Ultimate long term durability revolver

[Flashman]

It's worth noting that the practice of using a revolver in match conditions, with repeated speed reloads and trying for fast splits is far more damaging to the gun than simply firing the same number of rounds through it. A competition gun that's seen 5000 rounds of matches, training, etc will have seen a lot more "use" than a gun that was casually fired on the range for 5000 rounds and never had someone trying to slam a Comp-III into it while running.

You may be right but my average round count in our local IDPA match for 5 stages is less than 80 rounds. The maximum number of rounds by the rules are 18. And, the cylinder is fully supported by my hand before the Comp III is pushed. Slamming a speedloader into a GP or SP unsupported can lead to others problems. In fact, this may be a weakness in the design because although I have never performed unsupported reloads, both an SP (which Ruger replaced) and this GP had major failures with the crane assembly popping out of alignment.

USPSA or other high volume matches wears out guns much faster.

Perhaps my expectations are too high but as we know, most handguns will never reach 5000 rounds and manufacturers recognize this.

[Malamute]

I'm big fan of the SP/GP revolvers and have several but do have concerns over their long term durability. One GP100 acquired new 10 years ago, blue in .38, has been used primarily as the IDPA gun. I had one or two minor problems resolved by Ruger early on but at about 7000 rounds, it developed a severe case of light strikes. Ruger fixed it and returned the tightest revolver I have ever used. Of course, they wouldn't say what the problem was but I suspect it was end shake--end shake after 7000 rounds? But I wonder how it will hold up in the next 7000 rounds.

I have a S&W 617 with just under 20,000 rounds and has been back to the factory about 14 times
with a host of unrelated problems, the most recent of which was the light strike problem which was probably end shake again.

Neither one of these revolvers have seen hard use.

Its difficult to draw useful conclusions from little or no information. With all due respect, your suspicion of what was wrong isnt much information to go on, since you apparently didnt do any diagnostics such as measuring end shake or cylinder gap etc. It may well have been end shake, or there may have been other problems. It may have been right at the edge of allowable spec when it went out the door of the factory and didnt take much wear to get past proper spec. Theres no way to know at this point.

Ive heard quite a lot of unfortunate problems with later Smiths. Such things are why I tend to like the older ones, not that they are perfect by any means, just seem less problematic overall, and I keep parts and tools to do basic things on them and am not averse to working on one. Barrel or cylinder swaps or similar arent deal killers for me if the price of a particular gun I may be interested in needed such things. Anyway, to the point of the 617, I dont know where they went off the rails on some later guns, I have a family 17 thats had somewhere between 200k-300k rounds through it with no parts or work other than a lost thumbpiece nut in the late 70s.

And I agree with the use question regarding super rough handling/loading/speed firing whatever. I dont think it reflects actual practical defensive use, or field use of the guns in anything ive ever done. I dont care if a revolver will or wont go 2k rds without cleaning, high volume round count classes, or any of the common current metrics used for autos. At this point, I know they will easily run for far more rounds than I ever carry with me (100-200 rds in the vehicle, like that many rds are ever going to be used at one time defensively....) with no particular care, even when carried for months daily with little or no attention. Im satisfied on that point. YMMV of course. Preventive maintenance seems to take care of most of the common bugs people have.

These discussions are interesting, but they seem to follow similar trajectories for the most part. @Outpost75 has been in the business for a long time, and probably worn out more guns than most of us ever will. I would note that the ones he mentions carrying or using most often seem to be Smiths along with a Colt here and there. I may be mistaken in that, just my impression, but the point being, single point criteria (longest lasting) is only one factor for most of us. I can live with knowing my guns may not be the longest possible lasting gun under severe use, but Im also comfortable keeping them up and can fix many of the common ailments myself, though its not been needed much overall. Finding parts hasnt been an issue either, despite the common internet rumor. The main wear parts (hands and cylinder locking bolts) are available from a decent aftermarket supplier, as well as shims to correct end shake, though I have enough factory parts to get by.

Bottom line: I liked the Security Six, just not quite as much as Smiths, and the GPs just never appealed to me. Mechanically great guns, I just like Smiths more overall.

[HeavyDuty]

I’d love one of these, but I’ve been really bad lately. But in case someone’s ideal is a 5” blue GP100, RK Guns has this on special today:

[Guerrero]

These two articles may interest people reading this thread:

https://revolverguy.com/great-revolver-frame-war-part/
https://revolverguy.com/great-revolv...e-war-part-ii/