July 27th, 2007 11:00 AM
All this "Ruger" talk?
Everytime I read comparisons of the GP-100 and the S&W686, Ruger is always said to be "built like a tank", "indestructable", "a real workhorse", etc, etc.
I mean comeon!
Are they driving railroad spikes with it to come to that conclusion?
And it's strength, like all things, really boils down to it's weakest links.
Like a spring or some small inner component.
When deciding between the two, I went with the 686+ because I liked the feel, the trigger and the reputation.
But in a regular lifetime of use, how has the Ruger come to be known as some sort of Uber-gun, "stronger" than anything else out there?
July 27th, 2007 11:04 AM
typically , Ruger pistols seem to be built larger, thicker heavier than other brands of pistols. also the big , blocky shape of many of their guns lend to this analogy.
"In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." Thomas Jefferson
Nemo Me Impune Lacesset
July 27th, 2007 11:07 AM
I prefer the feel of the 686 but regard the one-piece frame of the Ruger marginally stronger than Smith with sideplate. The Ruger also has cylinder notches offset from chamber centers - again a potential increase in strength.
Conclusion - the Ruger will probably take the top loads with an edge of robustness and possibly too may not loosen as fast over time. Small differences maybe but if we did a head to head with each gun over a huge ammo thruput, of hot loads ... chances are the Ruger might win.
Beyond that - what the heck, it's only mass opinion, maybe amplified by some ''legend''.
Chris - P95
NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member.
"To own a gun and assume that you are armed
is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!."
- a portal for 2A links, articles and some videos.
July 27th, 2007 11:17 AM
Ruger Super Redhawks and their previous generation single action revolvers were capable of handling pressures that other revolvers can't. Reloading manuals actually have 'Ruger only' loads in them. I think a lot of that toughness reputation is based on that.
“Freedom is the sure possession of those alone who have the courage to defend it.” ~Pericles of Athens
Primary Carry - Colt Commander .45 in a Brommeland Max-Con V
July 27th, 2007 11:48 AM
1943 - 2009
Does the phrase "marketing hype" come to mind?
Ruger is always said to be "built like a tank", "indestructable", "a real workhorse", etc, etc.
When you’re wounded and left on Afghanistan’s plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Just roll to your rifle and blow out your brains,
And go to your God like a soldier.
July 27th, 2007 11:51 AM
It is part marketing and part rep. Ruger first made its name making strong reliable guns. it has kept the good relibility rep.
“You can sway a thousand men by appealing to their prejudices quicker than you can convince one man by logic.”
― Robert A. Heinlein,
July 27th, 2007 12:28 PM
Originally Posted by DasBoot
Actually, a couple guys did some training for Ruger at there facility. When they went up there they had in a display case a GP that was sent in by a customer. The barrel had been cut to show the inside of the barrel and inside where 10 squib loads stacked up. A guy bought the gun. Fired 10 shots through it with no hits on his target, after the first squib was barrelly sticking out the front, while the last squib had locked up the cylinder. The barrel was cross sectioned and had no visible bulges or cracks externaly. Internally, not so good. The guy apparently sent it back with a locked cylinder, inside was 4 fired cases and 2 unfired cases, all head stamped .357 magnum. Kind of says alot about the GP.
“Are you a thermometer or a thermostat, do you reflect or become what is happening in the room or do you change the atmosphere, reset the temperature when you come into the room”?--Chuck Swindoll
Its not about guns...Its about Freedom!
July 27th, 2007 01:25 PM
Everyone who I know (about 8 people) who has owned a Ruger P-Series no matter what caliber have all had to send thiers back for repair. Except for two of them, and they dont shoot their pistols that often.
It has always been a stove pipe or extraction problem too. Now, this is totally un scientific, and YMMV. But for me, I dont feel safe putting my life on the line with a Ruger.
The revolvers on the other hand, I have never experience or even heard of problems with.
Primary Carry Gun: Sig Sauer 229~R (.40cal w/ Golden Saber JHP's)
July 27th, 2007 02:59 PM
The "trigger and feel" are some of the reasons the 686 is more "fragile". Now that term is subjective, but police and corrections deaprtments that have high-volume quals do more maintenance on S&W. The frame of the Ruger is heavier and 1-piece, the aforementioned cylinder-boring and heavy-walled barrels, and lastly, the beefy top strap.
Originally Posted by DasBoot
I've owned both, and like both. The Smiths are easier (much, MUCH!) to get a good action on, but if I was going to be dropped in the boondocks, with a weapon that had to do the job with extreme neglect being dropped, knocked and hammered- no discussion: Ruger.
July 27th, 2007 03:07 PM
Buffalo Bore uses a GP100 for its hot ammo tests.
Good testimonial for me.
"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."
- Sir Winston Churchill
July 27th, 2007 04:18 PM
If you want confirmation of that, consider how covetous of the Ruger name they are. You will pretty much never see the logo "Ruger" without it being accompanied closely by a large "®" -- everywhere.
Originally Posted by Captain Crunch
I find it very off-putting. It's a drag on the aesthetics of the logo.
Now, you look at a GLOCK, and they understand that everyone else understands that it's THEIR logo and you're not allowed to steal it! They don't feel the need to put ® everywhere.
So when I see that all over Ruger guns, it makes me think they're about name first and second, probably quality next. Is this empirical stuff I'm talkin'? Of course it is not. But a feeling's a feeling.
July 27th, 2007 06:17 PM
I have two Rugers, and no S&Ws (yet). The reason I bought these two revolvers is because I wanted something that could take heavy handloads in stride, be carried outdoors without worry, be accurate and reliable, and not prohibitively expensive.
I don't think for a second that a Ruger revolver is better than another. They are heavier, and easy to find in stainless steel. The automatics I have no personal experience with, but I think they're ugly and wouldn't want one.
July 27th, 2007 06:24 PM
Very qualitative discussion topic. My Ruger (Stainless Steel Service Six 4" .357) was my 90 yr old Dad's. It rode around under the seat of his Maule Rocket (bush plane) in Alaska for many years. Was wet many times as he hauled fish from sand bars in the Yukon River to the cannery each summer. Left there stored (ignored)in the plane all winter each year for 8-10 yrs. When he gave it to me this year it had rust and pitting, was "rusted " stuck to the formerly wet leather holster. I was fairly sure that all the insides would be ruined. I put some light machine oil on the moving parts and moved the trigger, cyl and hammer to see if they were movable. Everything worked. Loaded it with .38s and shot 50 rds without a hitch. Loaded .357s and shot 50 more. Perfect. So I got out the 400 grit, Dremel, 600 grit etc polished it all up pretty. Cleaned and oiled the innards, bought it a new pretty rubber grip. It looks and works like new. Now it (and my Dad) will be on my night stand as long as I have a night stand.
July 27th, 2007 11:10 PM
Just a personal opinion but Ruger revolvers have always left me cold.
I'd rather drive my Dodge 1/2 ton pickup than one of these.
I prefer the more refined Smith & Wesson and Colt revolvers to the ones that are "built like a tank".
July 28th, 2007 12:01 AM
My P-89 is 10+ years old and has seen I don't know how many rounds go through it. In that time, I've had 2, yes 2, problems. Both were eject issues with reloads. This rather hefty chunk-o-metal shoots the same no matter if I just serviced it or it's been stuffed in various places during a 2 week trip through the SW. Not a competition shooter mind you, but always consistant.
Law without force is impotent.
By Tally XD in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: July 14th, 2010, 09:14 PM
By HiFreq47 in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
Last Post: May 17th, 2010, 08:59 AM
By socuban in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Last Post: May 18th, 2008, 05:58 PM
By JD in forum General Firearm Discussion
Last Post: December 28th, 2007, 01:30 PM
By peacefuljeffrey in forum General Firearm Discussion
Last Post: October 24th, 2007, 10:46 AM
Search tags for this page
ruger handgun read owners manual stamped in barrel
ruger talk forum
rugertalk pistol safe
Click on a term to search for related topics.
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors