My First Revolver: Ruger, S&W or Taurus in .357?

J

J.Bourne

New member
Allright, short and sweet question.

I've got four semiauto's (2 9mm's, 1 .45, 1 .40).

I want to buy my first wheelgun now. I want it as a housegun and maybe a sometimes (rarely though) carry.

As far as quality, price and size/weight issues, does a S&W, Ruger or Taurus offer the best combination and value?

I don't want a barrel larger than 3" if possible and don't want a gun that kicks or bites to the extreme, either (such as the scandium).

FWIW - I did think about buying a new Taurus Ported Compact .45 Long Colt (5 shot, 6 port barrel, 2.25" Barrel, stainless steel) from CDNN for $269.

I want something more powerful than .38 special.

Thanks.
 
Given that you want at MOST a 3" barrel....

How about a Ruger GP 100 with 3" barrel? Recoil is pretty mild with 158 grain .357 magnum loads, due to the GP's 35 plus ounce weight, and fabulous factory rubber grips. Another solid choice is a 2.5" to 3" S&W.

All three brands are good choices, it comes down to which you prefer the most. Try renting one of each make, and see which fits your hand the best. For me, the Ruger GP 100 has the best grip feel, with the S&W 686 a close second. I've not had the chance to try many Taurus revolvers out.
 
The 125 grain .357 maggie loads feel more sharp/snappy to me in my GP's. The 158 grain .357 maggie loads are less painful for extended shooting, IMO. I'm talking mostly target shooting now, for defense I agree that the 125 .357 mag loads are generally better against bad people.
 
Merry Christmas To All,

Well, I will go against the grain here and recommend a
Smith & Wesson product or two. First up, its hard to beat
the original model 19 for a HD weapon and/or as a
plinking or target weapon. I would perfer the 4" barrel
length, and I've seen them in LNIB condition for as little
as $259.00, to as much as $400.00; dependent on the
seller and what area of the country you are in! Built on
the very popular Smith K-frame, it should fit the hands
of women really well too!~

My choice for a HD .357 magnum is the Smith & Wesson
model 686-5, with a 6" tube; and stoked with Federal
and MagTech 125 grain +P .38 Special's. The semi-auto
HD guns are kept for myself; since I have a novice type
handguner in my household!

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
 
"My First Revolver: Ruger, S&W or Taurus in .357? "
Yes




This question has been asked a million times. My answer; 4" Ruger GP100, stainless. I would be very happy with a S&W 686. I would be overjoyed to have a used S&W 19, 66, 27, 28. The .357 is a terrific catridge and IMO the chief cornerstone of any gun collection. There are a very nice selection of revolvers in this caliber which possibly represent some of the finest revolvers ever made.
 
my dad has a ruger gp161, full stainless, 6" full shroud barrel. awesome gun. will take any .357 you feed it. last weekend I shot a few IMI .357 magnums 158 gr JSP trough it, damn, that was fun :D
the gun will most likely outlive your great great ... grand children.
I don't have any experience with s&w, but I've heard of the firing pin breaking of in rough use :confused: great gun altough, but not near as rugged as the ruger.
 
Rugers ar fine guns, Smiths are generally a little finer.

Gotta go with Ala Dan on this one, Smith K or L frame. Personally, I'd choose the K, since it's surprisingly light and compact for CCW yet is still substantial enough to be shot very, very well. I think it's the best "all-around" jack-of-all-trades .357 made. My dad's M66 6" is a great "carryable" gun, with reasonable recoil, so I can only imagine the 4" would be even more of a good thing. My 686 recoils somewhat less though if that matters, and is heavier than I would like to carry often. But it is my house gun.

I never encountered Smith and Wesson's alleged durability problems until I started reading internet gun forums, leading me to conclude it is largely an internet phenomenon and in large part, rumor, just like alleged Glock "perfection". Newer Smiths benefit from endurance enhancements the company added years ago, but people on here still like to ignore

For some, the era of the problematic 1970's cop guns using hot ammo has never ended. Modern Smiths seem quite durable; I've not heard of anyone having durability problems with them on here.

I have actually had much worse quality/durability issues with Rugers in the past. They are very good but indeed can be broken if not occasionally maintenanced.

There is no gun out there that won't eventually need occasional maintenance with heavy use.
 
Normally I'd recommend a Taurus, but I don't think that they offer many options with a 3" barrel. Most of their snubbies are 2 and 1/4". I'd go with the 3" Ruger.
 
You might consider the 7-shot Smith 686 with a 4" barrel. I think the extra shot is worth having. The 4" barrel will keep the velocity up where it belongs for .357 or 38 Special.

I bought a new Smith revolver recently and the workmanship is absolutely flawless and the accuracy is excellent. I have Rugers too. They are good, and the service is too.

One thing for sure with a Smith or Ruger, if anything is wrong you will still end up with a good gun, at their expense.
 
The 3" SP101 in 357 is a good choice. I have had one for two years and really like it. There are a lot of 3" GP100's on the auction boards. Both are well built.

I would recommend you go to a range that rents 3" or less revolvers and try them out. We have a Taurus 605 and with full power loads it is a handful.

Generally speaking, Taurus are the least expensive and S&W are probably the most expensive with Ruger in between.
 
Ruger ruger and Ruger!


Tony


convertibles01.jpg
 
I have to go with Ruger. 4" GP-100 for home defense and range shooting. 3" SP-101 if you want to carry it. 3" GP-100 for general purpose. I find myself carrying my 4" GP-100 alot lately. With the right holster and position, it hides well and is very comfortable. You can find used Ruger 3" GP-100s for 300$ without much searching.
 
As far as quality, price and size/weight issues, does a S&W, Ruger or Taurus offer the best combination and value?
Click to expand...

That is the million dollar question. I think any one of them can be "the best combination/value" depending upon your particular needs and wants.

S&W will have the best trigger and smoothest action. It is tough and durable but quite sophisticated.

Ruger is stronger but not as sophisticated and the action and trigger aren't as nice. Price is just a little less.

Taurus (with the exeption of the J-frame equivelent models which sometimes have nicer triggers than the S&W) won't have the trigger or action of the S&W. It isn't as sophisticated either. It isn't as strong as the Ruger. It is a nice gun, simple internals, durable, with a decent trigger and action. They also have some of the most innovative revolver designs right now (a full range of titanium, .45acp, .44spl and .45lc snubs, the Trackers, a 7 shot snub, etc). The price is significantly less than the equivelent Ruger and S&W.

So they all have their own particular strengths and weaknesses. None of them do anything poorly, just some are better than others at various things. If strength is your number one priority (i.e. you will use strong handloads out of them) get the Ruger. If you care most about the trigger get the Smith. If getting a decent gun at a low price or getting something different Taurus may be for you. It is hard to go wrong with any.

Anyway, I don't really have the defininative answer. I've owned 2 Taurus revolvers and both were very good guns. I own 2 S&Ws. I never did own a Ruger, though I probalby will and soon. So, I guess my vote is get them all. If you won't/can't do that, get what you prefer and don't worry about it.

FWIW - I did think about buying a new Taurus Ported Compact .45 Long Colt (5 shot, 6 port barrel, 2.25" Barrel, stainless steel) from CDNN for $269.
Click to expand...
I thought about one of those not too long ago (though I was going to pay $295 from a local dealer). I decided against it because I don't reload and .45lc isn't that easy to find around here and it is quite pricey. Well, now that I have some other areas covered I am thinking about that gun again (or the .44spl version). It will probably be in my safe by summer.
 
All have their good points, the only problem with some of the Taurus Trackers is (IMHO) the porting, creates too much extra noise and flash. If the ports don't bother you, you might want to try the Tracker in .45ACP, since you already have a .45 you'd be using a caliber you already have . I don't think anyone would argue with the effectiveness of the .45ACP out of the revolver.
I have gone from a Tracker in .357 to a Smith 66, 4" & GP100, 3" for IDPA & HD. I didn't care for the ports on the Tracker, other than that, it was a great gun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top