Best choice for first modern revolver

I've owned Smith's (686+, 629, 36 and 637) before--now I own Ruger's (SP101, GP100)----I like the Ruger DA revolvers more --really can't put my finger on as to why because the Smith's were just fine.

REALLY dislike the "lock" on the Smith's and won't own another that has one.
 
The K frame S&W and current-production Colt double-actions are compact, light, and easy to carry while still shooting much better than J frames, LCR's, and Kimbers which are too light and awkwardly small to shoot easily and comfortably. The little guns are ok if you back off on the power factor, but you're expressing an interest in range-time and not carry, so I would suggest stepping up even from a K frame/Colt Cobra.

The two big advantages you get stepping up to a L frame or GP100 is weight and barrel length. The weight is important when shooting a higher power factor. When the barrel length exceeds 4" (to 5", 5.5", 6" and beyond), even the .357 produces big energy for a handgun. My 5.5" .357 can produce more than double the energy of that of popular 9mm self-defense loads commonly shot out of autoloaders with reciprocating slide mass and recoil springs that reduce the recoil velocity. In a revolver, the only thing reducing recoil velocity is the gun's mass.

S&W doesn't currently produce a K frame with more than a 4.25" barrel, and while the current K frames are easily stout enough in all ways to handle a high volume of maximum .357 Magnum loads, their ~36 oz. weight doesn't make this a pleasant endeavor. The full underlug on L frames and the GP100 not only add mass, but they also add it where it tends to reduce muzzle flip the most. Porting or compensating a K frame can also reduce muzzle flip, but it won't add the mass the reduces recoil velocity.

.357 Magnum in particular is benefited tremendously by increased barrel length. I've measured a consistent 40 fps difference just between a 5" and 5.5" barrel (same b/c gap). Going from a 4" to a 6" barrel can add hundreds of fps with no additional pressure. If power factor or energy doesn't mean anything to you, then just shoot a 4" K frame .38 Special. It can't be beat. But if you do care about power then there's no replacement for a longer barrel and you'll appreciate a gun with more mass.

Venturing into the big bores, your ammo and component costs will increase substantially. I would suggest a .38 or .357 to learn the double-action trigger and reloading and then a big bore should you wish. While there are L frame and GP100 sized guns in .44 Magnum and 10mm, big bore double actions are generally N frames or Redhawks. I can't speak from enough experience with these to offer good advice, but I would suggest that a .454 Casull or .460 S&W is a poor platform to learn double-action revolver on, even if you shoot more economical and lower recoil .45 Colt. The mainsprings on those guns have enough strength to strike rifle primers and that makes the triggers even harder than what you'll have to overcome to shoot any double action.
 
I am right on with post #2. Personally, I won't buy a new pistol with the keyhole lock. Ruins the looks of the gun and I don't leave mine sitting on the counter at the local day care.

Really like the older Smiths. I do own a 642 with keyhole ONLY because if the deal I got on it and wanted an Airweight. I carry an SP101 quite a bit. Installed trigger springs and a Tritium front sight/buffalo grips. Love that gun.

I like the looks of Rugers more than Smiths, but like shooting the Smiths more - go figure. I've got a 1969 3 screw .44 mag and a 29-2 in excellent condition. A few others.

If I were buying new I'd get a GP100 and an SP101 all over again. New it would be Ruger. Used I'd look at Smiths expecting to spend some time to get exactly what I wanted but be happier in the long run. Maybe a Dan Wesson, wouldn't count those out.
 
For a first modern revolver, I would suggest a .357 Smith and Wesson N frame.
60s through early 80s vintage model 28, or 27 six shots, and built like a bank vault.
I own a four inch Model 28, and a three and a half inch Model 27.
Load up, or shoot was cutter .38 special, you have a great shooter.
6 inch bbls are available too.
Prices are in my opinion, a little elevated, but are still affordable.
 
I'm not going to recommend a revolver brand, but instead recommend a barrel length. Skeeter Skelton said that a 5 inch barrel was the goldilocks of length. Not too long and not too short, and I tend to agree. The ruger GP 100, the S&W 686 plus, and the S&W 629 classic, all come with 5 inch barrels. If the lever action chambering is not an absolute must, I would also look at the S&W performance center 986 in 9x19mm with a 5.5 inch barrel. It has great balance, fit, and finish, and 9mm ammunition is cheap and plentiful. If you're considering a 45 colt, then I would also consider the ruger redhawk with a 4.2 inch barrel and cut for moon clips so that it can fire either 45 colt or 45 acp.
 
If you're a hand loader, don't rule out a nice .41 mag. A nice S&W model 57 is pretty fun. I have had my 6" for almost 40 years and my 4" for about 2 years. They will go to my children when the time comes. My son actually has a tattoo of my 6" on his arm. I guess I know which one he wants.
 
I have Ruger and S&W Revolvers. I like them both but I lean towards the S&W for fit and finish. I've never had a problem with the lock on the S&W's and if I did, I'd just send it in and I know they would fix it, no questions asked. That's just the way they operate.

As for Caliber, a 22LR or 22Mag might be a fun place to start. Anybody can shoot it with ease and they can be very accurate. If you want a little more bang then the .357 Mag is the way to go. You can shoot 38 Special in it and it will be easy to handle but if you want to do a little more damage to your targets then jump up to the .357 Mag ammo and blast away. The .357 mag is a very competitive round and is also a very effective personal defense round.
 
I have had them all. If I had to have one for the purposes OP wants, it would be a S&W N
frame. I don't like the keyhole either but has no bearing on shooting. What ever cal. suits your needs but 357 with 6" is probably best all around target & range gun. When you get into 41-44-45 cal if you handload they are pretty equal in cost, the 357 a liittle less. My self I like the blue/ P&R era S&Ws. In fact I have almost all S&Ws from 34s to 29s and in DAs have gotten rid of everything else except one Colt. The Rugers are nice guns but have never
equaled the S&Ws out of the box.
 
Looks like most opinions match my own. I have experience with the Ruger single action, the Ruger GP-100, and the S&W K-frame......all have been wonderful. I also have experience with .357 and .44 mags.....again, both are wonderful.

If forced to choose, I'd go .357 mag, and a K-frame S&W.
 
You cannot go wrong with an L frame S&W or a GP100 Ruger, I own both, love to shoot both. You cannot go wrong with .357. Or a .44, or a.45. Especially being a reloader just about any caliber you choose would be right. I own a few modern revolvers. If I were to have to pare down to one revolver I could not.

If I had to pare down to two revolvers, I could. One would be a 6" GP100. The other would be a S&W model 57, pinned and recessed, 6" barrel. I have .44 magnum revolvers, I just love the .41 better. And the N frame fits my hand well. And being a reloader it would not come with a significant financial penalty.

David
 
Back
Top