Ruger GP100 or S&W 686 Which one?

This is a discussion on Ruger GP100 or S&W 686 Which one? within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Well to tell you the truth I have shot loose a S&W 686 and a S&W 586 so bad that they would spit lead out ...

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 75
Like Tree7Likes

Thread: Ruger GP100 or S&W 686 Which one?

  1. #31
    VIP Member
    Array TWO GUNS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NH
    Posts
    2,560
    Well to tell you the truth I have shot loose a S&W 686 and a S&W 586 so bad that they would spit lead out the cylinder.I have never done this with any of my GP100's. Don't get me wrong as I love S&W's but I don't think they are as tough as the GP100.
    Attached Images
    Have Fun and Shoot Straight !!

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,714
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragman View Post
    I have an escalade and it has both. lol
    Yea, but do you actually go off roading in it, or is it just for looks?

    I pick the GP100 because you can do darn near anything with it. It is built for whatever you can put into the cylinder. You won't find any ammo manufacturers posting warnings about not using their products in the Ruger. Warnings against S&W are definately not unheard of.

    Does S&W build a good gun, yes. Is it my choice based on your criteria, nope. The only thing that S&W does better out of the box is the trigger. But if you don't like the trigger on the Ruger you can always have that worked on. You can't make a S&W as stout as a Ruger no matter what you do to it.
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  4. #33
    Distinguished Member Array Dragman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Vandergrift PA
    Posts
    1,275
    Quote Originally Posted by farronwolf View Post
    Yea, but do you actually go off roading in it, or is it just for looks?

    I pick the GP100 because you can do darn near anything with it. It is built for whatever you can put into the cylinder. You won't find any ammo manufacturers posting warnings about not using their products in the Ruger. Warnings against S&W are definately not unheard of.

    Does S&W build a good gun, yes. Is it my choice based on your criteria, nope. The only thing that S&W does better out of the box is the trigger. But if you don't like the trigger on the Ruger you can always have that worked on. You can't make a S&W as stout as a Ruger no matter what you do to it.
    Yes I take it off road its my hunting vehicle.
    For the money that you will spend making the Rugers trigger as nice as the S&W's you will have to stone yourself and buy a trigger kit. or send it to a gun smith. at that rate the S&W is cheaper. Also I agree the Ruger is a TANK, but how much is needed?? I fully believe the smith is plenty durable enough for any normal usage I can think of.
    To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women

  5. #34
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    9,411
    I have to wonder if the unoriginal, very tired, and overused cliche: "Rugers-are-built-like-a-tank," will ever go away. They are not built like tanks. They are built like Rugers, that is to say that their main components are cast rather than forged. The Ruger GP100 is fine but is not really any more durable and trouble-free than a classic Smith & Wesson Model 686.

    Besides, one won't be hearing that a Smith & Wesson is almost as smooth as a Ruger.
    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  6. #35
    VIP Member Array wmhawth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    4,240
    Quote Originally Posted by farronwolf View Post
    Yea, but do you actually go off roading in it, or is it just for looks?

    I pick the GP100 because you can do darn near anything with it. It is built for whatever you can put into the cylinder. You won't find any ammo manufacturers posting warnings about not using their products in the Ruger. Warnings against S&W are definately not unheard of.

    Does S&W build a good gun, yes. Is it my choice based on your criteria, nope. The only thing that S&W does better out of the box is the trigger. But if you don't like the trigger on the Ruger you can always have that worked on. You can't make a S&W as stout as a Ruger no matter what you do to it.
    As I have said, I own and shoot both S&Ws and Rugers and have for a number of years. In truth, I've never broken either of them. I see nothing that would have me believe that my GP100 is more stout or more durable than my 686+. At the same time the 686 is nicer to handle and shoot. Out of curiosity, I wonder if you have reference to any kind of testing that has been done that might substantiate a claim that a S&W can't be as "stout" as a Ruger.

  7. #36
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,714
    As I stated, do you know of any ammunition manufacturers that recomend not shooting their ammo in Rugers, but suggest it is safe for S&W?

    I can post some links if you like stating the opposite.
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  8. #37
    VIP Member Array Cuda66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    minnesota
    Posts
    2,199
    I have both. The GP100 is a nice pistol, yes...but I far prefer my 686. The trigger is a lot better, I would have to give it an edge in accuracy (which may be due to the better tirgger), and after thousands of rounds that I've put through it (and I have no idea how many went through before--I bought it well-used) it still locks up just as tight as my GP100.

    However, I don't think the OP will go wrong with either of them.
    There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men.--RAH

    ...man fights with his mind; the weapons are incidental.--Jeff Cooper


    There is a reason they try and make small bullets act like big bullets--Glockmann10mm

  9. #38
    Member Array ladder13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragman View Post
    I agree the Ruger is a TANK, but how much is needed?? I fully believe the smith is plenty durable enough for any normal usage I can think of.
    Exactly, who needs a tank when a Lexus will do just fine.

  10. #39
    Member Array SC Tiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Seneca, SC
    Posts
    211
    I have owned both. I had a GP100 get stolen from me and I replaced it with a S&W 686 which I still have. This was because, at the time, some of the products coming out of Ruger looked like they were built by a 5 year old (not to say that Smith hasn't let a bad gun or two out). Ruger has this under control now it seems (I've since bought a Vaquero .44 Mag and an LCP). I honestly don't know which I prefer but the Smith has the better trigger and I don't think the Ruger is THAT much stronger. Both were very accurate. I shoot the Smith better than I did the Ruger but I'm a better shot now than I was back then so I don't know how much that tells you.

    I may snap up a GP100 (or a good used Security Six if I could find it) though once the financial situation allows it.

  11. #40
    Distinguished Member Array alachner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    1,232
    I think that it is a hard choice since both are fantastic revolvers. Nonetheless, I would pick the Smith & Wesson 686 for only three reasons: 1) it does not have the stupid "Warning: Read Safety Manual" etched on the side of the frame like the Ruger does, 2) it does not have that transfer bar safety mechanism that the Ruger has and which makes a funky sound when you shake the handgun, and 3) the finish on the S&W 686 is much nicer than on the Ruger. Nonetheless, you cannot go wrong with either one so just buy whatever feels best, has the best price and appeals more to you.
    "If you carry a gun, people will call you paranoid. That's ridiculous... If I have a gun, what in the hell do I have to be paranoid for?" [Clint Smith - Thunder Ranch]

  12. #41
    Senior Member Array ICTsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    911
    So MichSteve, 40 posts in, we been any help, or you just enjoying the Coke/Pepsi fight?
    I'm not a lawyer or a LEO, just a pantload with a computer.

  13. #42
    Senior Member Array MichSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    507
    Yes, I know that it is a personal preference as to which gun is the best for an individual, I guess your Coke/Pepsi debate is a good analogy.

    Right now I like my 642, and when I ask why it does come down to the feel in my hand, the trigger is alright and I have gotten used to it. The 642 seems easier to conceal than the Kahr PM9, which really is all about the rounded design of the 642.

    It will come down to the feel of each in my hand and the trigger, I do not like the lock on the 686's but not a deal breaker. Neither will be a CCW, just a range and home defense gun.

  14. #43
    Member Array sinzitu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    157
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragman View Post
    For the money that you will spend making the Rugers trigger as nice as the S&W's you will have to stone yourself and buy a trigger kit. or send it to a gun smith. at that rate the S&W is cheaper.
    Not true. $10 Wolff Spring kit and install it yourself. Done.

    Both are fine guns and either will serve the OP for a lifetime+

  15. #44
    Distinguished Member Array Dragman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Vandergrift PA
    Posts
    1,275
    Quote Originally Posted by sinzitu View Post
    Not true. $10 Wolff Spring kit and install it yourself. Done.

    Both are fine guns and either will serve the OP for a lifetime+
    I have installed one and it still isn't a S&W they still have a little travel and creep that the smith doesn't
    To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women

  16. #45
    Distinguished Member Array Dragman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Vandergrift PA
    Posts
    1,275
    Quote Originally Posted by ICTsnub View Post
    So MichSteve, 40 posts in, we been any help, or you just enjoying the Coke/Pepsi fight?
    YEP coke and pepsi S&W is coke and ruger is pepsi. Did you know the #1 rated soft drink in the USA is Coke, the #2 is Diet coke, and in 3rd is pepsi. haha just saying.
    To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

686 or gp100
,

686 vs gp100

,
gp100 or 686
,

gp100 vs 686

,
ruger gp100 or s&w 686
,
ruger gp100 price
,

ruger gp100 vs 686

,

ruger gp100 vs s&w 686

,

ruger gp100 vs smith and wesson 686

,
s&w 686 vs gp100
,

s&w 686 vs ruger gp100

,
smith and wesson 686 vs ruger gp100
Click on a term to search for related topics.