Both are good guns.
However,, if a lot of shooting is to be done, even moderate loads, you'll need to look at the ability of the gun to withstand the "use & abuse" of such endeavors.
The S&W's are known to be very, very good in the smooth action department. Especially many of the older ones.
This is due to the different approach to the action design.
The Ruger is a solid frame,, (no side plate) and the internals differ from the S&W. As such,, it does feel different when you take a pair of stock guns & put them side-by-side & compare.
Both can benefit from an action job. And it may surprise you how well a Ruger can feel after a knowledgeable gunsmith smooths up a Ruger's action.
But,, in the world of serious, long term use & abuse,, the Ruger has proven to be capable of out-lasting the S&W's.
Look into the serious world of steel silhouette shooting,, where they shoot 200 meters at steel rams weighing 50 lbs. While the S&W's can & will work in the accuracy dept,, they also required more maintenance in the long term.
Another thing I'll address. You mentioned the S&W "felt good" in your hands. Often,, the fit of the grips has a big part of how well a gun shoots. A good fitted set of grips allows consistent gripping & better trigger control.
So,, it boils down to this.
You need to decide how much shooting you'll be doing, how heavy the loads will be, the expected accuracy & lifespan of the gun if used a lot.
Both are good guns,, and only you can make the final decisions.
PS; I shoot USPSA competition. I too consider myself a big Ruger fan. As such,, I'm now using a Ruger Super GP-100 in 9mm in competition. I'm seeing a few S&W folks "take notice" of me & my scores. I like to express that the gun is just part of the equation when competing in a match.
