Which Gun, Which Length

Ruger GP100 or S&W 686

  • Total voters
    71
If this is a range gun, why not go 6"? To me, that length makes a perfect range gun.

As far as Ruger or S&W, you cant go wrong with either. Pick the one you loke the most and fits you best. I think S&W has a slightly better trigger but try both and see what you like best.
Click to expand...

In complete agreement except that I have read testimony that the GP100 5" like mine has better balance than the 6". I certainly like mine and shoot great with it, but have never handled or shot a 6".

On the S&W side, my 686-6 (4") seems perfectly balanced to me.

In a gun as long as a 6" barrel, I would like a 22LR Smith 617.

I don't think a 3" would balance well as a range gun, given the alternatives. I do have one though (GP100, 38 Special), but can't score as well with it as with the longer guns.

I couldn't vote, because the poll lacks context.
 
New revolvers I would rather take a chance on the ruger. Both can have very slick trigger if needed. A rp main spring will greatly improve the ruggers too. 3" or 4" ?? 4 of the 2 you listed buy I would by a 6" before ether 3 or 4" for a range or house gun. Longer sight radius . More velocity with less podwer and more barrel weight mean a more controllable revolver.

Now if you find a used 15-2 or new CZ 715 Dan Wesson !! Buy it instead. Then with the aid of EWKarms if you feel like a short and slow pistol up on the 3" barrel or 8", 10 or 12" for longer range fun.
http://www.slickguns.com/product/dan-wesson-715-revolver-357-magnum-90424
 
I would go 686 4". I love the 4" barrel. Used to own a GP100 it just never floated my boat as much as the S&W .357s I have shot.
 
I don't particularly like either one of them, but I can't say I dislike either of them either. Whichever one I bought, I wouldn't buy new. I'd haunt the used gun stores and get whichever one I could find the best price on. Same for the barrel length. Whichever one I thought felt best. They're neither one bad.
 
I give the edge to the 686, specifically the 7 shot 686+. I have 2 686+ Smiths, one with a 4" bbl and another with the 6" bbl. For your purposes I suggest the 6" because you want it for the range. I shoot a ragged hole at 25 feet with my 6" Smith and just a bit looser, about double the size with the 4" version.
Don't get me wrong, the Ruger GP100 is a terrific gun and that is what my brother chose with a 4" barrel. When we get together and shoot my 4" S&W and his GP100 side by side they basically shoot equally well. I just think Smith and Wesson currently makes the best double action revolvers. When it comes to single action revolvers I give the nod to Ruger.
 
Your question required some additional questions:

If you're only using it on the range, why are you concerned with velocity? Accuracy and velocity have very little to do with one another. Are you shooting at super long range?
Click to expand...
I guess I should further explain. The main reason I'm buying a revolver is because I don't currently own revolver, so I'd like a good revolver to add to my collection(yes, even though my name is Smith and Wesson I do not own a revolver). So right now I have no use for it other than shooting at the range. Later on down the road I may use for something else, so I'd like a wheelgun with a versatile barrel length.
 
I own both a 6" 686 PowerPort and a 6" SS GP100. Tehy are both GREAT guns. I am more accurate, can reacquire the target much faster and have a better feel of the trigger on the 686 though.

I really don't get the notion that the GP is any tougher. Is a slightly uglier woman tougher? Are semi-ugly trucks tougher?
 
I've had a 686 and several GP100's, and of the two I'd choose the GP100, mainly because it's better built and while it's true the S&W's trigger will be a little better, the GP100 trigger isn't bad at all. Both look great, but for the money I think you're better off with the GP100. Both are more accurate than you are.
 
I really don't get the notion that the GP is any uglier. Is a slightly tough woman uglier? Are semi-tough trucks uglier?
 
I would get the 4" GP100. I, personally, like the looks and function of the GP100 over a 686. The GP100's beefy frame, that has no side plate or lock hole, looks cleaner to me. The way the barrel on the GP100 has that slick angle on the end that makes it look mean just works. I like the quick change front sight on the GP and I love the push button cylinder release that Ruger uses.

And I don't buy the "S&W trigger will be better" argument. I've tried them side by side and I didn't think the Smith had anything over the Ruger.. Maybe in the past this was true, but compare a recent manufactured model from both companies today and make up your own mind.

That all said, The 686 is a nice gun too.... and in a world were the GP100 didn't exist , the S&W 686 (or more likely the 586) would be my choice over the next medium framed .357 revolver.
 
I really don't get the notion that the GP is any uglier. Is a slightly tough woman uglier? Are semi-tough trucks uglier?
Click to expand...

My 5" GP100 is very pleasing to me. However, I think the sexy full lug barrel distracts from the aesthetically crude sharp angles on the gun. Those sharp corners are hard on holsters, make it look clunky and heavier than it really is, and leave a sort of unfinished look to the thing.
 
And I don't buy the "S&W trigger will be better" argument. I've tried them side by side and I didn't think the Smith had anything over the Ruger.. Maybe in the past this was true, but compare a recent manufactured model from both companies today and make up your own mind.
Click to expand...

There will be resistance on that one. I have a 4" S&W 686, a GP100, and a Security Six, and the Smith trigger is by far the more impressive. They all shoot well, though.
 
Join Date: April 26, 2014
Posts: 42 I really don't get the notion that the GP is any uglier. Is a slightly tough woman uglier? Are semi-tough trucks uglier?
Click to expand...

I think so. Beauty is certainly in the eye of the beholder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top