Buying my first revolver

C

Civilian

New member
I have a difficult decision I hope some of you can help me with. I will be purchasing my first revolver in the next 2 weeks and I am having a very hard time deciding which one to buy. I have researched, held, and tested many different revolvers. For an all purpose (Home Defence, target practice, etc.) revolver I have decided to buy a .357 with a 4" barrel. The two I like the most are the GP100 (KGP141) and the 686plus. I can purchase the GP100 for about $360 and the 686plus for about $460. I am not going to let the political mistakes S&W has made influence my decision on the first revolver I buy, so that is not really a concern. My concerns are as follows:
1. If the 686+ is better than the GP100, is it $100 better? (I can afford either, but extra money toward ammo & training will be helpful.
2. What are the advantages the GP100 has over the 686+?
3. What are the advantages the 686+ has over the gp100?
4. Which is easier to clean and maintain?
5. I have heard a lot about the trigger pull being better with the 686+, is it a significant difference? I have tested each, but being new to handguns, could not tell a differnce. I also am not inclined to go to a gunsmith for major changes/alterations. (I have had too many cars that ran worse after a tune up than before the mechanics tinkered with them.)
6. How is customer support with Ruger and S&W?
7. How is quality control with Ruger and S&W? I don't want a lemmon.
8. I intent to have this revolver for the next 40-50 years, will both hold up that long (with good basic care and factory .357 ammo)?
9. Are there any consistent problems with either?
10. How easy to use are the adjustable sights on each?

This is a lot of information to ask for and any responses are appreciated.
 
I have owned several of both revolvers over the years, and here are my findings:

1. No, the 686 is NOT better. The GP 100 is an OVERALL better revolver IMO (in many ways).

2. GP 100 is far stronger, easier to disasemble, has more user friendly features, and is a better "shooter"--better ergonomics and accuracy than the S&W.

3. 686 has better trigger out of box. The GP 100 heavy trigger does smooth/lighten up with usage however. A trigger job is unnecessary.

4. Ruger is [FAR] EASIER to maintain/clean

5. Read above for trigger. With the GP, just shoot/dry fire it a lot and it smooths out and gets very good. The 686 has a very good out of box trigger.

6. Ruger customer service is OUTSTANDING. S&W customer service is above average.

7. Ruger qualtiy control is very good on both semi-autos and revolvers. S&W has poor quality control on the semi-autos and good quality control with the revolvers. Of late I have seen a declining quality control on S&W revolvers however.

8. The S&W will not hold up to heavy .357 magnum usage, the Ruger WILL!

9. Problems: MOST Rugers have heavy triggers out of the box (their problem).
S&W has had timing problems and action problems on a small percentage of NEW revolvers.

10. I like the adjustable sights on both Rugers and S&Ws. No advantage here...

In conclusion, the Ruger is the overall better revolver. The only area S&W has an edge is in the out of the box trigger pull.
 
Best buy = GP100.

Not talking theory; could have bought anything but chose two (2) 4" stainless GP100's.

You will not be sorry, you'll be satisfied (for generations).
 
Well, I guess this is why they makes Fords and they makes Chevrolets...I've got to DISAGREE with MUCH of what "Quant" said...the GP100 MAY be a TAD stronger than the S&W, but I don't know ANYBODY who's EVER shot either one "to destruction"! I do have a personal-favorite 586 [blued brother of 686] that has digested well in excess of 30,000 rounds...just starting to get broken in! For anyone who ISN'T all thumbs, the S&W is NOT difficult to disassemble for cleaning/maintenance. The S&W triggerpull, ESPECIALLY in DA mode, is usually MARKEDLY better than the GP100...if you consider that both can be improved with QUALITY 'smithing, the gap widens EVEN MORE...most "revolversmiths" of my acquantaince will say that they can "improve" a GP's triggerpull to ABOUT EQUAL a GOOD, out-of-the-box S&W!!! As far as the sights...well, I must respectfully posit that the S&W sight is AT LEAST as robust as the Ruger's, and that the REPEATABILITY of the adjustments of the S&W sight are excellent...while the Ruger rear-and I've SWORN AT many of 'em!-leaves a great deal to be desired in terms of accurate, repeatable adjustments. Lastly, the 686 "Plus" holds SEVEN rounds...the GP100, only six. Is the 686 "Plus" worth an extra hundred dollars...only YOU can answer that...for me, four out of the last five .357's that I purchased were 686 "Pluses"...the other, an EIGHT-shot 627 PC!!!Good Luck....mikey357
 
We all have our preferences and opinions...BUT...I do know people who shot their 686s to the point of needing the cylinder retimed...I am one of them! It didn't take many .357 magnum rounds to do it. As far as the trigger, the S&W is better, but in my experience with simple use the GP 100 does smooth out over time.

Also, the GP 100 has a superior cylinder release system (push button), better factory grips, and IMO much better handling. I have the money to buy either, and I am now exclusively buying Ruger revolvers...that says it all! I will end this discussion by saying try both out and make the decision based on what you like...
 
Thanks for the information. I have tested both, and found them to be near equal to each other. The information I requested is for expert opinions and experiences with either/both of these handguns. Being an inexperienced shooter I am concerned about my ability to guage the subtle differences between the two (like trigger pull). I appreciate the input given and look forward to recieving more information over the next few days. Thanks for the help and have a great new year.
 
Just get one of each, which is how I resolved the question. One used S&W plus one Ruger GP-100 equals twice the fun. Think also of the educational benefits in becoming a revolver expert.
 
Your decision is a tough one. Just about everybody here has been in the same delightful dilema. Your best choice will come down to personal preferences. The S&W dominate competition, but that is just the competitors' personal preference (I do know one Ruger shooter) and the Ruger is every bit as competent in accuracy and durability.
 
Buying My First Revolver

The first revolver I bought was a 686. I have had it for 7 years and I have never had a problem with it. It is extremely accurate and a lot of fun to shoot. I don't think you would go wrong purchasing either one. I have looked at the GP100 on several occasions and it is a quality gun.
 
I ordered a GP100 (KGP141) today from a local gun shop.
Reasons for the GP100:

1. Mainly, I want to use the money saved to take a handgun safety course at my local shooting range. I don't want to become a statistic or give any ammunition to gun control enthusiasts (no pun intended).

2. I see plenty of used Smiths I can purchase for very low prices (I want to be the first and only owner of my first revolver).

3. I like the "thumb groove" on the Ruger.

4. Finally, none of my friends have a GP100, I like to stand out.

Thanks for all of the information, I look forward to contributing to future posts.
 
Advantage of the 686. 7 shots if you get that 7 shot model. Better trigger pull too.

The Ruger is lower maintenance. You don't have to check whether the screws are tight or not. The Ruger also takes more abuse than the S&W. While Ruger's trigger can be smoothened, I've never got it as smooth as a glassy S&W trigger.

BTW, both are easy to work on.
 
Personally, I prefer the S&W Model 19/66 over either of the above. Yes, it won't stand up to lots of full power magnum loads. But neither will I. And I find that it balances better than the 686.

I've fired a well-used GP100 and have to say that the 19/66 trigger out of the box was better than that well used (but not abused) Ruger.

Nevertheless, this is something of an embarrassment of riches, as all of the guns mentioned are quite good.

M1911
 
I think you will find that the vast majority of big name revolversmiths and the folks who do action jobs will agree that Smith and Wesson makes the best revolvers. If Rugers, etc., were they better products you would see more of them in the hands of competitors. Too bad S&W has such a political firestorm going.
 
the new S&W revolvers ...

I'm not sure the new S&W revolvers are built to the same quality standards as ones from a few years ago. I was looking at 586's, and the police trade in's were better made than the new 686's. Even trade in's with no wear marks of ANY kind had a much better trigger pull than the newly made ones.

I am pretty ignorant about S&W, but I had heard that small internal parts were now MIM, and not finished to the same fit and smoothness as the old steel parts.

From what I saw, the older 586's were built to a higher standard than the Ruger's, but I think Ruger's quality has been improving, and there is more potential in a new GP-100 than a new 686.

I've heard rumors but have never seen a S&W m19 that shot loose, but a m19 is a K-frame, and a 586/686 is a bigger L frame. I would really doubt anyone could hurt it with factory magnum loads.
 
If you can get an older model 66 or 686, go for it. If not go for the gp100. I have a model 66 made in the mid 70's and love it, but I would not buy a new S&W.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top