Ruger Model GP-100 vs Smith&Wesson Model 65
- Thread starter dgludwig
- Start date
Clifford L. Hughes
New member
dgludwig:
Both the Smith 65 and the Ruger GP100 are fine guns and they will last several life times. I would choose the lighter Smith 64 for both its weight and its aesthetic values. I'm not sure about the Rugers but the Smiths, with a trigger job and an action job will make Colt Python owners envious.
Semper Fi.
Gunnery sergeant
Clifford L. Hughes
USMC Retired
Both the Smith 65 and the Ruger GP100 are fine guns and they will last several life times. I would choose the lighter Smith 64 for both its weight and its aesthetic values. I'm not sure about the Rugers but the Smiths, with a trigger job and an action job will make Colt Python owners envious.
Semper Fi.
Gunnery sergeant
Clifford L. Hughes
USMC Retired
Crazy88Fingers
New member
I'll double the suggestion for a used Ruger Six series gun. I picked up a Security Six in pretty good condition for $300 last year. It's the size of a K-frame, will eat up all the .357s you can throw at it, and field strips without tools in about five minutes (though it's much easier if you have a small screwdriver handy). If there's a good chance the gun will go for a swim you should pack a small can of WD-40 as well. If I was out and about in the wilderness, this gun would probably be with me.
The Speed Six is probably right up your alley. The rounded butt and shorter barrel make it a much better concealed carry gun.
The Speed Six is probably right up your alley. The rounded butt and shorter barrel make it a much better concealed carry gun.
Whirlwind06
New member
I went with the 3 inch GP-100.
Last edited:
I would get a 4in GP100! I love my 4in iy just feels right in my hands,I like the 65 but something about the lock I dont like.If they move it where you cant see it.The lock just ruins the look of S&W revolvers!I have all pre-lock S&W revlovers and I want to get a new 586.When I feel one in my hands I might buy a lock S&W. The bluing seems to camo the lock!
Whoever(s) said the 65 Lady Smith is the "Holy Grail" is right. It is at least the creme of the K-crop, which to me places it right up there anyway. Unique combo of vaunted 3" plus fixed sight and full lug, plus bead blast/satin stainless. Love mine, but they are getting (?) scarce and pricey. Also, whoever said Speed 6 also had that right as well.
Given that you want something more compact than your 686+ and you're already well acquainted with S&W revolvers, I'd say you'd probably be better served by the M65.
The GP100 is a fine gun to be sure, but it's more akin to the size of a S&W L-Frame than to a K-Frame (according to their websites, a 3" GP100 weighs 36oz while a 3" 686+ weighs 36.8oz) and some holsters and speedloaders can be used interchangeably with a GP100 and S&W L-Frame.
Ruger and S&W revolver also have a distinctly different feel and balance. A Ruger will sit lower and farther forward in your hand while a S&W will sit higher and farther back. What this translates to is a bit less muzzle rise with the Ruger and a bit less felt recoil with the S&W. Also, Ruger no longer makes the GP100 with anything but a full underlug which will give the revolver a more muzzle-heavy feel than a S&W K-Frame with a half underlug or none at all. Finally, all Ruger DA revolvers use a push-button type cylinder release latch while all S&W's with the exception of the polymer Bodyguard .38 use a thumbpiece which slides forward.
As to the trigger, I wouldn't really say that one is better than the other but they are distinctly different. S&W triggers are very smooth and consistent all the way through the pull with little or no perceptible stacking while Ruger triggers stack more noticeably just before the break. Some people like a bit of stacking and others don't, it's really just a matter of personal preference.
As to price, you'll probably be looking at paying about the same price for either revolver. K-Frame Magnums have increased in price dramatically since they were discontinued in 2005 and $500 is not at all unreasonable for a 3" M65. While the 3" GP100 is still made, it is the least common barrel length for that model and often brings a premium when you do find one.
I don't really see ease of disassembly being a huge issue should one of the guns get wet. Both of the models you're considering are stainless steel and drying out the internals of the S&W shouldn't require much more than popping off the sideplate and perhaps giving the parts a very light coat of oil after they've dried. I've owned both S&W and Ruger revolvers and the only time I've ever had to disassemble either type was to replace springs.
Durability should only be an issue if you plan to shoot a steady diet of .357 Magnum ammunition with bullets lighter than 140gr. Light bullet magnum loadings (125gr in particular) are known to cause excessive flame cutting and erosion/cracking of the forcing cone in K-Frames so that type of ammunition is better suited to the Ruger. If, however, you plan to stick with .38 Special and/or .357 Magnum ammo with heavier bullets, either revolver will serve you well for decades and most likely be passed on to your children and grandchildren.
The GP100 is a fine gun to be sure, but it's more akin to the size of a S&W L-Frame than to a K-Frame (according to their websites, a 3" GP100 weighs 36oz while a 3" 686+ weighs 36.8oz) and some holsters and speedloaders can be used interchangeably with a GP100 and S&W L-Frame.
Ruger and S&W revolver also have a distinctly different feel and balance. A Ruger will sit lower and farther forward in your hand while a S&W will sit higher and farther back. What this translates to is a bit less muzzle rise with the Ruger and a bit less felt recoil with the S&W. Also, Ruger no longer makes the GP100 with anything but a full underlug which will give the revolver a more muzzle-heavy feel than a S&W K-Frame with a half underlug or none at all. Finally, all Ruger DA revolvers use a push-button type cylinder release latch while all S&W's with the exception of the polymer Bodyguard .38 use a thumbpiece which slides forward.
As to the trigger, I wouldn't really say that one is better than the other but they are distinctly different. S&W triggers are very smooth and consistent all the way through the pull with little or no perceptible stacking while Ruger triggers stack more noticeably just before the break. Some people like a bit of stacking and others don't, it's really just a matter of personal preference.
As to price, you'll probably be looking at paying about the same price for either revolver. K-Frame Magnums have increased in price dramatically since they were discontinued in 2005 and $500 is not at all unreasonable for a 3" M65. While the 3" GP100 is still made, it is the least common barrel length for that model and often brings a premium when you do find one.
I don't really see ease of disassembly being a huge issue should one of the guns get wet. Both of the models you're considering are stainless steel and drying out the internals of the S&W shouldn't require much more than popping off the sideplate and perhaps giving the parts a very light coat of oil after they've dried. I've owned both S&W and Ruger revolvers and the only time I've ever had to disassemble either type was to replace springs.
Durability should only be an issue if you plan to shoot a steady diet of .357 Magnum ammunition with bullets lighter than 140gr. Light bullet magnum loadings (125gr in particular) are known to cause excessive flame cutting and erosion/cracking of the forcing cone in K-Frames so that type of ammunition is better suited to the Ruger. If, however, you plan to stick with .38 Special and/or .357 Magnum ammo with heavier bullets, either revolver will serve you well for decades and most likely be passed on to your children and grandchildren.
IrishBluEyes51
New member
that GP-100 is purty...
Mr.RevolverGuy
New member
In Love with my 3inch GP100
Not a wiley clap but is still a 3inch with great balance and very accurate.
http://www.dayattherange.com/?p=1257
Not a wiley clap but is still a 3inch with great balance and very accurate.
http://www.dayattherange.com/?p=1257
Tennessee Jed
New member
I have a 3 inch S&W 65LS, and a 4 inch GP100. I love them both. I think the differences between the two revolvers are very well described above.
The only thing I can add is, when I venture into the great outdoors, I take the GP100. The extra weight of the GP100 makes the recoil a little more tolerable with the rounds I carry in the woods.
Also, there's something about the fact that S&W doesn't make the 65LS anymore that makes me a little more cautious with it, than the GP100.
The only thing I can add is, when I venture into the great outdoors, I take the GP100. The extra weight of the GP100 makes the recoil a little more tolerable with the rounds I carry in the woods.
Also, there's something about the fact that S&W doesn't make the 65LS anymore that makes me a little more cautious with it, than the GP100.
Dgludwig, I went through the very same analysis several years ago when I got seriously back into canoeing, camping and deer hunting. I ended up buying the GP100 in 6".
I like round butt Smith & Wesson and Colt revolvers for carry but I thought the GP would be a better bet for a woods gun because I like to load 180 grain ammo when I camp or hunt and the GP100 is very comfortable to shoot with full power .357 magnum loads. I also like the provision for easy field stripping of the GP100. You may never need to field strip the revolver while on a camping trip, but it's nice to know that you can do it without removing small screws, springs and other little parts. You can use the rim of a cartridge to remove the grip screw of the GP and no tools are necessary other than that. If you have a screwdriver or multi-tool, fine but if you don't, it's still fine. The Ruger is designed to be more of a survivalist or military style revolver, to be serviceable in the extreme. I'm not going to remove the side plate from a S&W or Colt revolver while in the woods or in my canoe or at night by moonlight. Some others may, but I won't.
Most of my camping is done in the fall when days are short and light is short. You want your gun to be as simple as possible in that situation. The Smith is a great gun but the Ruger gets the nod when conditions are dirty, wet and nasty.
In the fall I usually spend a few days in salmon streams with waders and I took to carrying the GP100 in an Uncle Mike's shoulder holster to keep it accessible and dry. When I hunt, I carry it in a Bianchi Cyclone leather belt holster and it feels good that way. You have been shooting a long time and you already know that the right holster makes all the difference when carrying a pistol. I believe the Bianchi Cyclone is the right holster for me to use with the GP.
At the time, I agonized over whether to buy the 4" or 6" and I reasoned that the weight difference is not great since both guns are rather large and require some type of cover garment anyway. The 6" barrel gives me a more comfortable and more confident feeling when I'm in remote areas and wide open spaces. I didn't consider the 3" at the time because a deer hunting revolver is required to have at least a 4" barrel in states where I hunt.
My experience with the 6" GP100 leads me to want a 3" version for concealed carry but I honestly don't need the 3" because I find it far easier to conceal my 2" Detective Special when I'm about town. I find the 3" GP too heavy for my every day carry but it would be fine as a camping sidearm since I'm dealing with an entirely different style of clothing in a camping situation. I don't think I could effectively conceal the 3" GP in my lightweight spring and summer business clothes.
If weight matters to you more than the other things I mentioned, then the Model 65 is the way to go since it is more streamlined then the Ruger. If you spend a lot of time on your feet while camping or hiking, this weight difference of a few ounces will be magnified with each passing hour. If you are indifferent to the extra weight, then get the Ruger.
With due respect to the venerable Model 65, If I were you, I would buy the 3" GP100 because it is 6 shot, short barreled, easy to field strip and clean and good looking. It's everything you asked for and I don't see how you would regret it. Personally, I would consider going for the Wiley Clapp version although I don't know what it costs.
I like round butt Smith & Wesson and Colt revolvers for carry but I thought the GP would be a better bet for a woods gun because I like to load 180 grain ammo when I camp or hunt and the GP100 is very comfortable to shoot with full power .357 magnum loads. I also like the provision for easy field stripping of the GP100. You may never need to field strip the revolver while on a camping trip, but it's nice to know that you can do it without removing small screws, springs and other little parts. You can use the rim of a cartridge to remove the grip screw of the GP and no tools are necessary other than that. If you have a screwdriver or multi-tool, fine but if you don't, it's still fine. The Ruger is designed to be more of a survivalist or military style revolver, to be serviceable in the extreme. I'm not going to remove the side plate from a S&W or Colt revolver while in the woods or in my canoe or at night by moonlight. Some others may, but I won't.
Most of my camping is done in the fall when days are short and light is short. You want your gun to be as simple as possible in that situation. The Smith is a great gun but the Ruger gets the nod when conditions are dirty, wet and nasty.
In the fall I usually spend a few days in salmon streams with waders and I took to carrying the GP100 in an Uncle Mike's shoulder holster to keep it accessible and dry. When I hunt, I carry it in a Bianchi Cyclone leather belt holster and it feels good that way. You have been shooting a long time and you already know that the right holster makes all the difference when carrying a pistol. I believe the Bianchi Cyclone is the right holster for me to use with the GP.
At the time, I agonized over whether to buy the 4" or 6" and I reasoned that the weight difference is not great since both guns are rather large and require some type of cover garment anyway. The 6" barrel gives me a more comfortable and more confident feeling when I'm in remote areas and wide open spaces. I didn't consider the 3" at the time because a deer hunting revolver is required to have at least a 4" barrel in states where I hunt.
My experience with the 6" GP100 leads me to want a 3" version for concealed carry but I honestly don't need the 3" because I find it far easier to conceal my 2" Detective Special when I'm about town. I find the 3" GP too heavy for my every day carry but it would be fine as a camping sidearm since I'm dealing with an entirely different style of clothing in a camping situation. I don't think I could effectively conceal the 3" GP in my lightweight spring and summer business clothes.
If weight matters to you more than the other things I mentioned, then the Model 65 is the way to go since it is more streamlined then the Ruger. If you spend a lot of time on your feet while camping or hiking, this weight difference of a few ounces will be magnified with each passing hour. If you are indifferent to the extra weight, then get the Ruger.
With due respect to the venerable Model 65, If I were you, I would buy the 3" GP100 because it is 6 shot, short barreled, easy to field strip and clean and good looking. It's everything you asked for and I don't see how you would regret it. Personally, I would consider going for the Wiley Clapp version although I don't know what it costs.