S&W 686 vs Ruger GP100

[Dangerwing]

Im looking to buy a medium frame revolver. It would be used for home defense and range shooting. Probably not much CCW since I have some other better options already. I've narrowed it down to the S&W 686 or a Ruger GP100 - both with 4 inch barrels. The S&W is about $200 more. I rented one of each and I really couldn't tell the difference at the range. Reading through threads, S&W seems to be the king, but my question is WHY? Why should I spend the extra $200 for an S&W when, as far as I can tell, the GP100 is equal in almost all categories?

 

[Kreyzhorse]

Both of them are great guns. I own a 686 and my buddy owns a Ruger GP and if I were to replace my 686, I'd replace it with a Ruger GP. Overall, I think the trigger on my 686 is slightly better than the Ruger, but not $200 better.

Either way, you can't go wrong with the 686 or the GP. It really just comes down to which one do you like better and which one fits you better?

 

[Jay1958]

Best prices I am seeing for a NIB stainless 4-inch GP100 are in the $460 range. For a NIB stainless 686 4-inch, around $575... so even though I own four Ruger revolvers and no S&W, the price difference seems much less than $200... closer to $115.

 

[Brian48]

When I bought my 686, it was a toss up between this and the GP100. The price difference was very minor between the two. I heard the GP100 was more durable and definitely had the better grips, but the trigger on the 686 was noticably smoother. Not be a huge margin, but noticable nevertheless. Eventually gone with the 686 because I figured I could always change the grips and L-frame was "tough enough" for my needs. Also, I had good experiences with a blue Model 19 a couple of years back. I don't think I could have gone wrong with either gun.

 

[Dangerwing]

the price difference seems much less than $200... closer to $115.

Smith and Wesson's website sets the MSRP of a 686 at $853. Ruger's website sets the MSRP of a GP100 at $660.

$853-$660=$193

Thats $193 that I don't have to pay tax on. SD State sales tax is 6%

$193x.06=$11.58

Lower price + less tax = total savings

$193 + $11.58 = 204.58

Estimated total savings based on MSRP = 204.58

 

[Gun 4 Fun]

Ownership of a gun is partly pride, and the reason I like S&W's. They are much nicer looking to me, than a Ruger, they do have nicer triggers out of the box, and usually have a higher resale value. The L-frames are as strong a gun as you'll ever need in .357. I also own Ruger's, it's not like I don't like them, it's just that Smith's are a nicer gun in my view.
Ruger's are rather homely in their lines compared to a Smith, but hey variety is the spice of life, so get what YOU like. After all, your the one paying.

 

[Gun 4 Fun]

The prices you just posted are MSR. In the real world you won't find that big a difference if you look around at all. If you buy a nice used gun the difference is even closer usually.

 

[carguychris]

Smith and Wesson's website sets the MSRP of a 686 at $853. Ruger's website sets the MSRP of a GP100 at $660.

$853-$660=$193

S&Ws are usually discounted more than Rugers. The real-world price difference is usually more like $100-$150.

 

[WVfishguy]

I don't know if this is luck of the draw or what - but I recently purchased a GP-100 (for my wife ) and its trigger is as smooth as my her 20-year-old S&W Model 10.

Plus, the Ruger is stainless. IME, stainless always has greater drag than blued steel. And, I have not yet cleaned nor lubed the Ruger.

In addition, the way the Ruger's trigger stacks makes it easy to shoot bulls eye during double action.

I've had several S&W revolvers, and I've had several Rugers (and a Dan Wesson 357.) But this new Ruger seems to be the best handling revolver yet.

HOWEVER - I have yet to shoot the Ruger (flame away!)

I'm going to shoot the GP-100 soon. If I think the Ruger stinks, I will post it here.

I've also noticed S&W 686s sell USED for $150-200 more than NEW Ruger SP-100. No thank you!

 

[Smaug]

The S&W has a better trigger. Vastly so in DA, slightly so in SA.

But the Rugers have stronger actions and cylinders.

Heavy loads --> Ruger
SA target & hunting --> Ruger

DA shooting --> S&W

The Ruger trigger can be improved, by in my experience, it will never feel like a S&W.

Some folks will tell you that a 686 will shoot heavy loads as well as a GP-100.

Based on my experience with a S&W 29 vs. a Ruger Redhawk, I don't buy it. The screws were always backing out on the S&W when I shot magnums, and the Ruger handles recoil better; doesn't seem to kick as hard.

 

[Doc TH]

686 vs GP 100

In my experience the S&W 686 has a superb trigger for a production gun. Also is very accurate. The GP 100s I have shot are not as smooth, so I don't shoot them quite so well. Either would be a good choice. Try rentals at a range and see what you like best.

 

[Gun 4 Fun]

Hello smaug the Redhawk is ALOT stouter gun than the 29/629, but in the gp100/586/686, their pretty darn close strength wise.

 

[100W_Warlock]

We need to tag this and stick it in the FAQ

In answer to the original question, both have their pro's and con's.

GP100
+ interchangeable front sights
+ VERY well built frame ready for HOT 357 loads
+ no silly key safety
- most GP100s require a bit of work to get them "smooth as silk"
- not as "easy" to take down as a S&W
- selection of aftermarket grips is quite pathetic compared to S&W

S&W 686
+ Good trigger out of the box. Easily improved with little effort.
+ Excellent selection of aftermarket grips
+ Springs are easy to tune for best performance
- Expensive, but, tends to hold resale value
- Only available in stainless
- Sights are a gunsmith only swap out

Both guns use the same exact speed loaders and can be machined for moon clips if you so desire.

Neither wheel gun is shy about shooting powerful loads, but, the GP100 has proven to be more reliable, in spite of the fact that its not a forged frame.

Me? I prefer the buttler creek grips on my GP100 along with Millett sights. I put in Wolff springs and gave all the internal parts a solid clean up and honing. Afterwards, it shoots every bit as smooth and accurate as my old 586. (which has since been passed onto another shooter new to the 357mag cartridge)

 

[laytonj1]

Some folks will tell you that a 686 will shoot heavy loads as well as a GP-100.

Based on my experience with a S&W 29 vs. a Ruger Redhawk, I don't buy it. The screws were always backing out on the S&W when I shot magnums, and the Ruger handles recoil better; doesn't seem to kick as hard.

To set a few things straight, the 686 was designed from the start for full house 357's. The Redhawk was also designed from the start for 44 mags. The 29 was originally designed for 44 specials and has underdone many updates.
A SRH in 454 will not hold up as well as a Freedom Arms in 454 for the same reasons.
For loose screws... try locktite.
That said, if you need to continually run full house or higher loads then buy a larger caliber.
To the original poster, either the GP100 or 686 will give you years of great service. Go to a gun shop and handle both and see which one you like best.

Jim

 

[Sgt.Fathead]

Here we are again with that old Coke vs. Pepsi, Ford vs. Chevy, S&W vs. Ruger comparison! I had lots of Smith revolvers back a few years ago and once I found Rugers, through a 4" stainless GP100 actually, I sold ALL my S&Ws save one (which was a gift for my wife) and now own all Rugers, both SA and DA.

Rugers are a little ugly but fellas, it's a gun. I actually want ugly in my firearms. Also, they are damn near indestructible, break in very nicely and shoot accurately and smoothly all day long. Plus, the money saved on them goes to ammo and accessories.

 

[BusGunner007]

This gun's ugly...

Ruger GKGP-161:

Ruger SuperRedhawk .44:

The GP-100 & SuperRedhawk share the same grip.

There will be two J-Frame S&W's in the mix soon, but Ruger rules the safe.

 

[HD2006]

S+W 686

S+W has rebate right now until Dec. 31st on Pistols and revolvers. I plan on getting a 686 sometime soon. Saw and held one with a 4" barrel. I can get it for around $600 with the $50 rebate coupon.

 

[WESHOOT2]

both are fine

I chose to buy two GP100s because, unlike as suggested earlier, I find their DA 'trigger' vastly superior for me.

I also recognize certain differences, like ease of disassembly of the Ruger, and solid frame, and easily replaced front sights, and parts listed at Brownells.com, and other factors.

But the S&W is also a fine choice.
It simply comes down to which the actual buyer prefers.

I don't care about appearance, as it has no affect on performance.

 

[Webleymkv]

Because of it's design, the S&W is more expensive to manufacture hence the higer price tag. As has been noted earlier, most people find the Smith to have a better trigger out of the box, but this is subjective. The biggest difference to me is that the two revolvers feel different in the hand. The Ruger seems to sit lower in the hand than the S&W does. I personally prefer S&W because that's what I started with and am therefore the most familiar and comfortable with but it's really just a matter of personal preference.

 

[Tuzo]

I own and shoot one each 686 6" and 4" and GP100 6". The two Smiths needed slight polishing of the trigger mechanisms and are very smooth. The Ruger required a bit more work: small burr removal and polishing of the trigger mechanism and a spring kit. Now there is no noticeable difference in the trigger actions of either of the three revolvers. The two 6-inchers are great accurate shooters and the 4-incher has a fine balance and feel.

Both S&W and Ruger offer fine rugged revolvers with a bit of an edge going to Ruger's warranty work. My old Security-Six developed a cylinder problem that was repaired by Ruger at no cost to me. Ultimately your choice will depend on how comfortable and balanced the revolvers feel in your hand.