Author Topic: 686 or GP 100 4 inch, which one? (Read 1827 times)

KF9VH · « **on:** February 16, 2005, 10:24:07 AM »

I want a general purpose wheel gun for carry in the woods and house gun. I am looking at the 686 and GP 100 in a 4 inch barrel. The Ruger is around $100 less and was wondering which you think is the best value.

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #1 on:** February 16, 2005, 10:57:36 AM »

I like the 686 better. I like the trigger and the gun just looks better in my opinion. Also I think the S&W would hold it value more.

New Hampshire · « **Reply #2 on:** February 16, 2005, 11:39:13 AM »

Nuthn against the Smiths but I will take the GP100 ANY day. If you dont like the trigger too much its actually pretty simple to smooth the action out and get it feeling just as fine as any of the Smiths do. The GP 100 is, to put it bluntly, a tank. Its seems near impossible to shoot it apart.
Brian M.

Badnews Bob · « **Reply #3 on:** February 16, 2005, 12:41:25 PM »

GP 100.... Abrams tank in .357 caliber, works for me.

KF9VH · « **Reply #4 on:** February 17, 2005, 05:54:05 AM »

Ruger is winning. Any one else with an opinion?

Bullseye · « **Reply #5 on:** February 17, 2005, 06:50:27 AM »

I used to have a GP100. Like all my Rugers it never shot that accurate and did not have enough sight adjustment to shoot the loads I liked. It is built like a tank though.

Never had a Smith, they might not be any better.

Iowegan · « **Reply #6 on:** February 17, 2005, 08:58:55 AM »

The Ruger GP-100 is a more modern and robust design. It is a stronger gun than the S&W 686 and will take a steady diet of magnums without a problem. The front sight on the GP-100 "plugs in" and can be changed in a few seconds. All Ruger plug-in sights are interchangable (Redhawk, Super Redhawk) so you can get white, yellow, blue, green, black, or black with a red insert, all under $10 each. 686 sights cost a fortune to change because they require gunsmith machining.

Out-of-the-box, the GP-100s trigger pull is harsh. A 5th grader on his lunch hour can smooth it up and install a lighter set of springs for about $10. The older 686s had very nice trigger pulls, however the new ones are about as harsh as a GP-100.

The older 686s were great guns. Each engineering change is noted by a dash number and after the 686-3, things started going down hill. First came the rubber grips, goofy extractor, then the MIM internal parts, in-frame firing pin, and now they will have shrouded barrels (much like the old Dan Wessons, though not adjustable or interchangable). Though still a decent gun, they aren't nearly as good as the -3 or prior.

Both guns are more accurate than the person holding them. I would give a slight edge to the 686. Also, the 686 comes in a 6, 7, or 8 shot where the GP-100 is a 6 shot only. The GP-100 comes in blue or stainless. The 686 is stainless and it's brother, the 586 is blue.

If I were to buy a used gun, I would go with a S&W 686-3 or older. For a new gun, Ruger's GP-100 in stainless is my choice.

AZ223 · « **Reply #7 on:** February 18, 2005, 12:12:18 PM »

Don't know about the newer 686's, but my older one is smooth as silk. Easy trigger pull in DA or SA mode, though it does want to "stage" a bit in DA. I've shot an SP101, and if it's typical of Rugers I'd think about a trigger job. Other than that, it feels very solid. Both guns fit me well, but given the triggers as the only difference I'd go for the 686. Otherwise get the one that fits you best. I don't think you'll be disappointed either way.

snakeman · « **Reply #8 on:** February 18, 2005, 03:49:49 PM »

I vote for the Ruger. I carry one on the farm and carried one for a duty weapon as well. They are good guns and well built.

snakeman

Glanceblamm · « **Reply #9 on:** February 18, 2005, 04:29:22 PM »

I shoot with a Brother-in-law now & again. I would give his GP100 4" very high marks for pointability. With gun in hand, it's almost like pointing your finger.

oso45-70 · « **Reply #10 on:** February 18, 2005, 05:39:25 PM »

I've owned both and feel that the 686 is more pleasant to shoot but think
the gp 100 is probably the strongest and will last longer if both were shot the same amount. But to me the S&W686 is smother and the trigger don't have to be worked on. thats my take on the two...........Joe.........

DirtyHarry · « **Reply #11 on:** February 18, 2005, 08:13:45 PM »

I vote for the S&W. FAR SUPERIOR trigger and just generally more refined.
Yeah, the top strap on the ruger is a little thicker giving the impression of strength, but it is my contention that they have to use a little more material because of the investment casting process as opposed to hammer forging process that S&W uses. I assure you the S&W will stand up to any load the ruger will and then some.......

DWARREN123 · « **Reply #12 on:** February 19, 2005, 04:08:52 AM »

Not quite the same but I have a GP 100 w/6 inch barrel, I love this revolver. It is accurate and fits me well.

Dogshooter · « **Reply #13 on:** February 19, 2005, 03:13:33 PM »

My nod goes to the 686. Have had several and put mucho ammo thru all of them. Only had one GP, didn't care for it.

TennesseeNuc · « **Reply #14 on:** February 19, 2005, 07:58:05 PM »

KF9VH,
I'll have to vote for the 686. Good trigger, smooth action and accurate. Costs a little more than the Ruger, but it will hold it's value better.
Best,
TnNuc

Savage · « **Reply #15 on:** February 20, 2005, 02:59:52 AM »

I agree that the 686 is more pleasing to the eye, and has a better trigger. The Ruger has a bit of a Spartan look to it and the "out of the box" trigger is not quite as slick as the Smith. While both will handle full power ammo quite well, the lockwork of the Smiths will require some tuning from time to time if it is shot a lot. I believe either one will do the job. The Ruger will last thru several generations of hard use without a lot of care. Since I believe that form should follow function, I would have to go with the Ruger. A spring kit and half hour working on the trigger will amaze you with the results. The price is just icing on the cake!
Savage

TScottO · « **Reply #16 on:** February 20, 2005, 04:27:48 AM »

Both of them are fine guns. The Ruger is heavier made but a heavier made gun is not as beneficial in a 357 as in perhaps a 45 Colt.

I do think the Smith is a $100.00 better gun than the Ruger. Ive shot action pistol for 6 or 7 years, in the revolver class Smith takes the cake. My particular gun has over 15,000 rounds through it and is still in great shape. Other action shooters have many more rounds through theres and are still a long way from a rebuild. Im not saying Rugers cannot do this, Im sure they can, but I know and have seen what the 686 can do.

If you want a classic well made gun with a good action, better resale value, plenty durable and just plane sexy, I would vote for the Smith. If you want a gun to abuse, why spend the extra 100 bucks?

Be Safe,
Scott

HappyHunter · « **Reply #17 on:** February 20, 2005, 05:44:12 PM »

There is no comparison...I have both. The smith is far and away a better gun.

Someone stated that it was an easy $10 trigger job on a ruger. The change of the springs is easy and is worth doing but it will NEVER be the action of a Smith and Wesson. I have done several trigger jobs on Rugers and many more on Smiths.

The Smith will be plenty strong and is worth the extra $100. You will get it back if you ever trade the gun in. You should be able to get a used 686 with out the frame lock and with the firing pin on the hammer for 350-400, that is my preference.

HTH,

Fred

TWBryan · « **Reply #18 on:** February 21, 2005, 02:20:07 PM »

Get a GP100 in stainless and don't look back. The Gp is much stronger than the smith,can be field stripped w/o tools,and the front sight is interchangeable. You also have a much wider variety of grips available for it than the S&W. The action can be rough,dry fire it a few thousand times and it will clean up. I have two a six-inch and a four-inch. you cannot go wrong with one of these.

TWBryan

KF9VH · « **Reply #19 on:** February 26, 2005, 05:54:46 PM »

I found a used 686 at a good price and bought it.

Thanks for all the feedback.

ed1921 · « **Reply #20 on:** February 26, 2005, 06:13:31 PM »

You'll be happy w/ your choice. My older 681(w/a fixed sight) is one of my favorites. I prefer the hammer mounted firing pin of mine, even though it is probably more prone to damage.
Much better trigger than my GP-100 which also spits a bit w/ hot loads.
I changed out the wood grips w/ Pachymar Presentation grips.
I do like the grips on the Ruger better than the stock S&W wood grips.

HappyHunter · « **Reply #21 on:** February 27, 2005, 02:50:56 AM »

You have a gun that will last a lifetime.

I try to buy all my guns used, better price and your smith/wesson will actually appreciate.

daddywpb · « **Reply #22 on:** February 27, 2005, 03:13:30 AM »

I have both - I like the S&W better. Better trigger and better handling for me.

KF9VH · « **Reply #23 on:** February 27, 2005, 09:08:47 AM »

Thanks again for all the feed back. I pick it up tuesday. This waiting period is a bunch of crap dreamed up by the socialist liberals. Here I sit with half a dozen other hand guns and I have to make another trip back to pick this up. What is wrong with this picture?

??

dan61psu · « **Reply #24 on:** February 28, 2005, 04:27:59 PM »

Wished I woulda saw this post earlier!

I actually just went through the exact same choices you did, but I actually added the Taurus Model 66 into my possibility list, and came out with the Taurus. For the price, look and feel, it was immaculate. Plus, outta the box I was shooting 4-6" groups at 25 yards, with very little prior handgun shooting experience besides a .22 S&W and a Single action .44 Mag that was too much gun for shooting very accurately.

IM sure you will love the 686, though, I hear nothign but good things about it. Plus, my 66 is almost an exact copy

, and I love the 66!

Enjoy!

Nebraska Kelly · « **Reply #25 on:** June 17, 2005, 10:30:35 PM »

Hello. I have had both revolvers. I must absolutely go with the 686 S&W. My ruger in 6 inch blued steel did not shoot nearly as accurately as any 686 smith. As a matter of fact I have always been disappointed in the accuracy of most of the ruger handguns I have owned. They go to a new home real fast when I cant hit anything with them. I would recommend one other inexpensive revolver in 357 that I do like very much. It is the Rossi model 971 or is it 972? Anyway I have small hands and it feels like it was made just for my size hand. It is accurate as hell to. But my first choice is the 686 smith. Second choice is anything except ruger gp 100 inaccurate piece of sh--.
Kelly