So /k/ I come to you with a question. I'm in the market for a 6 inch 357 magnum revolver and have narrowed it down to the Ruger GP100 and the S&W 686+. I like both, but I'm leaning towards the S&W because it seems more refined and has an extra shot. What I'm worried about is that damn "Hillary Hole" on the smith. I've only heard of the lock failing once and that wasn't even proved it was the lock in the first place. Am I worried about nothing or should I just stick to the ruger? I'm also looking at the GP100 Match Champion but that's a 4 inch and I'm really wanting a 6 inch to utilize that 357 goodness better. So which one is best in your opinion?
Personally I lean towards Ruger.
>lots of insurance for retard-tier handloads
>much simpler internals, you can actually take it apart in the field
>Not as polished, but that's perfectly fixable.
Personally I have a Security Six and I have in fact once taken it apart using only a dime.
Good points, Ruger's customer support is top notch. I also like how easy it is to change the front sight to whatever you like. The price is also more attractive but not really an issue. That 6 inch GP100 is certainly a looker too in its own right. Fuck I wish S&W did away with those fucking locks.
Same , fuck if our gp100 survived 1k+ of retards handling them ( majority anyways since we started letting in 18 year Olds in corrections ) there isn't much that can destroy them.
I vote for the Smith. I have a 686+ with a 3" barrel, and I think it's a good carry gun. I haven't had any problems with the hillary hole, and I actually kinda like it.
The GP100 isn't bad either, but I think it's pretty ugly, so that's why I don't like it.
That she is.....that she is.
I would, but no store has them in stock. Even tried used gun places like pawn shops and stuff. No luck. Are they still making them?
Probably going to end up with the Ruger to be honest.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I suppose. The 686 is more attractive but the GP is not ugly by any means to me.
I personally want too buy one for myself but already got layaway on another gun atm(S&W model 49)
>Are they still making them?
They do, they just aren't the main like S&W is trying to push like the 686 is. They're part of the "retro" or "classic" line.
I was in your place not too long ago and basically the Ruger is the more economic and hardy choice. That said, I think Rugers are just plain ugly and unless you plan on really abusing and feeding a constant diet of heavy 357 loads through your gun, there's minimal chance you will ever bust one or the other, so I'd still rather have a S&W.
Another option is to comb gunbroker and armslist for older 5 or 686s without the internal lock. You can fairly often find them for around the same price or not much more as the current offerings and in my opinion you get a better gun.
Again, I was in your same place and after my research I would have rather looked for an older Smith, though the Ruger was my choice if that option failed.
saying you like ruger is hardly saying you hate smith.
cute persecution complex though
I have the S&W 686 plus.
I actually don't really like it all that much. It's my first revolver and first .357, my main complaints..
Trigger is absolute garbage. Double action trigger is like trying to pull a train, single action is a hair trigger that will release if you even think about pulling.
Front sights suck.
Stock grips suck.
Also was unreasonably expensive for a .357 magnum revolver, even with its 7 round cylinder. Got it for like $700, got lucky.
Been considering selling it and getting a Ruger .44 magnum or something else instead.
RRRRREEEEEEEEEEEE STOP HATING ON SMITH & WESSON!!!
I'm buying a Smith and Wesson atm(and plan on getting many more) but I'm thinking my next revolver should be a .357(smith I'm getting is only .38) and I'm thinking of a 3' Ruger sp 101(like Harvey Keitel in Bad Lieutenant) should I go for it in a few months?
Seconded on the trigger. My friend bought one a while back, the trigger is horrible. I have an older taurus 66 with a way better trigger. This just adds to the price of the 686, a trigger job isn't optional, the stock one is so bad I'd call it defective. I love revolvers, I have a smith (old model 19-3) that isn't shit like this. I''m going to be in the market for a new 357, but when he got his 686 smith just fell off the radar for me. Terrible.
Maybe I'll change my mind once he gets a trigger job, but that's getting awful expensive. I've shot a gp100 and found it very pleasant even with wacky handloads. It's heavy but balanced better, 686 feels too light in the whole butt area, the weight on the barrel (6") makes it feel heavier for being so front heavy.
Gun off topic but was wanting too get a Charter Arms .44 special Bulldog, found a place with a damn good price on them and they even let you pay within 90 days, what your opinions on one?
The older ones are okay, but I've heard that the new ones Charter Arms makes aren't all that durable. They'll shoot fine but don't expect it to last if you wanna put hundreds of rounds through them every weekend at the range. Other than that not bad, at least they're cheap.
Hmmm not really sure. Didn't even know they had that model honestly. Either way I don't know much on them. Do some research online and see what you come up with is all I can say.
Would you know how too? There schematics online? Blueprints? Someo F those can be an arm and a leg with some extra on the side but saw a few go around 1800-1900 on gunbroker and gunsamerica recently so maybe keep a eye out.
Old model 19>GP100>S&W 686
Ruger wins on price really. Don't really see what new S&W has going for it. Handled a JM 8 shot S&W once and the trigger was miles behind my '68 model 10.
I would love too get a 19 if I could find one, getting a nice like new 49 soon but was wondering, which should I get, a model 10 or 36? How a Colt police /detective special for that matter?
If you're buying a .357 for life, get a GP100, if you want a .38 Special, get an S&W there are plenty of police trade-in Model 10s available. I bought this one recently from J&G Sales.
Model 19 is a stupendous weapon, but I usually never shoot .38's at the range. So my steady diet of hot .357 magnums means GP100>Model 19 for me. Just based on that fact alone. Otherwise I'd love one. Hell I'd still want one, I just wouldn't put thousands of magnums through that forcing cone.
Easier to clean.
Better double action trigger.
Can twirl the cylinder via the ejecting rod
They can charge more for the 686 because it's a better gun OP.
cheap old smiths are fun for .38 special, just fucking don't put +P or .357 in them unless you want to lose a finger
my voter for a dedicated .357 would be the ruger, all day erry day. people also say they are ugly, but I think theyre great looking. they have a certain charm to them, like the old hi point carbines with the planet of the apes stocks
I did forget how easy it is to remove the cylinder on smiths. Something very appealing about just having to unscrew one screw. I don't necessarily think the Ruger is hard to disassemble either but still.......... At the end of the day I think I'm going with the GP100. I want this gun to last forever even if I shoot an unlimited amount of magnums through it. Thanks for the help deciding everyone.
I enjoy mine quite a bit. Somewhat wish I got a .44mag instead, but it's fine for what I want of a revolver.
I tried the 686 and the gp100 and the GP felt better in my hand. A little rougher around the edges, and a little heavy of a trigger, but I like taking shit apart.
I got a blued 6" GP. Hiviz front sight is on order and a trigger job will happen when I get around to it. They're both awesome guns.
This. I want a 6 inch barrel, so if they made a match champion in a 6 inch I'd be all over it.
They have a Match Champion with adjustable sights now. It's pretty nice.
Oh if I had the cash for that.....
Yup, just went today and put in an order for a 6 inch GP100. Very excited.
Yep, it's a great fiber optic if that's your thing.
Mmmm I kinda wanted the blued but went for the stainless for ease of cleaning. I still might get the blued one day.
I don't dislike it cause I think it will malfunction ion. I dislike it because it exists. With all the shady gun grabber bulshit S&W has gone along with over the years I will buy my guns elsewhere.
I have never had a Smith and Wesson lock up because of its Hillary hole, or at all for that matter, but I have had an LCR lock up on me after I short-stroked the trigger. I had to send it back to Ruger to get them to un-fuck the mechanism, which had completely seized up. Ruger does have good customer service, but do you really want to depend your life on a gun that might need to go back to the manufacturer for service in the middle of a gunfight?
My father has a Smith and Wesson 329PD (the scandium-frame .44 magnum Smith and Wesson which is supposedly notorious for having its internal lock break during firing). He's probably put 800-1200 full power .44 magnum rounds through that gun, which is A LOT for that gun, btw (this isn't the kind of gun to plink with) and it's still working fine.
Not bashing Smiths but why in the hell would you buy a gun that can't take a steady diet of whatever caliber it was meant to shoot? If 1200 rounds is considered alot for that gun I would not blow a good chunk of change on it. Just saying....