Recent 686 vs GP100

[Beentown71]

Need some advice. I know this is probably an overdone topic for those that frequent the forum daily. My Googlefu didn't turn up much recent.

Just asking for recent experience of each especially those with hands on of both.

Mostly a plinker. I reload. Might take a deer or two with it (perfect, close shot opportunities only). Going to be a 6" or 7" version. So far I have liked the "Talo" special editions of both.

I was able to compare a current GP100 vs a current 629 and was completely suprised how much better the DA pull of the GP100 had. One off or is the what I should expect?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Model12Win]

Go to a gun show and handle both. Pull the triggers on them, then, pick one.

That is the only way. Very comparable and very excellent revolvers. I prefer the GPs for a new gun, I will not buy a Smith & Wesson revolver with an internal lock.

 

[Beentown71]

Go to a gun show and handle both. Pull the triggers on them, then, pick one.

That is the only way. Very comparable and very excellent revolvers. I prefer the GPs for a new gun, I will not buy a Smith & Wesson revolver with an internal lock.

Yeah, I tried to compare both today but the only Smith available was the 629. Which the Ruger trigger was better, to me.

The only thing holding me back from buying the Ruger for sure is that it is not DT'ED from the factory. I would like to mount an optic occasionally.

 

[rob-c]

Weigand makes a mount that attaches by the front and rear sight mounts on the gp-100. I installed one on my wife's and she has well over a couple hundred full tilt rounds down the tube with zero problems.

 

[Beentown71]

Weigand makes a mount that attaches by the front and rear sight mounts on the gp-100. I installed one on my wife's and she has well over a couple hundred full tilt rounds down the tube with zero problems.

Thanks for the data!

 

[DaleA]

Hey beentown71 there was this thread fairly recently about the GP100 verses the 686 which might be helpful.

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=581268

One of the difficulties is the different flavors of the two guns. You mentioned TALO. There's also the S&W Performance Center versions and Ruger has the GP100 Match Champion version.

FWIW if you ever want to disassemble the gun I've heard the Ruger is easier than the Smith.

Good luck.

 

[Beentown71]

Hey beentown71 there was this thread fairly recently about the GP100 verses the 686 which might be helpful.

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=581268

One of the difficulties is the different flavors of the two guns. You mentioned TALO. There's also the S&W Performance Center versions and Ruger has the GP100 Match Champion version.

FWIW if you ever want to disassemble the gun I've heard the Ruger is easier than the Smith.

Good luck.

Thanks for the reference. My Googlefu (limited to phone use today) wasn't very good apparently.

Same thing I expected except the current model GP100'S seem to have improved triggers.

 

[James K]

For the most common revolver "disassembly" (removal of the crane and cylinder), the S&W is easier and faster (one screw). Further disassembly is about the same. FWIW, I consider S&W's to be smoother and more consistent, but would have no qualms about carrying a Ruger should I wish to do so.

The mythical super strength of Rugers is just that, mythical. If you really want to blow up guns, any make will do. (IIRC, Ruger and S&W buy their cylinder steel from the same supplier.)

Jim

 

[UncleEd]

One interesting thing about Ruger is that it expects some owners will want to change springs, "go inside" as it were and the Ruger home site provides a video for doing so.

The GP is extremely rugged and for me, who has owned by 686 and the GP100, I'd go for the Ruger. Not quite as refined as the Smith (a few sharper edges) but it's a winner and cheaper as well.

The Match Champion has been mentioned and it does have its edges and other parts smoothed off for more refinement; it's designed to compete
as a stock service revolver, of which Smith has one named the SSR for stock service revolver.

One real or perceived advantage with the new Smiths is that most come as 7-shooters, not 6. The Smith SSR is, however, a 6-shooter (as Sam Colt and the Good Lord intended).

Attention James K: That little screw to remove the Smith cylinder, is that the same little screw that loosens and lets the cylinder fall out of the gun at the silliest times? Just kidding.......I think.

 

[DaleA]

Disassembly---Ruger verses S&W

James K---you could be correct. I just have memories of my Uncle telling me what would happen to me if I ever removed the side plate of one his S&W revolvers. When I got one of my own he told me I had a choice, shoot it or look at all the little pieces of gun on the work bench if I ever took it apart.

I suspect I've been traumatized.

Anyway I guess you could judge for yourself from these videos.

S&W 686
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6B5Ydl4hF6U
Ruger GP100
http://ruger.com/products/gp100MatchChampion/models.html

 

[rob-c]

they may buy the steel from the same company but ruger leaves more of it on their cylinders, not saying rugers cant be blown up but I bet it takes more than it would for a smith..

 

[Buckeye!]

Both are great revolvers , you cant make a wrong choice ....

I picked the GP100. ... And it has a great trigger...

 

[75218ron]

My GP100 has a great trigger....and Rugers don't have that side plate.

 

[Kreyzhorse]

Go to a gun show and handle both. Pull the triggers on them, then, pick one.

That is the only way. Very comparable and very excellent revolvers. I prefer the GPs for a new gun, I will not buy a Smith & Wesson revolver with an internal lock

+1 Both are excellent guns. I prefer the Smith but it's really just a matter of personal preference.

 

[BlackLabsMatter]

In response to the strength differences mentioned above:
The chambers are equal in strength. Push past SAAMI and you're eventually gonna get burned with either.

The action and frame are significantly more durable with Rugers. It's durability, not strength where Rugers have the advantage.

I've owned my share of Smiths. I've worn out Smiths with fewer rounds than my Rugers had. I never had a Ruger stretch a frame, go out of time, drop a cylinder, or shear a firing pin. 3 out of 4 of my Smiths failed me in some way. The only one that didn't was a M&P(the REAL one, not that Glock) but it had a horrible trigger.

Most revolver buyers are not real revolver shooters, they're just range toys or J frames to them. They won't have the round volume for it to be an issue.

 

[Radny97]

Do you have a source for the assertion that Ruger and smith buy their steel for their cylinders from the same supplier? I personally have found that the cylinders from the two seem to have a definite difference in the level of hardness. For example I have a 627 PC and a GP 100 match champion. I dry fire both of them a lot. I have found that the cylinder on the 627 PC has started to have some peening where the cylinder stop hits the cylinder notches. Probably more dry firing in the match champion and no such peening. Which leads me to believe that the two cylinders have different levels of hardness and are not the same steel.