Been having major problems with brand new S&Ws over last two years, had to send them immediately to S&W for repairs. Once returned, they function flawlessly. Ruger has been reliable all along, sticking with them for now.
Same here. I picked up my favorite Smith revolver, a 642, at my local Academy about a year ago. It was priced at $519, but they gave me a $100 discount. So $419 was a really decent price now a days. I noticed immediately after getting it home that it had 2 chambers out of time- and the star that pushes the empty cases out had a bad bur on it. I called Smith and explained my issues. They did quickly send me a prepaid shipping label. I had the revolver back in 2 weeks. All postage and repairs were covered and it was repaired. So their customer service was really good. But it's just pitiful that a gun leaves their factory in that condition. Even though it was repaired, I traded it off. Just didn't want it anymore. And I doubt I'll buy another S&W revolver. I personally think they are overpriced and now I don't even trust their quality. I have an old late 90's stainless Rossi model 88 snub revolver. The workmanship on it seems much better than my newer Smiths . Just pitiful !
Minor problems here, but I hear ya. Two 1911s with crumbling mag releases and a 329 that the Hillary Hole locked itself up repeatedly, even while dry firing!! Not dangerous my a**!!!
I sent a new 686+ back for a Hillary hole that was jagged and not round, preventing me from putting the tool in. When I got it back, I noticed a timing issue on a chamber and sent it back again. When I got it back the second time, it still had a timing issue. I ended up buying a new extractor and oversized hand, then fit them together. I also had lots of cylinder slop, so I fit an oversized cylinder stop as well. I have several older S&W revolvers, and there is a big difference in how they were made.
Ruger GP 100 front sight doesn't tap out now. There is a button over the front of the barrel to just push in and the sight comes right off. Replace sight in about 60 seconds.
That depends on the particular model. The dovetail front sight is on the combat/defensive pistols & the plunger style is more likely on hunting or target pistols.
I loved that about my GP100. The factory front sight was just flat black. Very difficult to acquire against the black rear sight. Ruger makes a front sight with a reddish-orange insert that is much easier to use, and looks like it belongs there, which it does!
I have both in stainless steel with 6" barrels, and I've put custom grips on them. For some reason I think of the Ruger being more Russian with simple fool proof construction, and the S&W being German, with more precise but overly complex design. Although I bought the S&W later and paid a lot more, if I could only have one it would be the Ruger. You could use it to hammer nails and dig trenches and it would still function.
After years of carrying Smith & Wesson I was assigned one of the 1st 6" Stainless GP100's out of the factory. I attended a Ruger Armorers class at a local PD with about a dozen other Police Firearms instructors. Total hands on learning how to tune and repair GP100's and Mini-30's. Watched several videos from several police agencies around the nation showing them abusing their sample of GP100's. 4 wheelers, cable and swamp in Florida, a concrete walkway, large Samoan and a flat handed slam to the concrete in San Diego and tossed out of a helicopter in the Mid West. Each and every time, (Gun loaded with blanks for safety) revolvers were retrieved and fired with no malfunctions. (Had to tape the grips back on after helo drop). Needless to say, my Smith got replaced by a GP100 in my duty holster. 38 years with the GP100 and no glitches, lots of rounds down range and couldn't be happier. Just wish I had this revolver when I fired the PPC Courses. My first S&W Model 28 came from a CHP officer in a trade. Discovered it had a sheared off rebound slide pin. 6 weeks at the S&W repair shop repaired no charge. However that damage would not have happened with the GP100.
I can only state that my 35 year old GP100 has endured with countless full house rounds through it and basic minimal care. That pretty much sums it up for me.
Very informative, and extremely well photographed/illustrated. I love my Smiths and I love my Rugers. We are fortunate to have two extremely well-made (in America) firearms to choose from. I still miss the K-frames (gave mine to younger daughter and her husband), because, unless you are shooting lots of magnum rounds in competition, the K-frames were a little more elegant and handy, but that’s just personal preference. Thank you for taking the time to produce this; it must have been very costly, time-wise, and I, for one, appreciate the time you took. Be safe, and happy shooting.
I had a newer model 19 that I ended up selling mainly to get another revolver I wanted more but the 19 also had some minor finish issues but that gun was a dream to shoot even with the dreaded lock
I own both, though my GP100 is a 44 Special. The difference is simple... The Ruger is a hunting and dragging behind the truck revolver. The S&W is a fighting and barbecue revolver. I love 'em both, but for different reasons! (There's a wife joke in there somewhere, but I'll leave well enough alone!)
I have a Ruger GP100 and S&W 686, both from the 1980’s. I remember folks saying the Ruger was stronger because the S&W isn’t solid (has the side plate). Others said the S&W had a better frame because it was forged, not cast like the Ruger. I do prefer the finish of the S&W, it’s like a fine Swiss watch. I have owned the Ruger since new, so it’s my favorite, more for sentimental reasons than anything else.
You missed the best part about the Ruger and that is how simply the cylinder and crane assembly comes out. A little more difficult to remove on the smith
It can be slid out the front once you remove the trigger assembly from the frame isn't it? Disassembly, cleaning and maintenance look far simpler with Ruger's design.
@@exothermal.sprocket or the Spohr. Yep, push button is easiest of all for cylinder removal. One is affordable for all, the other two are for much more well off clientele.
I have both in 6 inch barrels. They are high quality, shoot very accurately and are completely reliable. I love them both. But, If I were forced to keep only one, It would be the 686+. I like the trigger better and the general feel of the gun. Glad I have both!
I have one of each Timing on the 686+ has gotten a little short on a couple chambers over a fairly short period of time the gp100 is solid but it is a 6 shot which i would think is EZer to set up when built at the factory the smith has a better single action trigger but double action is a wash on my guns except that the reset on the smith is faster and more solid I do have to check side plate screws on the smith so that’s an advantage for the ruger but being able to remove the cylinder from the yolk easily for cleaning is big advantage for smith.
Nice thing about a Ruger You can get just about any style of grip you want and have no problem putting it on. Smith & Wesson you are limited by the frame. Rental places like them because they don't wear out.
Thanks for the video. I had a Service issued stainless Ruger. By the time it had about 13,000 rounds, the threads of the barrel cracked. The barrel fell off at the range. Obviously, that could be fatal to the user in a fight. However, I have to say, I never heard of any other gun besides mine, that happened to. The Service replaced it with a smith, but for some reason, I prefered the Ruger trigger. I guess I liked the coil spring better than the leaf spring.
I have both in 2.5" models and I prefer the smith trigger. Both guns are fantastic and would be happy with either I'm just more accurate with the smith. Can't go wrong with either of them.
I have Ruger's, Colts and Smiths. Their all high quality pistols that should have no issue lasting a persons lifetime and beyond. i've had zero issues with any of them after firing thousands of rd's through my guns. My Colts have the highest level of fit and finish, next would be the PC smiths and Ruger last. That said all shoot great looks aside and the Ruger's do seem overbuilt toughness wise. My favorite Ruger is the GP100 3" Wiley Clap model . I carry it all the time hiking and camping. I carry /EDC my Python 2.5" a-lot in Winter months. Its shoots like a laser and is crazy smooth double action. Just picked up another nee model python 4.25" and a Smith PC 629 2.5" 44mag snub. The PC 629 with full 44 loads is a flame thrower I love it :)
The thing about owning one (or more) of each (late 80's) was that we were kids and everyone had custom gunsmithing done on their Smith. So i had my GP worked over. Has as many edges as a bar of soap, and just the eagle T.M. and serial number.
I wanted a 357 revolver, was considering the Smith and GP. Consensus was the Smith was nicer out of the box, GP was stronger, but crappier trigger. Bought the GP, did a trigger job (polishing up the teeny parts in the trigger group was fun), installed lighter trigger and hammer springs. Ended up super nice, the single action just a touch too light even though I didn't go with the lightest springs in the kit. I've had a lot of fun with it over the years, just had it out at the last range trip, still excellent.
If you want a real magnum that can actually Handle a Steady Diet of Magnum Ammunition, get the Ruger no question at all. They make "Ruger only" loads for a reason...
Ruger only loads are for RedHawks & Blackhawks that have longer cylinders meaning the Ruger only loads are longer and won’t fit in other revolvers that have shorter or regular length cylinders.
one thing not mentioned was the ease of mounting an optic. The Smith & Wesson is just a matter of removing the rear sight and installing a base into the top strap and using the pre drilled and tapped holes. The GP 100 is a little more involved if you can evan find a mount.
I like the looks of the Ruger better although my 4 inch, six shot GP100 has adjustable rear sites that look more like those on your Smith. I also think the price difference sometimes gets a little bigger on the used market, at least based on my casual observations. Used Smiths seem to be priced closer to 'new' prices than used Rugers. I guess if you are a person who thinks of firearms partially as an investment or who likes to trade a lot that is an advantage for Smith & Wesson. If you are like me, however, and don't (can't afford to) buy several guns a year, really chew on the decision to buy another and, once you do, have no intentions of it ever going anywhere then how well it will hold its value if you sell/trade it doesn't matter.
It’s so funny he was talking smack about the GP100 previously. Yet it wasn’t the Rutgers that caused the SAAMI specs to be lowered for .357 Mag. That was S&W whining that their little pistols not being able to handle full 357 loads.
One of the deciding factors for me back in 1989 when I got my first GP-100 was the cylinder lock. Being left handed I found it quicker than the S&W to open by using the big joint on my trigger finger to press the button. That and the GP-100 is far more accurate with target loads than the S&W, Colt or the Dan Wesson.
I've had a GP100 with a 6 inch barrel since the mid 1990's and the only change I had to to it was to put a Houge monopod grip on it because my hands could no longer handle the recoil of magnum rounds with grips is came with.
Back when I was a young man, that angled cut on the underlug of the Ruger GP100 saved my bacon in Smyrna, Ga. (🎶In the heeeat of the niight...😋) ...anyway, there I was, a newbie in the gun shop picking out my first handygun. Being a bit shallow, I liked the look of that lug, so I bought the Ruger. 🙄 What!? I could have owned a Smith! 😅 I do own a Smith now, but I still love that Ruger. 😋
@@TheYankeeMarshal Nah, nothing like that. It saved me about $25 and I got a prettier gun. 😂 But I may be starting to know why Gary acted out so much. 😓
You had mentioned in a previous video how the Ruger's trigger was a little clunky compared to the S&W. Since I had a Ruger for years before my first S&W, I didn't understand it. But now it is very apparent what you meant. I've polished and changed the springs on my Ruger, so it is extremely smooth and actually lighter pull weight then my S&W. But there's no getting away from how nice the S&W feels. It's kind of like going from a manual steering to power steering in your car.
I have always liked Smith & Wesson. I have come to realize what I was liking was what they were supposed to be. I say that because I have had a lot of them and at least 80% of them had some kind of problem. Probably 25% of them have had major problems. I want so badly to have a nice S&W that is what it is supposed to be. I always thought Ruger was a lesser than compared to the Smith but not anymore Ruger is far superior to the S&W of today.
While modern S&W is more consistent, has parts designed on CAD and manufactured on CAM machines, can run much higher parts volumes and keep parts more consistent, I'm sure they QC check and track tolerances like any modern manufacturer, but they have suffered by cutting out skilled craftsman and staff that know what they are doing, to pay attention to fitting and function. Typical corporate crap in America. It's a mindset in that company that needs to change. The older S&W revolvers feel, function and look better in most cases. That's not to say those older designs never had problems, of course they did. Yet the manner in which they were manufactured, they HAD to be handled and fitted and skilled craftsmen HAD to give them attention or they would have never worked. It was a time before computers.
One thing for sure I have found that Ruger‘s customer service and turn around time is second to none. 2 to 3 weeks versus months with Taurus being the worse which is months and months and months!
I have had a 586 and a 100. they both shoot straight and work great. the 100 has spring kits for changing the hammer fall/release which i played with as well as reloading. Both revolvers were excellent to shoot. the 586 was lighter than the 100 as there story swaps between shooters was too much beef on the ruger and too light on the 586. I believe it will be personal comfort.
There's one thing that irritates me about Ruger. Especially on their Stainless guns, the sharp edges, especially on the hammers. they really need to do some more rounding of these areas.
If the edges bother you SO much....there are things called 'files' and 'stones' that easily remove them with just a few minutes of work. You're complaining about something that would add cost to an already costly device that the vast majority of people don't have a problem with. Round all the edges that offend you and the fact that they're stainless means there's no refinishing needed.
@@dancruze The Ruger hammer pivots on a through axle where the Smith pivots on a pin secured only on one side. Dropping a Smith on the hammer can and has snapped this hammer pin where it's unlikely to damage a Ruger and if it does...simple part replacement and it's back in action. As mentioned in the video...the hammer play is designed to be there for production and debris tolerance reasons. Most trigger improvement kits include shims to tighten up the hammer but I've never felt it necessary to do so. The video didn't mention how the triggers differ in pull with the Smith smooth all the way through to the break while the Ruger will stack right before release. I prefer the Ruger as the tip if my trigger finger touches the back of the guard right before the break and I can reliably advance the cylinder during recoil and the trigger effort helps bring it back down to the target. Staging the trigger is a different technique that works well on Ruger but not so well on Smith's. It's great to have both as options!
I’m very surprised he didn’t mention one of the biggest differences: the Ruger is a cast frame and the Smith (like Colt) is a forged frame. Forging is superior and that’s why Ruger has to make the frame larger to achieve the same strength. Both still great guns but casting is a shortcut and higher quality parts are forged just like crankshafts, pistons, etc in high performance motors.
Hey Yankee, while you’re doing these comparisons, why don’t you throw the Henry Big Boy revolver into the mix. I know it’s not as mainstream as the others, but size wise it’s pretty comparable.
If Ruger could get the manufacturing of their revolvers turned up a bit so we could actually find some of their cooler models on the shelves, they would wipe the floor with S&W. I feel like S&W understands their buyers more. They have way more snubbies and 3 in 7 shot revolvers than ruger. They have lightweight camp guns, and a much greater variety. If Ruger would just be a little more innovative in their revolver market and turn up their manufacturing, I wouldn't even consider S&W.
They both could use some attention from a competent gunsmith who can true things up, polish stuff, put a file to the mechanism, shims, ream the forcing cone, reduce spring pressures a bit, and install better sights. If I was going to the trouble, I'd probably do a Ruger.
So out of the three (S&W 686plus, Ruger GP100, or Colt) which do you prefer ? Just asking, I already made my decision. I have my awesome 686 plus in 4 inch. Can you answer my question ?
Had both...sold the Smith and kept the Ruger. I didn't really need both, as they were pretty much the same. Ruger is built better, stronger, and looks nicer I think.
Thanks for a great review, S&W 686 and Ruger GP100 are both high quality revolvers, but S&W 686 has a better single action trigger than Ruger GP100 and Colt Python.
Biggest difference for me - Ruger is more reliable, and build for smaller hands like mine, so is easier to hold and shoot double-action. I bought the Ruger, pretty well when it was first on sale 25+ years ago.
I mostly grew up on Smith and Wesson, but have liked the Ruger GPs on every occasion I shot one. (Never realized anyone had a thing against the Smith slide release, though, kinda just normal. Your release lever thing looks interesting but like it might get in the way of a switch-hitter like me. (Cause I will thumb back the hammer if I have the fraction of a second to do so. Possibly if Ruger's just nicer for single action like you said that's wy I had positive experiences, if not exhaustive comparisons. )
Gp100 all day long. Smith has made shit quality revolvers since the 90s. So many problems have come thru my shop, even after being sent for warranty work that I won't take a new smith for free.
I have no experience with the standard Ruger GP 100. However,I have had a lot of experience worth the Ruger GP 100 .357 magnum Match Champion. It was built like a damned tank,and almost as heavy as one. It was also the most accurate handgun I ever had. An absolutely superb firearm.
I’m not choosing because I don’t have to. I am keeping and enjoying all my examples of both. I really couldn’t care less about one opinion over another. They are mine and that is what really matters, not trite observations and unfounded perceptions.
I'm surprised @TheYankeeMarshal wasn't all over the newly released M&P Metal in the foty. S&W is SAVING THE FOTIES! Which they should, seeing that the chambering is named after them, and it is a good duty and self-defense round.
@@tk423b Would be nice if these corporations would stop paying homage to bureaucratic regulations. Ultimately it comes down to perceived value. What does a customer perceive as valuable on a revolver vs. not? I guarantee S&W has lost a ton of sales on their products due to the "Hillary Hole" and probably Ruger has lost customers (would be hard to quantify exactly how much) due to the stamped warnings and instructions all over their products. It can reach a place where customers are going to go somewhere else for something they perceive as better value.
Jennings Machine & Tool sells a plug for the hole in the Smith and Wesson frame if you remove the lock. I like the Ruger cylinder release a bit more because I automatically push with my fingers as I hit the latch with my thumb & the cylinder comes out a little smoother for me. My first pistol was a S&W 686 6". I regret selling it a few years later but apparently not enough to replace it after 30 years without it.
I prefer the overall design on the smith and Wesson. Their fit and finish is also overall better. Their QC over the years has fallen though. Ruger is really looking pretty good….I’m still a S&W loyalist but the company needs to take better care of their long lasting product….especially with the rising prices.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and it is obvious you like the Ruger better. Personally I prefer the S&W, but I'm coming at it from a different point of view. I've been carrying the same S&W 686 with a 6" barrel since they first came out in the late 1970's. I have put thousands of full house .357 rounds through it without any issues. I started carrying the 686 when I was a deputy with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department. We were allowed to carry S&W, Colt, or Ruger revolvers. Every one of the Department armorers advised against the Colt revolvers, as it took a tad longer to do a combat reload due to the cylinder lock having to be pulled to the rear which took longer. They also strongly advised against the Ruger's (even though they were authorized), due to their exceedingly long lock time, which in a gunfight can be the difference between living or dying. A nice feature with the S&W revolvers (all of them) is that you can jerk the trigger back to the breaking point (or roll over point) without discharging the weapon and you can hold it there for however long is needed. That won't work with a Ruger. With the S&W's, you are able to do this regardless of hand? finger size. Since law enforcement used double-action shooting except in very few circumstances, with the S&W, you could draw, come up to a firing position, pull the trigger back to just before the breaking point, hold it for as long as needed, but be able to get a quick shot off if needed, or release the trigger if that was needed. Just my opinion.
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Been having major problems with brand new S&Ws over last two years, had to send them immediately to S&W for repairs. Once returned, they function flawlessly. Ruger has been reliable all along, sticking with them for now.
Same here. I picked up my favorite Smith revolver, a 642, at my local Academy about a year ago. It was priced at $519, but they gave me a $100 discount. So $419 was a really decent price now a days. I noticed immediately after getting it home that it had 2 chambers out of time- and the star that pushes the empty cases out had a bad bur on it. I called Smith and explained my issues. They did quickly send me a prepaid shipping label. I had the revolver back in 2 weeks. All postage and repairs were covered and it was repaired. So their customer service was really good. But it's just pitiful that a gun leaves their factory in that condition. Even though it was repaired, I traded it off. Just didn't want it anymore. And I doubt I'll buy another S&W revolver. I personally think they are overpriced and now I don't even trust their quality. I have an old late 90's stainless Rossi model 88 snub revolver. The workmanship on it seems much better than my newer Smiths . Just pitiful !
I’ve sent some back 3 times
Minor problems here, but I hear ya. Two 1911s with crumbling mag releases and a 329 that the Hillary Hole locked itself up repeatedly, even while dry firing!! Not dangerous my a**!!!
Have a new 629 deluxe there now, been 7 weeks....front sight was literally bent and the side plate had a dent in it right behind the cylinder ear.
I sent a new 686+ back for a Hillary hole that was jagged and not round, preventing me from putting the tool in. When I got it back, I noticed a timing issue on a chamber and sent it back again. When I got it back the second time, it still had a timing issue. I ended up buying a new extractor and oversized hand, then fit them together. I also had lots of cylinder slop, so I fit an oversized cylinder stop as well. I have several older S&W revolvers, and there is a big difference in how they were made.
Ruger GP 100 front sight doesn't tap out now. There is a button over the front of the barrel to just push in and the sight comes right off. Replace sight in about 60 seconds.
Better design than both a scroll pin or a dovetail.
That depends on the particular model. The dovetail front sight is on the combat/defensive pistols & the plunger style is more likely on hunting or target pistols.
The 3 inch model 1715 still has a pinned front sight (black ramp) with fixed rear gutter sights. I haven't seen it in any other model of GP100.
I loved that about my GP100. The factory front sight was just flat black. Very difficult to acquire against the black rear sight. Ruger makes a front sight with a reddish-orange insert that is much easier to use, and looks like it belongs there, which it does!
I have both in stainless steel with 6" barrels, and I've put custom grips on them. For some reason I think of the Ruger being more Russian with simple fool proof construction, and the S&W being German, with more precise but overly complex design. Although I bought the S&W later and paid a lot more, if I could only have one it would be the Ruger. You could use it to hammer nails and dig trenches and it would still function.
After years of carrying Smith & Wesson I was assigned one of the 1st 6" Stainless GP100's out of the factory. I attended a Ruger Armorers class at a local PD with about a dozen other Police Firearms instructors. Total hands on learning how to tune and repair GP100's and Mini-30's. Watched several videos from several police agencies around the nation showing them abusing their sample of GP100's. 4 wheelers, cable and swamp in Florida, a concrete walkway, large Samoan and a flat handed slam to the concrete in San Diego and tossed out of a helicopter in the Mid West. Each and every time, (Gun loaded with blanks for safety) revolvers were retrieved and fired with no malfunctions. (Had to tape the grips back on after helo drop).
Needless to say, my Smith got replaced by a GP100 in my duty holster.
38 years with the GP100 and no glitches, lots of rounds down range and couldn't be happier. Just wish I had this revolver when I fired the PPC Courses.
My first S&W Model 28 came from a CHP officer in a trade. Discovered it had a sheared off rebound slide pin. 6 weeks at the S&W repair shop repaired no charge. However that damage would not have happened with the GP100.
Glad I read this. Great story.
I can only state that my 35 year old GP100 has endured with countless full house rounds through it and basic minimal care. That pretty much sums it up for me.
Same here, 29+ years, a couple of upgrades and no issues.
3 points of cylinder support with the GP100. And a solid frame with drop out assembly. Ruger is a tank.
It’s cast metal
@@DeedOfLiberty so are engine blocks for automobiles and trucks.
You know what else is investment casted?
Jet aircraft turbine blades.
@@DeedOfLibertyit was S&W that begged for SAAMI specs to lowered on 357 mag. Not Ruger.
@@dancruze They just be ignorant.
Very informative, and extremely well photographed/illustrated. I love my Smiths and I love my Rugers. We are fortunate to have two extremely well-made (in America) firearms to choose from. I still miss the K-frames (gave mine to younger daughter and her husband), because, unless you are shooting lots of magnum rounds in competition, the K-frames were a little more elegant and handy, but that’s just personal preference. Thank you for taking the time to produce this; it must have been very costly, time-wise, and I, for one, appreciate the time you took. Be safe, and happy shooting.
I had a newer model 19 that I ended up selling mainly to get another revolver I wanted more but the 19 also had some minor finish issues but that gun was a dream to shoot even with the dreaded lock
I own both, though my GP100 is a 44 Special. The difference is simple... The Ruger is a hunting and dragging behind the truck revolver. The S&W is a fighting and barbecue revolver. I love 'em both, but for different reasons! (There's a wife joke in there somewhere, but I'll leave well enough alone!)
I have a Ruger GP100 and S&W 686, both from the 1980’s. I remember folks saying the Ruger was stronger because the S&W isn’t solid (has the side plate). Others said the S&W had a better frame because it was forged, not cast like the Ruger. I do prefer the finish of the S&W, it’s like a fine Swiss watch. I have owned the Ruger since new, so it’s my favorite, more for sentimental reasons than anything else.
You missed the best part about the Ruger and that is how simply the cylinder and crane assembly comes out. A little more difficult to remove on the smith
REALLY??!! One screw. Open cylinder, remove! How did you try to take it out?!!
I think the Smith and Wesson comes apart way easier.
How about that Taurus convertible, or that Korth Mongoose with the spare cylinder....
It can be slid out the front once you remove the trigger assembly from the frame isn't it? Disassembly, cleaning and maintenance look far simpler with Ruger's design.
@@exothermal.sprocket or the Spohr. Yep, push button is easiest of all for cylinder removal. One is affordable for all, the other two are for much more well off clientele.
I have both in 6 inch barrels. They are high quality, shoot very accurately and are completely reliable. I love them both. But, If I were forced to keep only one, It would be the 686+. I like the trigger better and the general feel of the gun. Glad I have both!
I have one of each Timing on the 686+ has gotten a little short on a couple chambers over a fairly short period of time the gp100 is solid but it is a 6 shot which i would think is EZer to set up when built at the factory the smith has a better single action trigger but double action is a wash on my guns except that the reset on the smith is faster and more solid I do have to check side plate screws on the smith so that’s an advantage for the ruger but being able to remove the cylinder from the yolk easily for cleaning is big advantage for smith.
The finish on my old 6" GP100 is flawless and it is very accurate.
Nice thing about a Ruger You can get just about any style of grip you want and have no problem putting it on. Smith & Wesson you are limited by the frame. Rental places like them because they don't wear out.
Currently own a GP100. Smiths are nice but the quality control has slipped.
How do you know?
Thank you for the deep dive, it's always nice to revisit the basics! This was great entertainment!!!!
Glad you enjoyed it!
I have a 686(no dash) from the mid-80's, no lock and the hammer has a spur, no transfer bar. I think it's the finest revolver I've ever seen.
I picked up a GP100 in Germany in 1988 the best fitting for my hand I have ever had out of the box. It fill like it was custom made for my hand.
Thanks for the video. I had a Service issued stainless Ruger. By the time it had about 13,000 rounds, the threads of the barrel cracked. The barrel fell off at the range. Obviously, that could be fatal to the user in a fight. However, I have to say, I never heard of any other gun besides mine, that happened to. The Service replaced it with a smith, but for some reason, I prefered the Ruger trigger. I guess I liked the coil spring better than the leaf spring.
I have both in 2.5" models and I prefer the smith trigger. Both guns are fantastic and would be happy with either I'm just more accurate with the smith. Can't go wrong with either of them.
I have Ruger's, Colts and Smiths. Their all high quality pistols that should have no issue lasting a persons lifetime and beyond.
i've had zero issues with any of them after firing thousands of rd's through my guns.
My Colts have the highest level of fit and finish, next would be the PC smiths and Ruger last.
That said all shoot great looks aside and the Ruger's do seem overbuilt toughness wise.
My favorite Ruger is the GP100 3" Wiley Clap model . I carry it all the time hiking and camping.
I carry /EDC my Python 2.5" a-lot in Winter months. Its shoots like a laser and is crazy smooth double action.
Just picked up another nee model python 4.25" and a Smith PC 629 2.5" 44mag snub. The PC 629 with full 44 loads is a flame thrower I love it :)
The thing about owning one (or more) of each (late 80's) was that we were kids and everyone had custom gunsmithing done on their Smith. So i had my GP worked over. Has as many edges as a bar of soap, and just the eagle T.M. and serial number.
I wanted a 357 revolver, was considering the Smith and GP. Consensus was the Smith was nicer out of the box, GP was stronger, but crappier trigger. Bought the GP, did a trigger job (polishing up the teeny parts in the trigger group was fun), installed lighter trigger and hammer springs. Ended up super nice, the single action just a touch too light even though I didn't go with the lightest springs in the kit. I've had a lot of fun with it over the years, just had it out at the last range trip, still excellent.
If you want a real magnum that can actually Handle a Steady Diet of Magnum Ammunition, get the Ruger no question at all. They make "Ruger only" loads for a reason...
Yeah, but not for the reason you think.
Then what is the reason ?
Ruger only loads are for RedHawks & Blackhawks that have longer cylinders meaning the Ruger only loads are longer and won’t fit in other revolvers that have shorter or regular length cylinders.
S&W crippled 357 as their firearms couldn’t handle it. The SAAMI loads were reduced due to the small frame S&W not being able to handle full loads.
@@TheYankeeMarshalesplain it to me Lucy
Picked up a Ruger gp100 4” 357 from my local pawnshop for $500. Really nice gun!
one thing not mentioned was the ease of mounting an optic. The Smith & Wesson is just a matter of removing the rear sight and installing a base into the top strap and using the pre drilled and tapped holes. The GP 100 is a little more involved if you can evan find a mount.
Thank you. Your information is great!!!
Glad it was helpful!
I like the looks of the Ruger better although my 4 inch, six shot GP100 has adjustable rear sites that look more like those on your Smith. I also think the price difference sometimes gets a little bigger on the used market, at least based on my casual observations. Used Smiths seem to be priced closer to 'new' prices than used Rugers. I guess if you are a person who thinks of firearms partially as an investment or who likes to trade a lot that is an advantage for Smith & Wesson. If you are like me, however, and don't (can't afford to) buy several guns a year, really chew on the decision to buy another and, once you do, have no intentions of it ever going anywhere then how well it will hold its value if you sell/trade it doesn't matter.
It’s so funny he was talking smack about the GP100 previously. Yet it wasn’t the Rutgers that caused the SAAMI specs to be lowered for .357 Mag. That was S&W whining that their little pistols not being able to handle full 357 loads.
One of the deciding factors for me back in 1989 when I got my first GP-100 was the cylinder lock.
Being left handed I found it quicker than the S&W to open by using the big joint on my trigger finger to press the button.
That and the GP-100 is far more accurate with target loads than the S&W, Colt or the Dan Wesson.
I had the GP 100, carried it for years in a shoulder holster because I'm a smaller framed guy. Never felt under gunned
If your gun drops in the mud, cleaning the inside of the Ruger is a lot easier. Also I don't like the S&W gun lock.
I've always liked Ruger's but was never fond of the GP 100. I have a Security Six and I think it's a much nicer looking gun.
You are 100% right!
Thanks for another in depth side by side comparison and analysis!
And as you say this is 'Merica' so we can own and enjoy them including Colt.
Awesome! How about a look inside a Taurus, a Charter Arms & maybe even a Chiappa for laffs.
I've had a GP100 with a 6 inch barrel since the mid 1990's and the only change I had to to it was to put a Houge monopod grip on it because my hands could no longer handle the recoil of magnum rounds with grips is came with.
They are both quality revolver's, however the GP 100 seems to be tougher
2:50
although i am a ruger fan ... i agree with you 100% on the asinine writing on the barrel.
Back when I was a young man, that angled cut on the underlug of the Ruger GP100 saved my bacon in Smyrna, Ga. (🎶In the heeeat of the niight...😋)
...anyway, there I was, a newbie in the gun shop picking out my first handygun. Being a bit shallow, I liked the look of that lug, so I bought the Ruger.
🙄 What!? I could have owned a Smith! 😅
I do own a Smith now, but I still love that Ruger. 😋
how did the beveled lug save you? Less anal tearing then the S&W when inserted?
@@TheYankeeMarshal Nah, nothing like that. It saved me about $25 and I got a prettier gun. 😂
But I may be starting to know why Gary acted out so much. 😓
@@whelper4231 rugers are ugly as sin
These comparison videos have been very informative. I wish other guntubers would get back to quality information. Or you can just keep them coming!
The other channels are mostly about fear mongering and profiteering.
You had mentioned in a previous video how the Ruger's trigger was a little clunky compared to the S&W. Since I had a Ruger for years before my first S&W, I didn't understand it. But now it is very apparent what you meant. I've polished and changed the springs on my Ruger, so it is extremely smooth and actually lighter pull weight then my S&W. But there's no getting away from how nice the S&W feels. It's kind of like going from a manual steering to power steering in your car.
I have always liked Smith & Wesson. I have come to realize what I was liking was what they were supposed to be. I say that because I have had a lot of them and at least 80% of them had some kind of problem. Probably 25% of them have had major problems. I want so badly to have a nice S&W that is what it is supposed to be. I always thought Ruger was a lesser than compared to the Smith but not anymore Ruger is far superior to the S&W of today.
While modern S&W is more consistent, has parts designed on CAD and manufactured on CAM machines, can run much higher parts volumes and keep parts more consistent, I'm sure they QC check and track tolerances like any modern manufacturer, but they have suffered by cutting out skilled craftsman and staff that know what they are doing, to pay attention to fitting and function. Typical corporate crap in America. It's a mindset in that company that needs to change.
The older S&W revolvers feel, function and look better in most cases. That's not to say those older designs never had problems, of course they did. Yet the manner in which they were manufactured, they HAD to be handled and fitted and skilled craftsmen HAD to give them attention or they would have never worked. It was a time before computers.
The body of my GP100 under the ejector rod is perfectly smooth. But I also have a pin to pull out on my sights. Mine is about four years old.
What barrel length. I have not seen many 3" and 2.5" barrel guns without the tool marks. They don't seem common on the 4" and above.
@@TheYankeeMarshal 3" barrel. I could send a picture if you wish.
Jeez at 4:48 that fitting one the smith looks rough. Is that just dirt or grease in there or one of the worst filing jobs ive ever seen.
Have both models, plus more, I go with Ruger personally....like them both, just like Ruger more.
One thing for sure I have found that Ruger‘s customer service and turn around time is second to none. 2 to 3 weeks versus months with Taurus being the worse which is months and months and months!
My S&W 686 SSR Pro Series has the quick release front sight. I think it’s one of the few L frame guns with the feature.
I have had a 586 and a 100. they both shoot straight and work great. the 100 has spring kits for changing the hammer fall/release which i played with as well as reloading. Both revolvers were excellent to shoot. the 586 was lighter than the 100 as there story swaps between shooters was too much beef on the ruger and too light on the 586. I believe it will be personal comfort.
There's one thing that irritates me about Ruger. Especially on their Stainless guns, the sharp edges, especially on the hammers. they really need to do some more rounding of these areas.
If the edges bother you SO much....there are things called 'files' and 'stones' that easily remove them with just a few minutes of work. You're complaining about something that would add cost to an already costly device that the vast majority of people don't have a problem with. Round all the edges that offend you and the fact that they're stainless means there's no refinishing needed.
@@dancruze The Ruger hammer pivots on a through axle where the Smith pivots on a pin secured only on one side. Dropping a Smith on the hammer can and has snapped this hammer pin where it's unlikely to damage a Ruger and if it does...simple part replacement and it's back in action.
As mentioned in the video...the hammer play is designed to be there for production and debris tolerance reasons. Most trigger improvement kits include shims to tighten up the hammer but I've never felt it necessary to do so.
The video didn't mention how the triggers differ in pull with the Smith smooth all the way through to the break while the Ruger will stack right before release. I prefer the Ruger as the tip if my trigger finger touches the back of the guard right before the break and I can reliably advance the cylinder during recoil and the trigger effort helps bring it back down to the target. Staging the trigger is a different technique that works well on Ruger but not so well on Smith's. It's great to have both as options!
Little kitten with a big revolver, I like that message.😁
am I wrong or does the S&W have adjustable rear sights while the Ruger doesn't?
That particular model of Ruger is drift adjustable for windage. Most gp100s use a traditional fully adjustable rear sight.
I dont know about the gp100 but i got the ruger sp101 and its a awesome carry pistol its only 5 rounds but all it takes is one
I’m very surprised he didn’t mention one of the biggest differences: the Ruger is a cast frame and the Smith (like Colt) is a forged frame. Forging is superior and that’s why Ruger has to make the frame larger to achieve the same strength. Both still great guns but casting is a shortcut and higher quality parts are forged just like crankshafts, pistons, etc in high performance motors.
Great video! Thanks for sharing
I want the 686+ 2.5" for my next carry.
The only revolver I liked better than the GP100 I bought in 1994 is the GP100 Match Champion I bought in 2016.
GP100 fits average to smaller grip & finger reach....Rugers don't come broken from the factory
Hey Yankee, while you’re doing these comparisons, why don’t you throw the Henry Big Boy revolver into the mix. I know it’s not as mainstream as the others, but size wise it’s pretty comparable.
I saw that video, very good to ❤ i like the Colt , but for the money S&W is still a good deal.
Good video. I’d like to see a comparison like this between the 686 and the closest competitor from Taurus, like an M66 or similar.
I have a GP100 from the late 80's and it seems the finish and machining are much better.
If Ruger could get the manufacturing of their revolvers turned up a bit so we could actually find some of their cooler models on the shelves, they would wipe the floor with S&W. I feel like S&W understands their buyers more. They have way more snubbies and 3 in 7 shot revolvers than ruger. They have lightweight camp guns, and a much greater variety. If Ruger would just be a little more innovative in their revolver market and turn up their manufacturing, I wouldn't even consider S&W.
As for my budget and intended use of a revolver, Taurus 627 for me 😂
They both could use some attention from a competent gunsmith who can true things up, polish stuff, put a file to the mechanism, shims, ream the forcing cone, reduce spring pressures a bit, and install better sights.
If I was going to the trouble, I'd probably do a Ruger.
The best one is the one each person prefers.
I always liked that style cylinder release on the S&W. What is that rear sight you put on the S&W & where did you get it ?
So out of the three (S&W 686plus, Ruger GP100, or Colt) which do you prefer ? Just asking, I already made my decision. I have my awesome 686 plus in 4 inch. Can you answer my question ?
I want a Wiley Clapp GP100 but I don’t know when Ruger will make any more.
HATE Ruger hand guns but really like their Rifle's. Carry a SW 686 every day.
Me too
Had both...sold the Smith and kept the Ruger. I didn't really need both, as they were pretty much the same. Ruger is built better, stronger, and looks nicer I think.
Damn! Now I have to get a Python, 686 and the Ruger! 😍
Thanks for a great review, S&W 686 and Ruger GP100 are both high quality revolvers, but S&W 686 has a better single action trigger than Ruger GP100 and Colt Python.
Great videos on colt and ruger vs 686. Can you explain the trigger stop screw?
Biggest difference for me - Ruger is more reliable, and build for smaller hands like mine, so is easier to hold and shoot double-action.
I bought the Ruger, pretty well when it was first on sale 25+ years ago.
My GP100 has a sprung latch to change the foresight... takes no effort or tapping.
In any case, how often do you change foresight?
What are the grips you have on the Ruger sir?
Ruger
Nice review.
I mostly grew up on Smith and Wesson, but have liked the Ruger GPs on every occasion I shot one. (Never realized anyone had a thing against the Smith slide release, though, kinda just normal. Your release lever thing looks interesting but like it might get in the way of a switch-hitter like me. (Cause I will thumb back the hammer if I have the fraction of a second to do so. Possibly if Ruger's just nicer for single action like you said that's wy I had positive experiences, if not exhaustive comparisons. )
Gp100 all day long. Smith has made shit quality revolvers since the 90s.
So many problems have come thru my shop, even after being sent for warranty work that I won't take a new smith for free.
If you want to get a laugh at an ICORE match say "performance center" out loud
Dammit, every time I watch one of these videos I want to go buy another gun, and I can't afford another fucking gun!
Sell a couple lower priority pieces, then buy one.
Where did you get those nice grips for the gp 100?
Been waiting my whole life for this video
Where did you get the grips for your GP100?
I have no experience with the standard Ruger GP 100. However,I have had a lot of experience worth the Ruger GP 100 .357 magnum Match Champion. It was built like a damned tank,and almost as heavy as one. It was also the most accurate handgun I ever had. An absolutely superb firearm.
Hey Yankee, this video was actually recommended to me!
I’m not choosing because I don’t have to. I am keeping and enjoying all my examples of both. I really couldn’t care less about one opinion over another. They are mine and that is what really matters, not trite observations and unfounded perceptions.
Did you use multiple 686’s in your videos? There are shots with a hammer nose roll pin early on that disappears later.
I'm surprised @TheYankeeMarshal wasn't all over the newly released M&P Metal in the foty. S&W is SAVING THE FOTIES! Which they should, seeing that the chambering is named after them, and it is a good duty and self-defense round.
“Read instruction Manual” is worse than “Grip Zone”
It’s hidden away on the SP-101
At last Ruger started putting that crap on the underside of the barrels on the Redhawks and Blackhawks.
@@exothermal.sprocketyeah my SP101 has it under the barrel.
@@tk423b Would be nice if these corporations would stop paying homage to bureaucratic regulations. Ultimately it comes down to perceived value. What does a customer perceive as valuable on a revolver vs. not? I guarantee S&W has lost a ton of sales on their products due to the "Hillary Hole" and probably Ruger has lost customers (would be hard to quantify exactly how much) due to the stamped warnings and instructions all over their products. It can reach a place where customers are going to go somewhere else for something they perceive as better value.
I have had both. I like both. But, the Ruger is better, not as good looking though .
The smith double action trigger can be tuned more easily than the ruger to me there not even close 😊
Ruger for me
I do love my Super Red Hawk
Very good info, thanks
Jennings Machine & Tool sells a plug for the hole in the Smith and Wesson frame if you remove the lock.
I like the Ruger cylinder release a bit more because I automatically push with my fingers as I hit the latch with my thumb & the cylinder comes out a little smoother for me. My first pistol was a S&W 686 6". I regret selling it a few years later but apparently not enough to replace it after 30 years without it.
So does Original Precision. He makes the plugs in titanium, SS, Black steel. Worked great on my 329PD.
I don’t like safety on a revolver. It’s too extra. I have shot both and the smith has a much smoother double action trigger.
Super job!
I prefer the overall design on the smith and Wesson. Their fit and finish is also overall better. Their QC over the years has fallen though. Ruger is really looking pretty good….I’m still a S&W loyalist but the company needs to take better care of their long lasting product….especially with the rising prices.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and it is obvious you like the Ruger better. Personally I prefer the S&W, but I'm coming at it from a different point of view. I've been carrying the same S&W 686 with a 6" barrel since they first came out in the late 1970's. I have put thousands of full house .357 rounds through it without any issues. I started carrying the 686 when I was a deputy with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department. We were allowed to carry S&W, Colt, or Ruger revolvers. Every one of the Department armorers advised against the Colt revolvers, as it took a tad longer to do a combat reload due to the cylinder lock having to be pulled to the rear which took longer. They also strongly advised against the Ruger's (even though they were authorized), due to their exceedingly long lock time, which in a gunfight can be the difference between living or dying. A nice feature with the S&W revolvers (all of them) is that you can jerk the trigger back to the breaking point (or roll over point) without discharging the weapon and you can hold it there for however long is needed. That won't work with a Ruger. With the S&W's, you are able to do this regardless of hand? finger size. Since law enforcement used double-action shooting except in very few circumstances, with the S&W, you could draw, come up to a firing position, pull the trigger back to just before the breaking point, hold it for as long as needed, but be able to get a quick shot off if needed, or release the trigger if that was needed. Just my opinion.
I prefer the Smith.
Never had a S&W that didn't need work. Never had a Colt or Ruger that needed work.😮
So you like bad triggers?