Which is more durable: 2.5" S&W 66 or 2.25" SP101

. After shooting all of my small and medium frame revolvers, I have come to the conclusion that I will like the feel and balance of a large frame 4" more than any revolver that I own.
Click to expand...

I think you would apreciate the M-28 Highway Patrolman Gary. I carry mine as my duty piece.
 
RogerC,

"I would think that a pre-agreement
model 66 would have a slight edge due in part to a smoother
double-action. "

Huh?

The "agreement" has some bearing on the trigger pull?

Not.
Click to expand...

I'd've phrased it differently; something like "I would think that a pre-cost-cutting, ease-of-manufacturing-cheapened, crappy-flatnose-hammer, MIM-parts-having Model 66...". Better? ;)
 
RogerC,

The Queen speaks!!
Click to expand...

Wow! Zero-to-personal-insults in one post! A new record.

I can show you plenty of "post agreement" guns, as you call them, that have great triggers.
Click to expand...

I didn't call them "post-agreement" guns; you did. As a matter of fact, I haven't used the word "agreement" or even mentioned it. I'm discussing action types, here. Yes, I've seen quite a few with very satisfactory triggers; however, on average, the new action is less amenable to a good out-of-the-box trigger than the old one. Bowling-pin and bullseye guys pay a premium for the old-style actions over the new ones for a reason, y'know...
 
Hmmmm. Lessseeeee.

The S&W.:cool: If and when you are one of the select few to "shoot it loose", or "wear it out", a trip back to the factory will get you back up-and-running.;)

I like what lonegunman said about how the Ruger owners talk-up durability to compensate for the mediocre triggers.:D
 
SP-101

To return to the original question, durability between a Smith 66 and a Ruger SP101, the more durable certainly is the Ruger. However, respectfully suggest the Smith is likely more-than-adequately durable for most (almost all ??) shooters. Further, both are excellent snubbies. My suggestion is fire both and pick the one with which YOU feel most comfortable.
 
I have both and I think that either would make a fine carry gun.

The Ruger is a bit stronger and would stand up to a steady diet of magnum loads a little better.

The S&W is smoother and carries one more round.

Choose whichever one feels better to you, if you are fortunate enough to be able to try both in advance.

Otherwise, buy both. You can't go wrong THAT way! :D
 
I have had both. I would much prefer the S&W. As far as your question, however, the Ruger is stronger. The Smith is plenty strong and much smoother. Watch-Six
 
How do we know Ruger is the stronger of the two guns? I hear a lot of claims made on the internet and can see for myself that there appears to be more metal in the ruger. What documented tests have been done to bear this out? I have heard some pretty ridiculous claims from non-scientific sources, but never the documentation from a test conducted with unbiased protocols. Inquiring minds (troublemakers like me) want to know.

As far as the relative durability of the two, I can't see any practical difference. If I could afford thousands and thousands of dollars for enough hot ammo to wear one or the other out, I can easily afford to buy two or three new guns to keep replacing the ones that get "shot" out.
 
I've got an SP101. Super sweet carry gun. Rough trigger at first that smooths out nicely in a very short amount of time. Very accurate, no qualms about shooting magnums through it.

The S&W 66 is a nice gun but I agree with a poster above who said if you're going to step up to that size, look at the S&W 686 +. Stronger gun and seven shots.
 
Thanks for all the replies!

I decided to go with a 3" SP101 in .357, due to the size of the gun, and it's touted durability.

catmath 1911
 
I hear a lot of people say Ruger triggers smooth out quickly, but I always wonder if they really smooth out, or if people just get used to them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top