Considering a .357

Tamara and Navigator-

I guess the "beefed up" part's did actually start with
the -3, as they indicated "changed yoke retention system".
As to MIM part's, I've never seen one break; although we
see post here at TFL indicating that? If the MIM process is
done right, its probably as strong as that of earlier S&W's.
Grant it, most new S&W's do require a little "smithing" to
slick up the action; but I've seen a few that were "slick as
a baby's butt", right from the factory. Example being, my
S&W 629-5 .44 magnum Classic with 5" tube.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
 
HEY!

I PREFER my GP triggers to those of S&W (although I had this M67 once that SA was the proverbial 'glass rod'; finest revolver trigger ever in the entire universe).

I will add that 99% of my revolver shooting is DA; only SA shooting is for chrono or a real tough IPSC target......:cool:
 
Have owned one or two from all three companies and Colt. All have been very good to great.

CheapSeats.....thanks for the reminder, I had a beautiful 6" blue MKIII that I let go of thinking it was a good idea at the time. :(

In S&W, I'm like a few of the other posters here, I really like the mdl. 66 better than the 686. The Ruger was a great gun but the trigger needed a little work. Not a big deal though. Taurus 65 was an inexpensive packing pistol that really shot well, also needed a little work on the trigger. Currently have a .41 Tracker that seems to be holding up well, should be just fine in .357.
 
Ala Dan,

If the MIM parts are as strong as their milled steel predecessors, why don't we see MIM cylinders and barrels? ;)

That being said, you're right; they're plenty strong enough for use in non-stressed parts like triggers and hammers. They just strike me as cheesy. I don't mind "cheesy" on a $300 gun, but it kinda galls me on one that costs $500, $800 or more. ;)
 
Tamara,

You definitely have a good and very valid point. I don't think
I would appreciate the use of MIM part's on my beloved Sig's.
Being an "oldtimer", I even question the use of the alloy parts
being used on the Ti's and Sc's. I read a recent thread here
at TFL where one of the "smith's" at the factory hated to see
these weapons coming in for repair.:eek: :( Don't get me
wrong, I would love to have one myself, either the 337PD,
360PD, or the 386PD; but I can't afford to waste that amount
of cash on possible gun's that may have a potential problem.

By the way, I'm really enjoying the book Standard Catalog Of Smith & Wesson, 2nd edition, as I learn something everyday.
Thanks for making me aware of the knowledge contained within.


Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
 
Last edited:
Just as a side note on the comment that Rugers are heavier than like sized guns. The S&W 686 with 4" tube weighs 40oz., the Ruger KGP-141 comes in at 41oz. Comparing the two, thats hardly noticable. So, one be easier to carry over the other.
 
The only concern I have for the MIM parts on my 686-5 is the appearance. I just don't care for the way they look, and the hollowed out portion of the trigger does look cheap. Is there any fix for that? I also notice that in dry firing, the edge of the trigger is uncomfortable on my finger. Is a radius job indicated?
 
I've had both a S&W 686 and a Ruger GP 100. They are both awesome, and you can't go wrong with either one. IMHO, the S&W will have a better trigger pull out of the box. I put a Wolff variable tension mainspring in mine and it made even more of a difference. The Ruger is built like an armored truck and could probably fire full house magnum loads for a few lifetimes. Consider what load you want to carry, though. Magnums are VERY loud and you can pretty much guarantee hearing loss if fired in self-defense in an enclosed area without hearing protection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top