has a triple locking cylinder in GP100 and SP101
Forget all the other tests, let’s cut right to the most important thing: which revolver is better at killing coronavirus?
Colt New Python
Jack Wells the corona virus isn’t spreading because of illegals.
@Jack Wells that's a goofy way of saying "I'm ignorant as fuck"
Taurus Judge
@Jack Wells you don't read the paper much do you?
The cylinder lockup is stronger on the Ruger because it has three locking points as opposed to smiths two locking points.
After trying both, I ended up going with the Ruger GP 100. When looking to purchase there were absolutely no deals to be found on a S&W 686 but I was able to get a very good deal on a new .357 Ruger GP 100, a little over $200 less than the 686. Mine came with the Hogue grip that were comfortable but a little large for my hand. So I change them out for the small size old school Ruger, rubber and wood grips that I really liked (so add $50 to my purchase). They look great on the firearm, fit my hand really well, are comfortable to shoot with and make it easier to carry the firearm concealed, (something I do with this firearm when camping). The Ruger trigger is easy to stage, which makes it nice to shoot accurately double action when target shooting, but it does makes it a little more challenging to develop a smooth double action trigger pull. Overall very happy with my choice. Now you may want to take this opinion with a grain of salt since I also own a Chiappa Rhino 200 DS :) .
Excellent review. Thank you.
Love my 686+!
I have several wheel guns and my all time favorite is my Ruger Match Champion. To each their own. You can't go wrong with either make, both great !! IMHO
I carried a Smith as a duty gun for years. Like Ruger but gotta go with Smith. Keep up the good work. I enjoy the no BS rivals.
Love my GP 100! Built like a tank!!
Manufacturer engraving lol shows by bold in it who bigger bad gun but instructions part ruger could lose
I am picking up a 686+ tomorrow. I love the grips on yours. Where did you get them?
Asking me to choose between my Rugers and Smiths is like choosing between my kids- some are better looking than others and some are definitely more functional.
For the 200-250 dollar difference I'll "round" the edges and live without the "Hillary Hole" that the S&W comes with. The cast is "tank like" and not an issue. Also there are shooting ranges that report a half million and more rounds on the GP100's with no issues of significant wear or maintenance. Out of the box the trigger on the Ruger feels better to me. Especially since I can do a trigger stoning and spring change in about 5 min. on the Ruger. "Lifetime no hassle guarantee", no matter who owns it. You can keep the S&W. For a carry everyday, workhorse revolver - Ruger. For investment and appreciation - S&W. If I need something I can put in the safe and sell years later for more money the - S&W it is. If I want something I can beat a gorilla with, leave outside for about a week and run over with my truck. Then soak in vinegar for 10 minutes, spray with ballistol then wipe it down and go to the range then the Ruger it is. That's the way I play it.
Wonderful assessment. Very utilitarian. Completely agree.
People who like Ruger revolvers should never look inside Ruger revolvers. This isn't a knock against their strength or functionality, it's just that they look like a high school shop class belt sander project. That being said I would never feel undergunned with the Ruger.
I bought a gp100 a month ago and pulled the whole thing apart and it looked fine to me, a few sharp edges in places that don't matter but other than that everything was nice and smooth. Same for my sp101 that i got year's ago
After buying my GP100 I took it apart and polished the non seer engaging surfaces of the internals and took feeler gauges to the gaps and shimmed everything to closer tolerances. Worlds of difference afterwards.
I prefer Ruger..to me the cylinder release is more intuitive and the internals are easier to take apart to polish and swap main springs for a more refined trigger. Ruger's are getting more refined with their Match Champ & Custom Shop guns and their quality control seems more consistent than S&W's Performance Center
I'll stick with the tank GP100. When you run outta ammo you can beat someone to death with it. It's a beefcake.
I used to have a Ruger GP 100 in .357 with a 3 inch barrel and the rubber grips with the faux wood panels... I've never found another wheel gun that was as smooth of a shooter. I miss that piece.
Smooth to shoot with that junk heavy 3stacking trigger
Of 3 S&W I had, two were factory bad, one barrel over torqued and by 1/8” to the left and wanted $200 to fix it, sold it after 6 shots. My 29 had a bad primer pad that was not set all the way, that cost me $150. Roger all the way, and dude, just wrap more tape duct tape. The Ruger comes apart with a dime, shell rim or finger nail. This should be called a S&W advertising.
👍 No Key Lock Ruger
The only revolvers I have ever had a malfunction with are 2 of my 3 Rugers. Now I only have 1 Ruger left in my collection. I like both but the S&W is a better gun hands down.
If you take a shot every time he says “more refined “ about the Smith you won’t make it to the end of the video. 😉
I love my GP100 22 LR 10-shot with 5.5 inch half-lug barrel. I chose it over the S&W 617 10-shot 22 LR. I do not like their full lug barrels. Just my taste and aesthetic sense. Also, Ruger has three points of cylinder support versus only two points of cylinder support with the S&W 617.
Besides the constant problems I had with light primer strikes due to the strain scores backing out, I live the 686. I'd say to go ahead a blue loctite the strain screw in if you buy one.
Josh Benware : I've been shooting S&W revolvers for dang near 40 years of my life, and in those years I've had one strain screw back out untill an oldtimer gunsmith showed me how to put the kybosh on that problem, I'll pash that along if I may right here and now, the first thing he told me was CLEAN the crap out of the threads both on the gun and screw with a degreaser like alcohol, then using a very high quality and perfect fitting gunsmith screwdriver (these are special made for a reason so DO NOT use a standard joe blow screwdriver) just thread the screw in and crank that bastard down like you meen it (his exact words), unless you are king kong or the screw was defective you will not break the screw, I've never managed to break one in all these years and by no means am I weak (I'm a retired logger/mechanic so my arms are pretty darn beefy), anyhow don't want to see anybody mess up thier gun so you do have to use your head and if it doesn't feel right then by all means don't continue to king kong on it, but if the screw does break it ain't the end of the world their cheap and easy to get and fit a ton of different models so if ya get one get an extra just in case, anyhow using some blue locktite is not the worse thing, but there is just something about seeing it on such a pretty shinny gun,not that you can see it on it with the grips on but somehow just knowing the stuffs there somehow just bothers me for some reason, guess we all have our wacky hang ups LOL, there is one other trick through the years I've used to keep crap from backing out like that and that is for lack of what else to call the slightly bugger the threads up method, just like it sounds you just very ever so slightly mar the threads so that when they thread together you feel a slight resistance to turning, then once they tighten down they kinda lock in that position, it wiorks pretty darn good but if you remove and replace it more than a couple times it will not hold so well so it's more for a once and done thing, and if you over do it with the marring you can realy mess stuff up so it's a use with caution at your own risk sort of deal, anyhow just a couple things to keep in mind if ya ain't got locktite handy, that stuff can b a bit pricey if ya got to run out a get a tube for one little old screw....but you could steel a thing of your wife or girlfriend's nail polish and coat the threads with that let it mostly dry then assemble, that works darn good, but just make sure you color match with your atire we can't look like a bunch of heathens running around with miss matched crap now, and you might want to ask her first because she's liable to beat the crap out of you if ya run off with her pink passion delight nail polish LOL.
Other than a possible slight weight loss, is there any advantage to having a fluted cylinder over an unfluted cylinder?
I assume easier to spin the cylinder.
@@walden6272 Thanks.
I can’t afford either, I bought a Taurus 66, 7 rounds of 357 and money still in my pocket
Nice gun!
Love my Taurus 66, hell of a gun
That was my first 357. I loved it. Definitely worth the 380 out the door I paid.
A Taurus .357mag revolver likely saved my life in Birmingham, AL.
@@TheYankeeMarshal when will you tell us that story.
That S&W is beautiful
I went into a gun shop, saw both revolvers, and held both. They were both used. But the 686 caught my eye instantly. It was actually a 686+ deluxe, with a gorgeous wood grip, 6 inch barrel, and a 7 shot cylinder. The gp100 had a 6 inch barrel also and a nice textured rubber grip. In this particular shop, the 686 was a couple dozen dollars cheaper. I could not stop eyeing that gun, and didn't want to stop holding it. It just felt right. Ended up locking in on the 686+ and have not regreted it at all. It just feels so premium, and I got such a good deal on it.
I'm two years late to this review, but this is an excellent side by side review! Thank you sir!
I’ll take the Ruger, thank you!
I have a gp100 6 inch barrel and 686 plus 4 inch barrel love em both can't go wrong with either one
The smith is like a bradly fighting vehicle and the ruger is the m1 tank.both are good but which one will take a beating and keep shooting.
After feeling the trigger difference in hand, I decided to wait on a 686+. 7 years of casually perusing the used cases at my local shops...I found one in excellent condition for $400 at Cabela's of all places. Needless to say I'm glad I waited and saved about $200 on the average used price in my area for similar condition used revolvers.
You are correct, sir I’m 64 and I have owned a lot of handguns the Smith and Wesson 686 is the real deal
Yankee is a madman but he has the best revolver reviews. Wish there were more models with unfluted cylinders.
686 plus over the Ruger everyday for me
So the smith is shaved and milled down from a solid block of steel and the left over shavings are melted down and used to make a ruger ?
Just a data point for a worn out topic, but. For anyone who hates the S&W lock there are companies that make lock plugs that are reasonably easy to install. Yankee is right in his assessment of the functionality of the lock as well, my 686 and 649 (.357 & stainless steel) have never had problems, but my 329NG (.44 & scandium/aluminum alloy) would partially lock up when firing 44mag. It wouldn't fully engage the lock, thumbing back the hammer would remedy the situation, but first time home from the range and one of those plugs was in my shopping cart instantly. Installed and problem solved, the 329NG is a "never sell" for me.
I'd choose the Ruger GP-100 because I'm familiar with, it and because it offers better value.
@Heywood Jablome Jesus loves you too.
@Heywood Jablome exactly. Everyone on here saying the Ruger is better is just trying to justify their purchase.
Great comparison video! Thanks, from the future.
I have both exact guns. Agree with everything you said. Where did you find the grips on your gp100?
Im a first time gun owner got my gp100 a week ago lol. Great timing for video
Nice first choice 👍 how many guns do you own now a year later?!
@@shanekingsley251 lol still just the one. Ive only been able to shoot it 2 times. I havemt even got to shoot 357 out of it only 38 special. But man i love it.
Dude same also my first gun and still haven’t shot 357 rounds out of it yet
Ruger has much more modern, updated design styling, particularly the left side plate area where the cylinder swings into the frame, the cylinder release button and half-moon metal that creates the back wall of the frame. S&W has exposed slotted screw on the cylinder latch which just looks like a horrible after-thought; whereas RUGER integrates the cylinder button with a smooth rounded housing that is part of the frame. S&W has what looks like an extra piece of metal strap shaped to help guide the cylinder back into the frame. S&W continues to produce revolvers with hideous design elements whereas Ruger has a much more integrated look and feel particularly re left side plat, cylinder latch and rear of cylinder frame. I agree roll marking on Ruger is not as nice. S&W usually has nicer checkering and wide spur hammer, and knurling on ejector rod is better looking that Ruger. So, it is a tough comparison ... best to have at least one of each.
There is no side plate on a Ruger. Rugers are turd coated boat anchors compared to Smith & Wessons.
One other thing to consider. The grip on the Ruger allows you to use one of the cushioned grips like the ones from Hogue. With the S&W, you are feeling the recoil through metal. Always. To most, it doesn't matter, but to those of us that shoot hundreds of rounds at a time, it might, and I don't see how you could brake one of those Hogue grips. I agree on the fit and finish, though, there is no comparison. As far as the price, I have found that there is usually more than $100 difference, and the money saved could be used to improve the trigger. I have both also, and I did just that, and I find that i shoot the Ruger with the trigger work more accurately than the Smith, and that hurts me to say, because I got the Smith first, and for a long time, I didn't want to admit it, because I really liked it.
I like the Rugers looks compared to the Smith, what a beautiful gun. You cant go wrong with either one.
The Ruger will outlast the Smith. I've had both. For me to use, I've got to say, I'll take the Smith. The performance center trigger was just perfect.
I love Ruger revolvers. S&W not so much. Canted barrels anyone? Love your videos. Keep them coming.
Yea my buddy bought a 686 a year and a half ago online and never realized the barrel was canted until just a few months ago when I told him to check it. He was pretty disturbed by it and sent it to S&W for repair(took forever) and when he finally got it back, it was still canted. He ended up selling it and lost money.
Just had to get rid of my 625 JM. My dream gun.
Us in Europe can only have a baseball bat as we're denied home defense
They generally have a smoother trigger pull so it's not all that bad!
Stop voting for local and EU gun banners. The USA is learning the same lesson.
Look up how to make a potato gun
And sharpen your cold steel
Spetsnaz shovel
Good luck 🔪
What kind of grips are on your Ruger? The factory Hogues are pretty huge and clunky. I'm sure they're great recoil tamers but I really like traditional wood
WTF is that you have a 10mm wheel gun, didn't you say that was the worst gun fad at the moment. 😒
S&W... 100 years older, doesn't have an idiot CEO, smoother, better aftermarket
Love revolvers! Have shot many SW and Rugers and own a GP100 among other Rugers. Outside of Bodyguard revolvers, can’t see anything bad and a lot great about SW, but still love my Rugers.
I love both very hard to pick just one
Nice grips! Where'd those come from? I have beautiful Altamont super rosewood boot grips on my 3" 686+, but those look really nice.
While I wish the Ruger had a full-sized grip frame (Ruger options seem to be fairly limited compared to other makes) and a little more attention in terms of machining, I just can't get past that internal lock shoehorned into the S&W. Ruger wins for new purchases.
I've had my 5866 for 26 years and have put at least 10,000 rounds thru it with good results. Then again it was my first hand gun so I might be a slight bit biased.
586 not 5866 oops.
Buy them both
Love the 686 plus with the unfluted cylinder. So good looking and a great gun all around.
I own both and can get my grip higher on the Ruger and it seems I take it to the range much more often. The Smith bothers my wrist.
Are these the only two good revolver manufacturers?
I agree 100 % with you Yankee Marshal. I like both companies !!!!!! Myself i prefer the S&W 686 4 inch barrel 357 magnum.
Smith 686 plus. I bought it online. Once I got it, the finish was uneven and scratched. I sent to smith, they polished and returned no charge. But, that was annoying. Overall, excellent piece. What static rig do you suggest to wear this piece.
I prefer Smith and Wesson revolvers over any other especially if the other is a Ruger
Yankee, funny enough the Ruger used to have a full frame grip in the Security 6. Other than trading in the full frame grip for a full under lug, I couldn't find any appreciable difference between the Security 6 and GP100. I was disappointed because in a large frame .357 with a full under lug 6 inch barrel, what's a few extra ounces weight, right?
I was looking at the S&W and the GP-100 ,, this may sound silly but the reason i picked the GP-100 over the S&W was ,, i couldn't get passed what just looked like a hole on the S&W by the
cylinder release button ..I guess its the "safety" screw or whatever but at a glance it just looks like someone drilled a hole in the gun ....Im not a S&W hater i love my older Model 19
About 5 years ago, I walked into a gun store to buy a S&W 686. I walked out with a Ruger GP-100 Match Champion. There wasn't a S&W in the store that had a better fit & finish or trigger than the Ruger. (And I own 5 Smith revolvers). But Ruger makes a hell of a gun,
My Smith & Wesson Model 629 6" got knocked out of time and begin skipping after about a hundred rounds of my handloads. Also ejector rod came loose. I screwed up a Model 66 the same way, and I screwed up a Taurus 357. However in my opinion the Taurus is a poor excuse for a Smith & Wesson. All three of these revolvers we're out of time and skipping and the ejector rods came loose. My handloads were stout but not exceeding any published load data. I sent the 629 back and Smith & Wesson customer service was fantastic! The 629 was back from Smith & Wesson within 3 weeks, tight as a drum better than new. I gave that gun to my brother. I have a Red hawk a GP100, a Super Blackhawk Hunter and a 6-inch Blackhawk. My ruger's eat all of the Buffalo Bore and heavy handloads I can feed them, never any timing issues not once!
It sucks because I really really love Smith & Wesson's. They don't need to be as blocky as a Ruger because they are forged, they are beautiful and their quality is fantastic. When for the love of God is Smith & Wesson going to beef up some of their internal parts like the hand, and totally go to a crane locking into the frame system as they have done on a few or their revolvers currently?
I can't be the only one who loves Smith & Wesson's but has experienced these issues.😕