Ruger Stronger Than S&W?????

Go to:

www.colt.com

The Anaconda and Python have been deleted. I'm guessing that Colt is so slammed with thousands of backorders on each that they decided to delete it from the catalog until they catch up. :D
 
Boats,

That's the one. :) But the last page contains Tamara's post. Of course nwobhm's post here seems to point in that direction too. Have fun.

.44mag
 
Politics are Irrelevant in a discussion about a guns quality and performance. Helllo but both smith and wesson and ruger have had negative publicity politically at some point. who cares now. smith is owned by a different company and Bill Ruger is dead. Now judge on the basis of the product, personally I love smith and wesson products for being smith and wesson products and Ruger products for being Ruger products.
 
Smith and Wesson only loads? NOT!!

http://www.magnumresearch.com/Expan...ctCode=BFR500SW
Click to expand...

Right and hence there are also NO Ruger ONLY loads. Because TC's can use them too. In fact, the Ruger ONLY 45LC loads are history now because of the smaller NM Vaq. What does that model do to the strength of Rugers in general?

I do believe the title of this forum is Ruger Stronger Than S&W?????
Click to expand...

Hmmm.. and I wonder why the smaller NM Vaquero Ruger cannot handle hot 45LC loads? Could it be that because all they did was make their guns bigger? Now that they are the same size as their contemporaries they are just as weak? So the 500 is HUGE. It's the Ruger school of gun design at work. Make it bigger (and unwieldy)

For those who feel the 500 S&W is the most powerful pistol, take a peak. The .50 Alaskan/500 Martin in a pistol.

http://www.singleactions.com/500Martin.pdf
Click to expand...

Oh, a custom job in an obscure caliber. Surely you can do better than that?
 
Ya know, both Smith and Ruger have dirty laundry, but both also pour money into the shooting sports or causes. Ruger with their NRA monies and Smith with all those guns they auction off to fund shooting teams.

All this fan boy talk aside, if S&W disappeared tomorrow and I needed a new gun, I will buy a Ruger before any Euro product.
 
My S&W Mod 649 Bodyguard 2 1/2" Stainless

In my department, I'd say its a split choice between Ruger and S&W. My opinion only, is that some of the younger guys pick Ruger because of the price. Ruger, to me, was always in second place because of the quality issue. I have owned my S&W for about 5 yrs and train with it almost weakly. I traded my Glock 26 for it our our local PD gunshop because it was too bulky. The 649 was slim and just made more sense to me as a backup weapon, for up close and personal communication. Today at the range I was very pleased to see I was making very well-placed headshots at the 15 yrd line, with my own 38 +p and .357 Magnum loads. For duty I carry 39 +p+ Federal Hydroshocks. My buddy had recently bought one of those Ultra Light Rugers. My argument was I could at least knock the booger-eatin' moron out with a strike against the head if I ran out of bullets. Really, it's all about personal preference. My club range will let you shoot, and even rent a gun before you buy it. Whatever feels good for you is what it comes down to. Don't know enough about Ruger. I hope this helps, Bill
 
For myself (and probably the vast majority of handgun shooters) I don't enjoy shooting the hottest load I can stuff into my .44 mag or .45 Colt revolvers. The recoil and blast is not enjoyable to me. And I don't hunt with my handguns. So I don't give a hoot about which revolver has the ultimate strength or lifespan under the heaviest loads. Sheesh... the average gun owner hardly even shoots his guns!

But I get a great deal of pleasure shooting moderate to light loads in these big bore calibers. Unless one simply must shoot the hottest loads available in big bore handguns, the Smith and Ruger guns are both quite up to the task, so what's the point with "ultimate" strength?

It's like picking between two beautiful girls and selecting one of them over the other simply because she's a little stronger... if they both flip your switch, the strength factor generally doesn't really matter. (I do understand that the handgun hunter may be seeking ultimate power and strength, but that's a completely separate category of use which doesn't apply to most of us.) ;-)=

So what if gun brand A might need some parts replaced at 100,000 rounds and brand B might be able to go to 120,000 rounds before replacing some parts. What counts is how much you like shooting it, how much pleasure it brings you. Would you really even get close to using the gun to anywhere near it's lifespan?

Another example, let's just say for example that a Nissan Altima can go 275,000 miles before major repairs, but a Toyota Avalon typically needs major repairs at 250,000... would you buy the Altima and prefer driving it for all those miles just to get that extra 25,000 miles out of it... if you even owned it anywhere near that long? Either one will get you there reasonably well, but there are differences! I'd take the Avalon myself, and enjoy the nicer ride all along the way... who cares if the ultimate lifespan is slightly different? Or buy both cars and let them share the wear! ;-)=
 
It may surprise many but the cylinder on the S&W .45 Colt is the same diameter as the Ruger Blackhawk. The webs (between chambers) and outside chamber wall are also the same. So basically the Ruger and S&W cylinders are identical in strength and dimension. We recommend handloads for the Rugers single action in .45 Colt caliber to 32,000 PSI levels.
Click to expand...

From the quote you provided.

S&W does not heat treat their guns???????, what year was that 1929???????

And since when did Magnum research make Ruger revolvers???????

Personaly I dont shoot loads capable of blowing up or destroying any gun I own. If I needed to shoot a powerful round out of a handgun, I've got a thompson contender for that.
 
Ruger casts the frames for the BFR.

I like both and I'll buy both.

Heck, if a standard .44 magnum isn't poweful enough for you, why try to overload it? Just buy a .454 or something and have at it.

Since when is a .44 Magnum NOT enough for hunting.
I love how a new, high-powered gun comes out and it's "this gun is too powerful for any practical purposes", then the next evolution comes up with more power, and last year's "too powerful" gun is now not making the grade.
 
The only acceptable hunting handgun is the S&W in .500. .454 is just a whimp. My favorite rifle is in .50bmg, cuz everything else just wont go through tank armor. You know, tank armor is a very dangerous presence when you go hunting, and everyone should be able to protect themselves from tank armor.
 
Tuff handguns

Back in the early 80's I was assigned to the training bureau at my agency. I had the opportunity to go to both the S&W and Ruger armorer's school. The Ruger class was held at our academy range. There were 21 Officers from different agencies attending. We each built from scratch 4 Ruger revolvers. They were stainless steel and we got the frames and then fitted all the parts, triggers, hammers, etc. to complete a weapon. This was done under the instruction of a Ruger gunsmith. One day the Ruger Director of Law Enforcement sales showed up and said he wanted to give us a demostration. We went out side and he took one of the weapons that had been built in class and threw it up in the air and let it drop on the cement. He then showed us the weapon still functioned by placing a 38 round in the weapon and firing it down range. We then each took a turn throwing the weapon against a block wall, or in the air and letting the weapon crash on the cement. Before is was over the wood grips broke off, front sight came off, the hammer spur was destroyed. There were deep abrasion over the entire weapon, but it never fail to fire. Again each time the weapon was tested and the cylinder never failed to open. It was truely an amazing test of the strenght of the weapon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top