S&W 686 | Ruger GP 100 | S&W 60 | Ruger SP101 - on the range comparison

On the range comparisons of just these four revolvers - keeping in mind that we are talking just for use ON THE RANGE. In my opinion, that means for fun and skill building, or even to replicate for defensive use in the home or place of business. In other words, not for carry, concealed or otherwise.

I've owned 3 of the 4 of these in .357 Magnum, and the fourth one (GP-100) I have in a different caliber. I've shot a number of GP's in .357 Magnum, however.

I find the 686 to be the best of the four if all else is equal. It's got the size and durability, but I would swap out the OEM factory grips. If it's an old 686 with the big Magna grips, they look okay but don't feel great and they transfer far too much recoil energy. If it's a newer 686 with the Hogue monogrip, it feels pretty good but couldn't be any uglier if you pooped it out on a Friday night.

The GP-100 is a ridiculously close second place. I won't be convinced that it's any more "durable" than a 686, but I really doubt that it's any less durable. Typically, it'll cost you a little less money. The trigger is pretty darn good for what is generally considered a "lesser" gun. The older ones have a fine looking grip that feels pretty good, too. Newer ones have a horrific Hogue monogrip that just turns my stomach. NOW-- if the 686 in question is a newer revolver with the internal lock -AND- it's a 7-shot "plus" model, then I will move the GP-100 in to first place and never look back. This is a lot of gun and will last a lifetime. If I'm buying used (95% of the time I am...), I'm looking for a pre-lock 686. If I'm buying new, GP-100.

S&W Model 60 is a well-built little fireplug. But it's small. For range days, it's too small to be comfortable. It offers much more recoil than I expect from a .38 or .357 revolver, even when using .38 ammo. Mine had a great little grip that "felt" fine in the hand, but a different grip may have handled the recoil better. Mine was a three-inch, full-lug barrel and it was VERY accurate and well built, but the recoil made me sell it. I look back on it fondly -- but I don't miss it. Would have been a perfect carry gun if I were to carry a revolver. I do not.

SP-101, .357 Magnum. Much like the Model 60, for a few less dollars and a little less refined. The double-action trigger wasn't nearly as smooth and predictable. Build quality was solid, I would trust one of these without question, but I'd never buy one as a range toy or a practice gun. It's a quality carry gun, but a GP-100 is a much better choice for regular shooting.

All four are fine guns and any one of them would be a great one to own for different reasons. These four aren't far apart when it comes to utility, durability, build quality and value for the money.
 
Sevens, thanks again for your assessment. You already helped me on similar subject in the other tread and I appreciate it very much. Indeed I am looking for a range gun which could also be a defense weapon if needed (hopefully not). I do not plan to carry a gun. I don't think I could in IL even if I wanted to, but I do not want to anyway.

I spent a fair amount of time on the range target shooting (guns similar to air soft) when I was a teen and then later shooting .22 caliber rifles back in Russia. Now as I am approaching mid life crisis I started going back to range, but this time revolver is my weapon of choice. So, indeed I am looking primarily for a range gun with superb accuracy and decent comfort.

As we discussed in the other topic it looks like that in .38/357 caliber either Model 66 or Model 19 should work best for me. I am starting to look into getting one. Mean time I will be on the range that has Models 66 and 686 rental next week. I'll compare them once again for a good measure :-)
 
I have a soft spot in my heart for the S&W 686 as it was my very first hand gun. I bought it brand new back in '91 and replaced the wood grip with a Pachmyer grip right there in the store and i was very glad that i did (makes the grip smaller too). It is well-built, comfortable to shoot, and take all kinds of abuses from me and it keeps on ticking.

The 686 is a L frame so it absorbs recoil better than the K frame 66/ 19 and a heck a lot better than the SP 101/ model 60 (my experience). IMO, you can not go wrong with it as your first revolver. It carries the weight well. I've carried in with a wide belt hiking and I did not feel the weight dragging.

Did I say it is a PLEASURE to shoot full power .357 magnum out of that gun? One time I shot the 180 gr PMC hot load out of this revolver in an indoor range, made other shooters head turn for sure yet it was not punishing in my hand at all.

The 686 is just a beautiful gun with its fine curves & balance. S&W got this one right, took out the metals where is not needed and beef up where is needed.

Get one. You will pas it onto your offsprings when it comes time.
 
Smith J-Frame vs. SP101

Personally I prefer the SP101 of these two models. Loved the way the Smith felt and the trigger, but it was no fun for full house 357 ammo, and I never mastered shooting the thing accurately. Even with 38 special ammo, it just never felt right and consistency was nonexistant.

The SP101 with 4" barrel handles full house 357 ammo a lot better, and with 38 special ammo it shoots measurably better than the J Frame.

Better half has a Smith 66 with 4" barrel. It is our go-to gun for house and car. If you can get a Smith K Frame, they are a really nice size, and balance well and are quality firearms. IMO
 
Too many choices once you enter a used market...

I think I do like k-frame S&W best for fit and as I said before, I do not intend to use magnum loads, as it hardly makes any sense on the 25 yard range. So, other than for a nightstand and occasional fun rounds 357 will not be used, thus no issue with a questionable stability of k-frame with steady magnum loads feeding. Therefore, considering this is going to be a 99% target shooting gun, it looks like I have three options:

Model 14 - nice 6" barrel, great accuracy and can be found in $400 - $500 in good condition. Lacks an ability to shot 357 though.

Model 19 - as nice as model 14, but with ability to feed magnum loads occasionally and more expensive: $600 - $700 in good condition

Model 66 - stainless, which doesn't look as cool, but more practical. 4" barrel probably not as accurate for aiming as 6", but close enough, I guess. $500 - $700 in good condition

Did I miss anything else target worthy in k-frame? :-))) Thanks.
 
I own a lot of .357 revolvers including all the ones you tested (although mine in some cases have different barrel lengths than the ones you tested).

Which one is "best" is mostly a personal choice. The things that are important to you, may not be important to me. All of them are terrific revolvers. You really can't go wrong with any of them other than your own personal preferences.

Out of the revolvers you tested, I personally like the GP-100 best. It feels the best in my hand. I like the feel of the action the best. I REALLY like the fact that you can easily and quickly field strip it for an in-depth cleaning. Something that you mentioned you arn't really interested in is the terrific strength of the GP-100. I sometimes enjoy shooting max loads and I know I could shoot max loads till the day I die and the GP-100 is more than up to that task.

Then you brought up the S&W Model 14. The Model 14 was one of the first revolvers I ever owned. It was an 8 3/8" barreled version. I shot it a lot and really liked it. But, back then I sold it to finance something else I thought I HAD to have and I didn't have the money to keep both. Somewhere along the way I bought another one also in the 8 3/8" barrel length.
I you really only want to shoot targets and have no desire to shoot .357s, I think I might just go with the Model 14.
 
I have the following revolvers:

GP100, 6"
S&W 627 4"
S&W 627 5"
S&W 586 L-Comp
Python 4,6,8"
Taurus 605
S&W 442

The GP100 is a tank and it IS fun to shoot. I had a trigger job on it, and it's almost as good as my python.

It's hard to beat the action of a S&W, though. Something about the feel.
 
My first centerfire handgun was a new S&W 686-5 with a 5" barrel. It was followed by a NIB model 14-4 8", 14-4 6", 15-4 4", 586 - 38only 6".
The 686 is now DAO only with lightened springs. The rest are all factory OEM.
* With the S&Ws I have, DA on the 686 and 586 are smoother than the older K frames. SA mode are all very crisp and clean.
* 14-4 8" - Balance is off. Barrel is just too long. For whatever reason, I have the worst groups with this revolver. Not really fun to shoot but very nice to look at.
* L-frames - 5" has better balance than 6" and both are a little nose heavy.
* Accuracy (in my hands) on all but the 8" is the same with the 4" requiring just a tad more concentration. The 14-4 6" seems to be the easiest to shoot well.
* The ones I shoot the most are the 15 4", 686 5" and the 14 6".
* Most of my shooting is in SA mode except with the DAO 686. Have not shot .357 ammo in years and do not really plan on it in the future.

Already having some revolvers, I am still on a (passive) lookout for a good deal on a
1. .38 4" K frame + adjustable sights + heavy barrel -- no lock. Stainless would be nice.
2. Stainless .38 only Ruger SP101, S&W J frame, or similar -- no lock.

If I am to start over and have only one,
1st choice - 4" K frame with a heavy barrel (with or without underlug) with adjustable sights.
2nd choice - 6" K frame - model 14 or similar.
3rd choice - 3"-4" 686 or Ruger Stainless GP100 + adjustable sights.

I still do not like the S&W lock but since my revolvers are mainly for fun shooting, having the lock may not be a terrible thing.
If for defense, NO lock.
 
Thanks you guys for all the information you are willing to share. I think I start getting a general idea: one revolver is never enough :D:D:D
 
I've said it before and it'll never be my intention to "pollute" threads with it and attempt to drift any S&W revolver thread with it... but my problem with the lock is for MANY reasons, but the incredibly rare chance that it might EVER lock itself up is so far down that list that I don't even count it. For me, it's no lock all the way, but that has nothing, NOTHING to do with any manner of a defensive scenario or a lock-related "possible failure."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top