357 mag advice sought

J

jmstr

New member
I need an opinion about 357 mag pistols. I have the Ruger GP100 with a 6" barrel and LOVE it. I was thinking of getting another .357 since I enjoy the GP100 so much. I was leaning toward a 4" version just to make it different. However, a great situation presented itself and confused me. [easy to do :)]

To make a long story short, I need an opinion: is there any advantage to a S&W model 66 in a 6" barrel over the GP100 in the 6" barrel? I realize the 66 will weigh less, but that is NOT a real concern, unless the 66 will weigh significantly less than the GP100 in a 4" barrel. They both have adjustable sights. So, other than the fact I would have a different brand/model, would I gain any advantages with the 66?

If it were a 4" barrel, or even a 5", I wouldn't even hesitate to snap it up. However, I am not certain about another 6" barreled .357. It just seems to do the same thing, but I can't fire as powerful of loads through it for as long. A great 6" 'carry' gun due to weight, but is there anything else I am missing?

Thanks for any/all input.
 
The Smith will probably have a better trigger, but it is not as likely to be as durable as the Ruger with a steady diet of full power loads. The four inch is a handier carrying gun.
 
I wouldn't worry much about the durability issue. I'm not sure it is founded in fact. In either case, either revolver will probably out live you. You probably can't go wrong in buying the Smith, provided it has not been abused.
 
I have a Ruger GP-100 and a S&W Model 19. I much prefer the Ruger. Since you are leaning toward a 4" and it's for carry, check out the 3" Ruger SP-101. I have fed my SP some of the hot loads I use in the GP and it handles them fine.
 
I'm curious. Every time that someone posts such a question, folks state that Ruger is more durable. Now, with every use of the gun the difference in trigger is in evidence. In the real world, how fragile is the S&W? Did departments spend large sums of money fixing these guns as they constantly broke down? Have all of you been unable to use your guns due to an appreciable amount of down time? Have you had to spend large amounts on your S&W, just to get them to go bang? I have Rugers and I would believe that they are more durable, but I don't think that the S&W, even the K frames, are shooting themselves loose on a regular basis.
 
I have to agree Gary. When the revolver was king in the LEO community, the 19 (later the 66) ruled the roost. The only complaint was the comfort factor using "magnum" loads in the K-frame, hence the L-frame 586/686. The durability argument is grossly overblown, IMHO.
 
Very few police arms are fired a significant amount.

I have found that stainless Smiths can be worn beyond econimical repair with a high round count....using target loads. Ran one into the ground with about 6,000 trigger pulls.

Relative....that particular gun would have lasted 60 years if fired 1,000 rounds/year. Lasted me two years.

Sam
 
Sam's calculator needs a new set of batteries. It would have lasted 6 years. But if it were fired the number of times your average non-gunner LEO would fire it, it would last that 60 years plus.
 
Ruger durability, WESHOOT2 and Corbon both use GP's to test their loads. I like Smiths but wonder how one would hold up to that kind work.
 
I like Smiths but wonder how one would hold up to that kind work.
Click to expand...

I think it's a moot point considering the average shooter. I know of no competition shooter who uses "full House" for practice and comp. Buy what you like, they will both do the job.
 
If you found a great deal go ahead and get the 66, otherwise, since you want a 4" and already have a 6" .357 wait for a deal on a 4". The S&W will probably have a better to much better trigger than your Ruger, but so will a 4" 66. With the 6" barrel it won't make a good carry gun so the fact that it is lighter than your 6" Ruger (and not by THAT much) won't make that much of a difference. If you want to carry you're better off with a 3" or 4" K-frame S&W, if you want target work the 6" is better but the Smith won't make much of a difference over your Ruger (the trigger will be a bit better, it MAY be a little more accurate or it may not).

I have a K-frame Smith (a 3" S&W 65LS) and I've read other people's experiences and while the Ruger does theoretically have a durability advantage over K-frame Smiths I think it is a bit overblown. Most people will not shoot their K-frames out. Unless you shoot many thousands of rounds of only .357s per year I doubt that you'll have a problem. If like most of us you only shoot a few thousand rounds out of each of your guns and many of the rounds out of your .357s are .38s this gun will probably outlast you.

Your Ruger is a great gun and so is that Smith. Most people prefer one over the other for one reason or another. You may find that you prefer the Smith if you get it but I see no compelling reason not to wait for the 4" S&W 66 that you want, unless you are going to get an extraordinary deal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top