I would prefer a 6" barrel, possibly 4". for now simply a target gun, I use a shotgun for home defense, might carry it someday (the revolver not the shotgun). I would also prefer stainless steel for durability but since it wont be getting rough use thats not a big deal to me. also since it probably wont be carried often if ever, weight is not a big deal. also...I would like the option of installing a scope. which one would you recommend?
considering a 357 magnum....
- Thread starter panzer426
- Start date
psycho nut
New member
GP-100, I asked the same question and it seemed that was the overwhelming opinion.
shoots awe lots
New member
If you are talking scope you are,t talking carry.
Find a "shooter" quality Colt Python in SS with a 6" barrel - good action and barrel but not collector quality... maybe a few war-wounds on the finish... that sort of thing.
Then get yourself a set of the One Ragged Hole ghost-ring sights (made mostly for the Ruger line of revolvers) and have a smith grind down the little tabs on the bases of the ORH sight-blades so that you can use them in your Python. Also have your smith tune your new snake's trigger... if needed... Python triggers are usually very, very good out of the box.
You'll end up with the highest quality, most general-purpose and fastest-sighting shootin' tool known to man!
Uji
Then get yourself a set of the One Ragged Hole ghost-ring sights (made mostly for the Ruger line of revolvers) and have a smith grind down the little tabs on the bases of the ORH sight-blades so that you can use them in your Python. Also have your smith tune your new snake's trigger... if needed... Python triggers are usually very, very good out of the box.
You'll end up with the highest quality, most general-purpose and fastest-sighting shootin' tool known to man!
Uji
629 shooter
New member
"I would like the option of installing a scope. which one would you recommend?"
I like the 686 for ease of mounting a scope. The newer versions (early 1990's and newer) are drilled and tapped for a scope base. I think it started with the 686-4 models. Here is mine , a 1994 vintage -4 with a recent 12 shot group. Should have been tighter but it has been a while since I shot scoped revolver.
All the 686s I have owned (4 total) have been very accurate and very good trigger pulls.
I like the 686 for ease of mounting a scope. The newer versions (early 1990's and newer) are drilled and tapped for a scope base. I think it started with the 686-4 models. Here is mine , a 1994 vintage -4 with a recent 12 shot group. Should have been tighter but it has been a while since I shot scoped revolver.
All the 686s I have owned (4 total) have been very accurate and very good trigger pulls.
Colt Trooper MKIII
I bought a slightly used Trooper blued with the 6" barrel for about $400. It is admitedly kind of a nostalgia trip as I had one back in the 70's. But it is a handsome and very accurate gun. I love the smoothness of the action. I don't know how easy it would be to mount a scope, though.
Lou
I bought a slightly used Trooper blued with the 6" barrel for about $400. It is admitedly kind of a nostalgia trip as I had one back in the 70's. But it is a handsome and very accurate gun. I love the smoothness of the action. I don't know how easy it would be to mount a scope, though.
Lou
tanksoldier
New member
If you plan to carry some day plan to buy another revolver, one with a shorter barrel.
For range plinking and home defense the aforementioned 6" GP-100 would be excellent and inexpensive.
For carry the 3" GP-100 or any of the SP-101's should do fine.
I also have to mention the "last generation" Ruger revolvers. A 6" Security Six for target and a 2.75" Speed Six for carry would do the job and be even less money, but you'd have to buy used.
For range plinking and home defense the aforementioned 6" GP-100 would be excellent and inexpensive.
For carry the 3" GP-100 or any of the SP-101's should do fine.
I also have to mention the "last generation" Ruger revolvers. A 6" Security Six for target and a 2.75" Speed Six for carry would do the job and be even less money, but you'd have to buy used.
well, I should have been more clear, I apologize for that. the scope is just a consideration and most likely will not happen and as for carrying it would be just for camping, hiking and horse back riding. mainly all the gun will be used for is target shooting pretty often and camping/hiking etc once or twice a year. I'm leaning towards the 6" barrel because from what I understand a shorter barrel it loses power and I imagine would have more kick do to less weight to absorb recoil and it is partly for my wife who is learning. so mainly all it has to be is durable, long lasting, accurate. also (sorry pretty ignorant on this subject) I see on manufacturer websites, magazines etc listings for 357 magnum/38 special + P...does that mean that model comes in either one, or does it mean that model can fire BOTH? my impression was they could fire both but that seems like it shouldnt be possible since one caliber is 357 and one is 38. if it can shoot both that would be awesome, she has shot a 22, a 9mm and a 45 quite a bit, she wants to step up and shoot the 357 which is handy because I want a 357. who knows if she likes it maybe she will claim it and I will get another new gun.
anyway, considering 6" barrel because of power, accuracy and recoil. considering stainless for durability but not a huge concern. carry but rarely and concealment wont be a huge issue as I will either be in an area that allows open carry or I will have no problem concealing (mostly hike/camp in back country in spring/fall when it is pretty cool), scope is just a consideration and if I get a gun that cant have a scope I will buy a new gun in a few years. dont know if I left anything out.
anyway, considering 6" barrel because of power, accuracy and recoil. considering stainless for durability but not a huge concern. carry but rarely and concealment wont be a huge issue as I will either be in an area that allows open carry or I will have no problem concealing (mostly hike/camp in back country in spring/fall when it is pretty cool), scope is just a consideration and if I get a gun that cant have a scope I will buy a new gun in a few years. dont know if I left anything out.
A .357 revolver will fire .357 or .38 ammunition.
There is not considerable difference in recoil (IMHO) between the 4” and the 6”.
So either would be fine for target shooting. I have the 6” 686 and just found out that some matches have a 5” barrel limit. (If that would ever be a consideration for you.)
There is not considerable difference in recoil (IMHO) between the 4” and the 6”.
So either would be fine for target shooting. I have the 6” 686 and just found out that some matches have a 5” barrel limit. (If that would ever be a consideration for you.)
Well…
Pitch the 627 because it’s an N frame; too big for carry.
Pitch the 620….. this is not where “less is better”.
Pitch the Taurus’s…well... because they are made by Taurus.
The Ruger GP100 is a good gun, but its ugly… so pitch it.
That only leaves the S&W 686. Imagine that.
tanksoldier
New member
It depends on what you mean by "best". BTW: If you take it camping it will see rough handling at some point; rain, dropped in the mud, etc.
If you want a gun that your great-grandkids will still be shooting, and that probably could be dropped down a cliff and still function, buy a Ruger.
If you want the absolute smoothest action, and best finish, go S&W.
If you want to spend the least amount of money, but still have reasonable quality go Taurus.
I've owned revolvers from all three, and for MY priorities Ruger is the best choice. For your purposes I'd say a stainless 4" GP-100 should cover all your bases well enough.
If you want a gun that your great-grandkids will still be shooting, and that probably could be dropped down a cliff and still function, buy a Ruger.
If you want the absolute smoothest action, and best finish, go S&W.
If you want to spend the least amount of money, but still have reasonable quality go Taurus.
I've owned revolvers from all three, and for MY priorities Ruger is the best choice. For your purposes I'd say a stainless 4" GP-100 should cover all your bases well enough.
"okay which do you guys think is the best...S&W 686, 620, 627PC, 520; Taurus 608SS4, 627SS4, 627SH4C, 66SS4; Ruger GP100 4""
Personally, I consider the Taurus models to be a notch less than the S&W L frames and the Rugers.
Personally, I'd avoid the N frame Smiths just because they are bigger and I don't need that, unless you are talking about going to a .44 Mag. The L frames are big enough so that they will do what you want in a .357 Mag without overdoing it. Personally, I don't value having 8 shots all that much, the 6 in my 686 serve me just fine.
Essentially, the S&W 686 and 620 are the same thing. One has a full lug barrel (6 or 7 shots), the other is a half lug (7 shots). What I understand is that the 620 is actually there to fill the "K Frame Lover's" niche for those who like the aesthetics of the half lug K frames, and it is a couple of ounces lighter than the equivelant 686. I consider those to be a toss-up. Oh, and the 520 is just a different finish, but I personally prefer the stainless models from a maintainence standpoint -- YMMV, some people like the aesthetics of a blued gun, I personally don't care.
Now, differentiating between the S&W L frames and the Ruger GP-100s. Essentially, they have similar quality levels, historically at least. There is concern that the quality level of the S&W revolver line in general has suffered lately, but I can't verify that first hand -- my 686 is an old one from back in the '80s, no dash. In general the L frame Smiths are considered to have somewhat better triggers, and the GP-100s are considered to be somewhat tougher and able to better withstand a steady diet of hotter loads. In both cases, it is just a matter of degree, either family of revolvers will do what you want, a revolver from either family will likely outlive the shooter if the shooter isn't stupid about it. I consider them to be a toss-up.
"I'm leaning towards the 6" barrel because from what I understand a shorter barrel it loses power and I imagine would have more kick do to less weight to absorb recoil and it is partly for my wife who is learning. so mainly all it has to be is durable, long lasting, accurate."
Actually a 4" barrel doesn't loose all that much velocity as compared to a 6" barrel -- somewhere around 100fps depending on the load. And a medium heavy frame 4" revolver doesn't kick all that much anyway. My wife, who is recoil adverse, doesn't have any problem with my 4" 686 when shooting standard load .38's -- I haven't loaded up anything hotter for her, but I suppose that she could handle that as well. What you will notice is that the 4" model will be "handier" to carry around, 6" barrels are nice from a velocity/sight radius standpoint, but aren't the most graceful things to tote.
"also (sorry pretty ignorant on this subject) I see on manufacturer websites, magazines etc listings for 357 magnum/38 special + P...does that mean that model comes in either one, or does it mean that model can fire BOTH?"
Yep. If it says that it will shoot .357 Mags, it will also shoot .38 specials and .38 special +p's just fine. Occasionally you have to clean out the carbon rings from the cylinders because of the shorter brass, but that's just a maintainence chore. The other way is a No-No. Not to mention that .357 Mag ammo won't fit in a revolver chambered for .38 spl (+p), they did that on purpose. For that matter, that is the whole reason why the .357 Mag coming into existence -- the longer brass kept shooters from putting the new high pressure loads in older revolvers that couldn't handle the greatly increased pressures.
"my impression was they could fire both but that seems like it shouldnt be possible since one caliber is 357 and one is 38."
It is just like being able to shoot shorter shotgun shells in guns chambered for longer shells, or like shooting .22 shorts in a bolt action rifle chambered for .22lr -- it works just fine (in the case of the .22, assuming it feeds). Actually, .38 specials have a .357 barrel, and shoot .357 jacketed bullets or .358 lead bullets -- just like a .357 Magnum does.
BTW -- a .357 Sig isn't a "real" .357 at all -- it is actually a "true" 9mm, it has a .355 bore. Confusing, huh?
"if it can shoot both that would be awesome, she has shot a 22, a 9mm and a 45 quite a bit, she wants to step up and shoot the 357"
Shouldn't be a problem, just start her out with .38's and work up to the mag loads. If she can handle self-defense load .45 ACP's from something like a standard 1911, she shouldn't have any problems with a .357 Mag in a similar sized revolver.
"who knows if she likes it maybe she will claim it and I will get another new gun."
Wouldn't be the first time something like that has happened!
"anyway, considering 6" barrel because of power, accuracy and recoil."
Power& accuracy -- you have a point. Recoil -- on a medium frame gun, a 4" barrel shouldn't be a problem.
"considering stainless for durability but not a huge concern."
My thoughts are pretty much like that -- I do like the ease of maintainence of the stainless guns.
"carry but rarely and concealment wont be a huge issue"
Then you don't need a light frame or a snubby.
Personally, I consider the Taurus models to be a notch less than the S&W L frames and the Rugers.
Personally, I'd avoid the N frame Smiths just because they are bigger and I don't need that, unless you are talking about going to a .44 Mag. The L frames are big enough so that they will do what you want in a .357 Mag without overdoing it. Personally, I don't value having 8 shots all that much, the 6 in my 686 serve me just fine.
Essentially, the S&W 686 and 620 are the same thing. One has a full lug barrel (6 or 7 shots), the other is a half lug (7 shots). What I understand is that the 620 is actually there to fill the "K Frame Lover's" niche for those who like the aesthetics of the half lug K frames, and it is a couple of ounces lighter than the equivelant 686. I consider those to be a toss-up. Oh, and the 520 is just a different finish, but I personally prefer the stainless models from a maintainence standpoint -- YMMV, some people like the aesthetics of a blued gun, I personally don't care.
Now, differentiating between the S&W L frames and the Ruger GP-100s. Essentially, they have similar quality levels, historically at least. There is concern that the quality level of the S&W revolver line in general has suffered lately, but I can't verify that first hand -- my 686 is an old one from back in the '80s, no dash. In general the L frame Smiths are considered to have somewhat better triggers, and the GP-100s are considered to be somewhat tougher and able to better withstand a steady diet of hotter loads. In both cases, it is just a matter of degree, either family of revolvers will do what you want, a revolver from either family will likely outlive the shooter if the shooter isn't stupid about it. I consider them to be a toss-up.
"I'm leaning towards the 6" barrel because from what I understand a shorter barrel it loses power and I imagine would have more kick do to less weight to absorb recoil and it is partly for my wife who is learning. so mainly all it has to be is durable, long lasting, accurate."
Actually a 4" barrel doesn't loose all that much velocity as compared to a 6" barrel -- somewhere around 100fps depending on the load. And a medium heavy frame 4" revolver doesn't kick all that much anyway. My wife, who is recoil adverse, doesn't have any problem with my 4" 686 when shooting standard load .38's -- I haven't loaded up anything hotter for her, but I suppose that she could handle that as well. What you will notice is that the 4" model will be "handier" to carry around, 6" barrels are nice from a velocity/sight radius standpoint, but aren't the most graceful things to tote.
"also (sorry pretty ignorant on this subject) I see on manufacturer websites, magazines etc listings for 357 magnum/38 special + P...does that mean that model comes in either one, or does it mean that model can fire BOTH?"
Yep. If it says that it will shoot .357 Mags, it will also shoot .38 specials and .38 special +p's just fine. Occasionally you have to clean out the carbon rings from the cylinders because of the shorter brass, but that's just a maintainence chore. The other way is a No-No. Not to mention that .357 Mag ammo won't fit in a revolver chambered for .38 spl (+p), they did that on purpose. For that matter, that is the whole reason why the .357 Mag coming into existence -- the longer brass kept shooters from putting the new high pressure loads in older revolvers that couldn't handle the greatly increased pressures.
"my impression was they could fire both but that seems like it shouldnt be possible since one caliber is 357 and one is 38."
It is just like being able to shoot shorter shotgun shells in guns chambered for longer shells, or like shooting .22 shorts in a bolt action rifle chambered for .22lr -- it works just fine (in the case of the .22, assuming it feeds). Actually, .38 specials have a .357 barrel, and shoot .357 jacketed bullets or .358 lead bullets -- just like a .357 Magnum does.
BTW -- a .357 Sig isn't a "real" .357 at all -- it is actually a "true" 9mm, it has a .355 bore. Confusing, huh?
"if it can shoot both that would be awesome, she has shot a 22, a 9mm and a 45 quite a bit, she wants to step up and shoot the 357"
Shouldn't be a problem, just start her out with .38's and work up to the mag loads. If she can handle self-defense load .45 ACP's from something like a standard 1911, she shouldn't have any problems with a .357 Mag in a similar sized revolver.
"who knows if she likes it maybe she will claim it and I will get another new gun."
Wouldn't be the first time something like that has happened!
"anyway, considering 6" barrel because of power, accuracy and recoil."
Power& accuracy -- you have a point. Recoil -- on a medium frame gun, a 4" barrel shouldn't be a problem.
"considering stainless for durability but not a huge concern."
My thoughts are pretty much like that -- I do like the ease of maintainence of the stainless guns.
"carry but rarely and concealment wont be a huge issue"
Then you don't need a light frame or a snubby.
Last edited:
okay awesome. so its a ruger GP100 or a S&W 686. just out of curiosity what makes Taurus inferior? I have heard a lot about how they dont stack up, and how the newer S&W's arent as durable as the rugers, why is that? I wondered about Taurus before I ever even found this site because they (atleast the models/calibers I am interedsted in, havnt paid much attention to the bigger calibers like Raging Bull comes in) are so much cheaper.
also what cartridges/manufacturer/grain etc do you suggest for target shooting, and for self defense shooting even though (as I think I have said) my 12 gauge is the home defense gun. is there a good one that fits all the uses? not the best for EVERY use but pretty good for all of them?