New GP100 vs new 686

[Jared]

Okay, this is not a S&W lock thread. It's not.

Last time I was revo shopping, I coonfingered a 686 and a GP100, both brand new. I came away very impressed with the Ruger, especially compared to my memory of the rather gritty action and trigger feel I remembered from years ago. The Smith 686's though (I handled 3) something in the way they felt when dry fired, they didn't seem as solid and crisp as the older examples I've handled.

I've always been a Smith guy. I'm kind of in the market for a 4" example of one of these two. I'm really leaning hard toward the Ruger right now.

Has anybody else handled any of the newer S&W's and came away thinking the actions weren't what they used to be?

[revchuck]

I've got about a dozen S&W revolvers in K, L and N frame sizes, including two newer ones, a M21-4 and a M22-4. They do feel different, but I don't think the newer ones are bad, just different. I had the factory do action jobs on a M10-8, a M681-2 and the M22-4, and the newer one feels as good as the older ones, even though the trigger's a bit heavier due to its being a .45 ACP. I've heard the current GP100s are pretty sweet, so I wouldn't necessarily avoid them.

[Wheeler]

I thought I had come up with a winner of an idea regarding Ruger revolvers. Beef up and place the same trigger group of the LCR in the GP series and you'd have one heck of a DA setup. I even got in touch with Grant Cunningham who is, to my knowledge one of the best known revolver instructors who is a proponent of the Ruger revolvers.
Much to my chagrin Grant informed me that the newer GP revolvers did indeed have a similar system, actually more along the lines of the Speed Six trigger group.

I said all that to say the new Rugers impress me much more than the new S&W's, this is coming from a diehard S&W resolver shooter.

[Hizzie]

I was always a die hard Smith guy. Picked up a Ruger GP100 Wiley Clapp II and was really impressed. Impressed enough I bought a second and have my 681PC up for sale. Take a good look at the Match Champion. The new Smiths just don't impress me.

[RevolverRob]

Almost dollar for dollar, I feel the GP100 is a better bargain and better gun than current production 686s. The triggers are a bit heavy, but smooth and the returns on Rugers are better than Smiths (more positive and smoother). The current production Smiths do not feel like old K-Frames or N-Frames. Not as evenly weighted through the stroke and the returns are gritty. If I wanted to buy a new 4" in .357, I'd look really hard at the GP100 Match Champion.

-Rob

[WDW]

Man, if you look around you can find a nice vintage 19,13, 686 or similar smith .357 for around $400. I just bought a mint, near unfired 19-5 for around that. I've just been burned by Ruger revolvers too many times. For me, it's Smith or nothing.

[Jared]

Man, if you look around you can find a nice vintage 19,13, 686 or similar smith .357 for around $400. I just bought a mint, near unfired 19-5 for around that. I've just been burned by Ruger revolvers too many times. For me, it's Smith or nothing.

Not at any of my local shops you can't. Any no-lock Smith commands a premium around here. A mint, near unfired 19-5 at either of the shops I do business with would probably cost 150 bucks more than what you paid. These are the same two shops where a 92FS or a Glock or the like can be brought home a quite reasonable prices, so I'm left to believe that the supply/demand thing with them old S&W's is leaning toward the demand side around here.

[revchuck]

<Glances at his safe with ~12 pre-lock S&Ws, smiles>

I haven't kept up with the current (last ten years or so) production S&Ws, and it sounds like going with a GP100 might be the better idea.

[Dagga Boy]

Man, if you look around you can find a nice vintage 19,13, 686 or similar smith .357 for around $400. I just bought a mint, near unfired 19-5 for around that. I've just been burned by Ruger revolvers too many times. For me, it's Smith or nothing.

I am really curious about "burned by Ruger revolvers too many times". Could you elaborate. One thing I have found with a VERY long history with Rugers in a wide variety of applications is that their revolvers work and work well. While their trigger actions have usually not been as good as the Smith's, their reliability has been without issue, and the Ruger factory has always been good about fixing things that are broken (unless modified outside of the factory).

I like both for different reasons, but when it comes to digesting heavy modern ammunition, and reliability under adverse conditions, the Rugers have always gotten the nod. For pure aesthetics, trigger feel, and some neat variants, then its the Smith's.

[JAD]

Aimsurplus just got a load of 10s and 13s in. I have too many other things going on, or I would also be looking at these.

[breakingtime91]

JAD I can't find them on their website.

[jetfire]

I like Ruger wheelguns quite a bit. I also like S&W wheelguns. The biggest difference between a Smith and a Ruger is the potential for a great trigger. Because the Ruger uses a coil mainspring there is only so much you can do to improve the trigger pull beyond cleaning up the internals and changing springs. That being said, I have some Rugers with GREAT triggers now.

The Smiths you can get a better trigger on, because the mainspring allows for nearly infinite tuning to get precisely the pull weight you want. Basically, if you put a 200 dollar action job in either the Ruger or the Smith (by a good gunsmith) the end result in the Smith will almost always be better. I just got a pair of Smiths in, and they're both headed to Apex shortly.

[Dagga Boy]

I like Ruger wheelguns quite a bit. I also like S&W wheelguns. The biggest difference between a Smith and a Ruger is the potential for a great trigger. Because the Ruger uses a coil mainspring there is only so much you can do to improve the trigger pull beyond cleaning up the internals and changing springs. That being said, I have some Rugers with GREAT triggers now.

The Smiths you can get a better trigger on, because the mainspring allows for nearly infinite tuning to get precisely the pull weight you want. Basically, if you put a 200 dollar action job in either the Ruger or the Smith (by a good gunsmith) the end result in the Smith will almost always be better. I just got a pair of Smiths in, and they're both headed to Apex shortly.


Boy this sounds like a familiar conversation.....;).

I would wholly agree with all of the above. I was shooting a full house open/unlimited type Ruger GP 100 based gun back in the very early 90's and I was very alone in that aspect. I would love to get that one back as it had a great action. Not as good as the Smith's, but it was very reliable even though it was light. I think you can get them close at the service level, but when it comes to a competition grade trigger, the Ruger will be more reliable light, while the Smith will have a better feel.

[Robinson]

I recently bought two 4" 586 Classics. These are blued 6-shooters with square butt frame. They shipped with very nice wood stocks, which I am replacing with Ahrends tactical stocks.

These guns were assembled by the Performance Center and the triggers are very smooth -- no grittiness and a nice reset. They are just a bit heavier than I like, but this will soon be remedied. These new guns are such nice shooters I feel they will pull me away from my K Frames as carry guns -- I already have a good holster on order. I had almost forgotten how nice the L Frames are for pure shooting, and they are not difficult to carry with a good holster/belt.

[RevolverRob]

I too would like to hear more about "burned by Ruger revolvers". I've never met anyone who had major issues with them.

The Model 13s AIM got in stock can be found here: http://www.aimsurplus.com/product.aspx?item=F1SW13&utm_source=AIM+Surplus+Main+List&utm_campaign=34f5ed2e0a-05022014&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6870497a6a-34f5ed2e0a-18899433

They got sent out in their email flyer yesterday. A stack of M13s, M65s, M10s, and M64s. Per AIM, they are European police surplus guns. If I had not just bought something else I would buy an M13 for myself. Not bad on the prices, but from personal experience K-Frames will not hold up to Magnum loads like a GP100 will. I'd also want to hand inspect any magnum K-Frame before buying. Even though I'm willing to bet these were not fired a ton, I still want to check them out. Even a moderate diet of fast burning magnums will erode a K-Frame forcing cone fairly quickly.

-Rob

[Wheeler]

I too would like to hear more about "burned by Ruger revolvers". I've never met anyone who had major issues with them.

The Model 13s AIM got in stock can be found here: http://www.aimsurplus.com/product.aspx?item=F1SW13&utm_source=AIM+Surplus+Main+List&utm_campaign=34f5ed2e0a-05022014&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6870497a6a-34f5ed2e0a-18899433

-Rob


.....aaaannnndd they are gone...

[SGT_Calle]

II just got a pair of Smiths in, and they're both headed to Apex shortly.

If one is a 929 I may literally turn fifteen shades of green with envy.

[Squall]

.....aaaannnndd they are gone...

Yeah, that was a bit of a let down.

[JAD]

Yeah, that was a bit of a let down.

It is a good (or bad) email list to get on.

[jetfire]

If one is a 929 I may literally turn fifteen shades of green with envy.

One is a 929 and the other is a 986. 929 shoots 1 inch groups.

[Rich]

I like the GP100 3inch with the old school grip over the 686 snub nose for AIWB carry
Both are tack drivers.

I like the looks of the 686 better, and think the 688 has more class.

Its just that I was a tad faster with the GP100. (6rds inside the 10ring as fast as I can yank the trigger)

If I couldn't get a GP100 3inch my next pick would be a 686 3inch maybe even a 7 shooter. Again using only 38spl / +P.

[Rich]

I am really curious about "burned by Ruger revolvers too many times". Could you elaborate. One thing I have found with a VERY long history with Rugers in a wide variety of applications is that their revolvers work and work well. While their trigger actions have usually not been as good as the Smith's, their reliability has been without issue, and the Ruger factory has always been good about fixing things that are broken (unless modified outside of the factory).

I like both for different reasons, but when it comes to digesting heavy modern ammunition, and reliability under adverse conditions, the Rugers have always gotten the nod. For pure aesthetics, trigger feel, and some neat variants, then its the Smith's.


I agree !

[Willard]

Man, if you look around you can find a nice vintage 19,13, 686 or similar smith .357 for around $400. I just bought a mint, near unfired 19-5 for around that. I've just been burned by Ruger revolvers too many times. For me, it's Smith or nothing.

Long time lurker, first time poster. Burned by Ruger I had to comment on. I've posted this on M4carbine.net, Rugerforum.net, and I believe elsewhere...Let me share a recent experience with Ruger Customer Service. We hear a lot about the bad, but not so often about the good. I recently returned a Ruger Security Six to the factory for repair. The front latch was not positively latching in the hole in the end of the ejector rod. It would slip out when you applied side to side motion, indicating a problem. Lightly used and near new looking revolver.

First, since this particular revolver had been out of production since the 80's, I'm surprised when they assign me an RMA and tell me to send it in. I expected them to tell me to pound sand and they were out of parts.

I like the revolver, so I don't mind sending it on my dime if there is a hope of repair. Of note, the customer service agent did not ask if I was the original owner, round count, or anything beyond information needed to determine the problem and where to return the gun. As far as I can tell, Ruger does not have a stated warranty.

Approximately one week later, I'm notified the factory cannot repair the revolver. They don't explain why, but do offer a new double action revolver of my choosing at NO cost to me. In the end, they ship a Match Champion. In theory, I guess I could have selected a more expensive Ruger .44 mag. I wouldn't have, but the offer seemed to be there. No muss, no fuss. Just where do we ship it since it will have to go to an FFL as it is a new serial number.

This kind of customer service vastly exceeded my expectations and previous service with a variety of manufacturers. I will buy Rugers again and let others know about my experience. I contacted their CEO on the website (obviously never heard back), but wanted to let him know his CS folks were making smart choices because word gets around. Honestly, I suspect actions like this are worth more than the company invests because it is REAL advertising that costs them nothing beyond the cost of the repair/replacement (in my case) and probably gets better results per dollar than paying an advertising company. I don't know. Anyway, wanted to share this information here based on the "burnt by Ruger" post. YMMV.

[WDW]

I have owned exactly 2 Ruger revolvers. The first was a 4" GP100 that wouldn't go more than a few reloads without jamming up. The only solution was to open the cylinder and clean under the ejector star. Literally after about 30 rounds, the cylinder would start dragging and the gun would literally lock up. The thing just felt out of spec. I tried various factory loads and the gun was always properly lubed and cleaned, but not over lubed. The cylinder release was also extremely floppy and would depress with minimal pressure. The second was an sp101 in .357 that had timing issues. Im sure there are plenty of Ruger Revo's that work. My two failed to meet my expectations. I've never had a bad Smith, therefore, I only buy/use S&W revolvers. I prefer the older pre lock guns, but I wouldn't hesitate to pick up a new one.

[Jared]

I have owned exactly 2 Ruger revolvers. The first was a 4" GP100 that wouldn't go more than a few reloads without jamming up. The only solution was to open the cylinder and clean under the ejector star. Literally after about 30 rounds, the cylinder would start dragging and the gun would literally lock up. The thing just felt out of spec. I tried various factory loads and the gun was always properly lubed and cleaned, but not over lubed. The cylinder release was also extremely floppy and would depress with minimal pressure. The second was an sp101 in .357 that had timing issues. Im sure there are plenty of Ruger Revo's that work. My two failed to meet my expectations. I've never had a bad Smith, therefore, I only buy/use S&W revolvers. I prefer the older pre lock guns, but I wouldn't hesitate to pick up a new one.


My first Smith was a Highway Patrolman that spit lead something awful. I also had one Smith that wouldn't go 3 full cylinders without having to clean under the extractor star. I still look at Smith's when I revo shop because I really do like 'em, in spite of those two (and a couple of other) lemons.

[JAD]

I have owned exactly 2 Ruger revolvers. .

What did Ruger customer service say when you contacted them?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[m91196]

I have seen plenty of smiths puke especially new ones. I selected the best 686 SSR at the factory store, took it home and poked around then cleaned out all the blasting media out of it to make the trigger acceptable. For most folks ok is good enough these days

[Rich]

The only revolver problem I've had was with a Colt! (12 S&W 38/357 , 2 GP100 , 1 Colt DS)

It was a minor problem and Colt fixed it fast.

I knew it was common back then for the Detective Special to come with a over torque barrel . I was so mad at myself for not catching it before leaving my favorite GS.

[Dagga Boy]

I think another issue is many people believe that revolvers are more reliable than auto's. I find them "different" in what areas the are reliable in. For pure going to the range and shooting thousands and thousands of rounds with little or no cleaning, the autos shine. Also revolvers tend to see a lot of lead that autos don't. The market figured out early with the quality European semi auto service guns that out of spec, cheap lead reloads were a total no go. With that said, we get upset when revolvers get gummed up after shooting dirty crap ammo. Revolvers tend to be more reliable when left loaded and untouched for years, when bouncing around purses full of God knows what, and ankle rigs. The autos do better with exposed gunk and particularly sand and mud.

When it comes to the Ruger vs Smith it is simple for me. Want to shoot real .357 Magnum for the life of the gun like many agencies did in the revolver days....Ruger, without question. The GP100 was made for large agency issue for a high diet of full power duty ammunition. They are also far more serviceable by the end user armorers. The Smiths tend to be better liked for individual use as they are a bit more refined and tend to have smoother actions. There is give and take with both.

[Robinson]

I dunno, I think it would take a lot of shooting to wear out a L Frame. I'm not saying they are indestructible, but I'd be surprised to find out a GP-100 is a whole lot more durable than a 586.

One advantage the Ruger does have is that it's really easy to install a set of Meprolight tritium sights -- plus you can keep all your original parts. On a Smith, installing the Meprolights means permanently altering your original sights. Dawson does make a tritium front sight blade for S&Ws though.

[Dagga Boy]

I was heavily involved with the GP-100 going into L/E agencies back in the mid 80's. The GP-100 was literally built to counter the issues the Smith's were having at many L/E agencies. Keep in mind that many thought the Model 19/66 were the perfect cop guns.....until they were getting shot a lot with full power ammunition. That was what the L frames were made to counter....N frame reliability with heavy loads and a K frame trigger reach and grip. The "L"'s were an improvement, but the GP100 was literally built from the ground up as a true .357 Magnum L/E Duty Revolver. They do not require parts fitting like the Smith's for Armorers and the design was pretty much a fairly blank sheet of paper, versus the Smith that was not much different from the guns of the turn of the century.

I love the Smith revolvers, but I am realistic about what their capabilities are. I still remember the funny Smith ads from the time to try to counter the GP-100. They were about "Thicker is only better in Shakes and Burgers". I don't know if anyone really bought that as Ruger was emphasizing how overbuilt the GP100's were compared to the Smith in frame thickness and other areas.

[Hizzie]

I was really impressed with the Wiley Clapp. Ruger obviously had a little more attention to detail on these. I bought a second one after my initial range trip with the first, then sold off a S&W Performance Center L frame.

[Dagga Boy]

I was really impressed with the Wiley Clapp. Ruger obviously had a little more attention to detail on these. I bought a second one after my initial range trip with the first, then sold off a S&W Performance Center L frame.

At some point, I will end up with one of those Rugers as well.............and still keep your old L frame. I'm a hoarder.

[KPD]

I have owned a few newer model S&W PC revolvers that were absolutely awful. The last one was a TRR8 that would not reliably work even half of the time. S&W refused to issue me an RMA so I sold it at a loss with full disclosure.
I have a Wiley Clapp GP100 that has been trouble free for significantly less price than any comparable S&W I can find.


Sent from the Bushwood Country Club

[Jared]

Well, I got the GP100. I still think it's got the nicest action I've ever felt on an out of the box Ruger, and the previous owner shot it just enough for it to be "used." Around here, it is very common for folks to want a 357 magnum, until they get one and shoot half a box of ammo, then it's traded in on a 9mm or something. Anyway, this is just a fun gun for me, so I'll probably never really be able to appreciate it's overbuilt nature.

One side note though. I seem to be able to get a comfortable thumbs forward grip on the GP100 much more easily than I could with the 686. I laid all my revolvers aside a few years ago when I decided to really learn to shoot instead of just plink. Back then, I didn't shoot thumbs forward, and once I learned that grip, every time I picked up my old K38, trying to grip it just felt.....wrong. Anyway, I'm not gonna go measure grip angles to see if the GP is different, but for whatever reason, I grip it easier.

[Hizzie]

Well, I got the GP100. I still think it's got the nicest action I've ever felt on an out of the box Ruger, and the previous owner shot it just enough for it to be "used." Around here, it is very common for folks to want a 357 magnum, until they get one and shoot half a box of ammo, then it's traded in on a 9mm or something. Anyway, this is just a fun gun for me, so I'll probably never really be able to appreciate it's overbuilt nature.

One side note though. I seem to be able to get a comfortable thumbs forward grip on the GP100 much more easily than I could with the 686. I laid all my revolvers aside a few years ago when I decided to really learn to shoot instead of just plink. Back then, I didn't shoot thumbs forward, and once I learned that grip, every time I picked up my old K38, trying to grip it just felt.....wrong. Anyway, I'm not gonna go measure grip angles to see if the GP is different, but for whatever reason, I grip it easier.


The Wiley Clapp with hot 125gr 357 magnum loads is a pleasure to shoot. 200rds in 45 minutes was fun, not punishing.