Ruger's decision to go to bigger, bulkier revolvers was ill advised in my opinion because if someone wants a target get, they should get a S&W 686. It's a more accurate gun. There's also no reason to make it bigger? Why would Ruger possibly want to depart from Bill Jordan's tried and true motif of a .357 that's easy to shoot and easy to carry into the wilderness? By adding a full underlug barrel, they made the 6-inch models so heavy that few would want to carry it on trails, or while camping or hunting.
Yep, I'm also aware that Bill Ruger complained because of his reduced profit margins while the "Six" series was in production. But that was no one's fault but his own. Once you devalue one of your products, it's difficult to raise prices, and he was trying to keep the prices low to appeal to the police market.
When S&W decided to go to a larger frame, heavier .357, they did so because they wanted to copy the Python. But it wasn't enough just to put some extra metal in critical parts and beef it up; S&W also decided to watch the tolerances so that when shot side-by-side, the 686 and the Python would render similar results in accuracy. So S&W addressed two issues: strength and accuracy. And I really think it reasoned that if they were going to make the gun bigger and heavier, that the gun should be every bit as accurate as the Python.
In my opinion, the 686 achieved those two goals.
Ruger, on the other hand, addressed two issues as well. First, since strength wasn't an issue (the "Six" series could eat at least 30,000 hot magnum loads), it had to
appear to be making the same improvements that S&W were, even if they were phantom improvements. Second, to give the gun an underlug. Unfortunately for Ruger, it did nothing to improve accuracy. All it did was make its guns bigger and heavier. And it deluded people into thinking that one spring doing the job of two was actually better than two springs doing the work of two.
In other words, while S&W actually improved it's .357 in critical areas, Ruger took an incredibly strong revolver and made it heavier and stronger. But for what? To make it
look like the 686!
If I had no handguns at all, but needed a revolver for defense, I'd want a revolver light enough to keep in the dresser drawer and to take with me on road trips (preferably in the glove box) and outdoors, for hiking or camping. If money was an object, as it is for many of us, I'd want something that would be comfortable enough for my wife and older children to use, and something that could pack a heavier punch if I were on the road or in the wilderness.
As stated elsewhere, I think the S&W Model 13, in the early 70s, was the perfect handgun. Everyone knew the manufacturer, the gun was modestly priced, easy to work, aim and fire. It also had a perfect balance and, with a Tyler-T adapter and a nice holster, it was beautiful and highly functional. Close on its heels was the Ruger Speed-Six with a 2.75-inch barrel and Pachmayr grips. This gun was not perfect out of the box, but could be improved by dry firing repeatedly. (That's why it doesn't get a "perfect" rating from me.) But these were decent, strong guns that lacked name recognition at the time among newbes.
The 13 still has a great appeal to me, as do the Rugers. But just because gun owners became more sophisticated doesn't mean that we needed heavier, more cumbersome guns. I'd love to put a 6-inch GP-100 on a table next to a 6-inch Security-Six and ask Bill Jordan to take his pick. All I'm saying, folks, is that Ruger fixed a non-existent problem and patterned their .357s on S&W's heavier and more cumbersome line of .357s; however, S&W had reasons: accuracy, range use, competition. Ruger, as far as I can tell, just makes their revolvers heavier and more difficult to use.
The S&W 686 (above) is more accurate and is suited for competition;
however, the Ruger Security-Six is a superior outdoors and field gun, highly
desirable as a hunting gun. It's lighter barrel picks up targets quicker and
easier than the 686.
The smaller-frame .357s added strength to portability. Alas, these
handy little guns are no longer produced, though they're the perfect
dresser drawer gun. They're superior to the SP-101 because they carry
one more round and are more comfortable to shoot. On a woodsy trail,
having one of these beats an SP-101 any day in my view.
Regardless of the barrel length, the Speed- and Security-Six revolvers
melded strength with portability.
.