Need advice: Ruger vs S&W

[arthury]

Among my other guns, I also own a Ruger SP101 357Mag and I carry it for CCW.

The problem is that I am now itching to get a larger wheel gun and I have looked at different articles and forums comparing S&W and Ruger for the larger frames revolvers. So far, the points that were consistently brought up were that S&W have better triggers and Rugers are made like tanks (they just keep firing no matter what you do to it).

How much truth is in there? What are your thoughts? Are Ruger triggers heavier than stock S&W triggers? Are S&W revolvers sensitive to dirt if it is used in the woods? I will be using this gun for self protection in the woods in the northern states.

 

[98Redline]

Owning some guns from each camp I will throw in my $0.02.

I really love the lines of the S&W guns. There is something about a blued S&W that really does it for me. The triggers I would have to say in large are better out of the box than the Ruger triggers but not orders of magnitude better.

As you stated the Rugers are simply built to run. My Rugers see a continual diet of hot loads that would cause issues with my Smiths in a short period of time.

For a CCW gun or a casual woods carry gun (.38 or .357 caliber), I think the S&W guns have an edge. Not much of an edge but for me I prefer them just a wee bit more.

For a hunting gun or big bore revolver (.44 caliber and north) I will take a Ruger every day and twice on Sunday.

I can get a trigger job on my Ruger and end up with a crisp, S&W type trigger, but a Smith can't be changed to take the pounding a Ruger can.

 

[arthury]

Thanks for the informative response.

There are some rumblings on the Net that say the current S&W revolvers are using MIM hammers and triggers. Are these same components forged in the Super Redhawk line of revolvers? May be I should ask what's in the big bore Ruger revolvers that make them so rugged? Are the steel thicker? Do they have better parts? Do the Ruger resolvers use forged steel?

 

[donut757]

Im am particularlly fond of the .38/357 platform and have quite a few Rugers and a S&W. The Smith is 686 6". The thing is a large revolver and the trigger just breaks perfectly and smooth the entire pull. My rugers have good triggers but not great like the smith... Again not bad but a difference can be felt. I just picked up a S&W 325 in .45 ACP... Its the only "big bore" revolver i have that gets shoot regularly, also have a .480 alaskan. That smith also has a very nice trigger pull...

With that said if i carry a gun its an LCR in the pocket... Or. Stainless 4" security six.... I do not think they is a better model of firearm than the six series guns... They are perfect size and magnum rounds are nothin in them. I do not care for the looks of the current GP100s, so those would not be a choice for me but the redhawks are strong durable guns and to me have a classic look that i like. Im also on the hunt for a redhawk in .45 lc and .357.

 

[stantheman86]

I own a LOT of both brands, but I have kind of gotten away from S&W and turned my totally on Ruger recently.

Rugers have investment cast frames and other parts like hammers, triggers etc. Ruger has been doing it this way since the 1950's, and it's clearly a proven process.

S&W uses MIM in their recent revolvers, say from the late 90's or so, when MIM started appearing in the revolvers. Ruger has also started using MIM in parts like SP101 triggers, and I think we'll see more MIM in Ruger guns. There is not a thing wrong with MIM, I own plenty of MIM S&W's and they are fine guns. Just not as tough as Ruger.

Rugers have no sideplates, like a S&W.

Bill Ruger designed the Security Six to directly compete with the S&W line of K-frame .357's. The Security Six was cheaper, tougher and lasted longer than the S&W's. So..........S&W developed the L-frame, to which Ruger responded about 4 years later with the GP100. A GP100 will eat a S&W 586 for breakfast when it comes to durability and strength.

I have no issues with the triggers of any of my Ruger revolvers. Some are slicker than others, but the same is true of my S&W"s. I have S&W's with horrible DA pulls too. Ruger DA revolvers were designed as LE duty guns and civilian defense and sporting revolvers with a low price point. They aren't out of the box match guns.

A new GP100 will run you about $550, the S&W "equivalent" the 686, will run you $650-700 or so. IMO the GP100 is much superior in all categories. A new Redhawk is about $700, and a new S&W 629 is maybe $800 or so. The Redhawk is still THE toughest .44 Magnum DA out there, along with the Super Redhawk.

Overall, S&W is perfect if all you plan to shoot are "specials"...........S&W excells at making .38 Special and .44 Special revolvers, in this capacity they will last forever. The S&W Model 10 is one of my favorite handguns, and I'm sure all of mine will outlast me.

Ruger is THE choice, hands down, for anything Magnum. The Redhawk has been proven to outlast the S&W 29 and 629, and there's a reason handload manuals have "Ruger only" loads. S&W's are simply not as strong as Rugers, or as durable.

The truth is, most people who buy S&W revolvers don't run super hot lrounds through them, or put enough rounds through them to worry about durability. So, for the vast majority of gun buyers there is no real difference to worry about other than price. The guy who buys a 4" 686 and shoots a few boxes of .38 through it a month isn't going to wear it out.

Ruger revolvers are for people who plan to run 10's of thousands of hot Magnums through the gun, this is where they shine.

 

[Sal1950]

Among my other guns, I also own a Ruger SP101 357Mag and I carry it for CCW.

The problem is that I am now itching to get a larger wheel gun and I have looked at different articles and forums comparing S&W and Ruger for the larger frames revolvers. So far, the points that were consistently brought up were that S&W have better triggers and Rugers are made like tanks (they just keep firing no matter what you do to it).

How much truth is in there? What are your thoughts? Are Ruger triggers heavier than stock S&W triggers? Are S&W revolvers sensitive to dirt if it is used in the woods? I will be using this gun for self protection in the woods in the northern states.

I've got some of both and that's about the whole truth of it.
Thing is, with the Ruger if you spend the difference in $ on a trigger job you can get the best of both worlds. Or if your handy do the trigger work your self for free except the cost of a couple springs.
You didn't say how large a framed revolver you're thinking about but either way the GP100 and Redhawk are the two finest revolvers ever made. You'll never regret the purchase I guarantee.
Sal

 

[rugerguy]

All good points above and it comes down to ones 'preference' and past experience...........
much like cars, most folks tend to stick to the "brands" and whats within the brands, you can buy a GM, and have either a Chevy, or move up get a Buick or top of the line cadillac,same goes for Ford......try and sell a Ford to a die hard Chevy man, or vice versa.........USED to be the Rugers were for the working man, blue collar guns AND affordable, no more...........bottom line, I tell folks "shop the DEAL" and they are to be had out there.....
informed shoppers do NOT pay 'retail'..... :roll: 8) :wink:

Good luck

 

[Jimbo357mag]

For Price, Quality and Durability I don't think you can beat the mid-frame GP-100 in any variation.

 

[meshugunner]

What 98Redline said.

IMO Rugers are excellent value while S&W are overpriced.

Rugers are tough and durable no nonsense guns. S&W are beautiful but a bit effete.

I bought a new S&W 686+ which I love but it came with a timing problem - not serious but for $700+ it shouldn't have been there at all. For the last two weeks I have been trying to get a return label from S&W. When it does go back it may take as much as 6 weeks to come back.

In that time I also returned a used (1975) Single Six to Ruger. It went out on a Friday, and it came back the following Tuesday completely rebuilt with two new cylinders - no charge. That kind of service adds considerable value to any Ruger one might buy.

Every unmodified Ruger trigger that I have handled is 'ok' but a bit gritty and creepy as it comes out of the box. Right now I am inclined to buy Ruger and spend the money on a trigger job. I am fixing to have trigger work done on the Single Six.

 

[Knuckles]

I like the bigger selection and broader ranges of models in the S&W line of Double Action guns, for instance the classic S&W 'Lew Horton' in .44 special... what a great wheel gun!
Then there are the .41 mags'... .40S&W... the .45 ACP's... ooodles of twenty two's... you get the idea.

Ruger is finally getting some other DA revolvers on the menu but most of the cool new stuff is in there Single Action selection.

The triggers in many cases have been a non-issue for me once my Rugers are broke-in, the Smiths have a shorter throw on there hammers and the Rugers have a longer throw... I don't care either way.

 

[TRanger]

You could not give me a new Smith & Wesson. Look around for an older one if you decide on the Smith. You will get a better gun for less money than one of the new ones.
Now then; have no concerns about the worthiness of the S&W for woods use. It will serve you just fine. So will the Ruger. I use both. Colts as well. None of them have ever failed me. Pick the one you like best.

 

[hittman]

The triggers on my Redhhawks were and are ~ right out of the box ~ every bit as good as any Smith & Wesson I've ever owned.

I can not say the same thing about the GP100's or "Six Series" but ~ you said you've got the itch for a "bigger" wheel gun so ..... I'd steer you to the Redhawks.

 

[VAdoublegunner]

What kind of a larger revolver and what do you intend to use it for?

First, considering both manufacturers, if you want DA, lots of options. SA, not so many.

Second, new or used. Both have new models that are good, and classic models that can be found on the used market that are highly regarded.

Let's evaluate caliber/chambering.
Since you say for woods protection in the Northern states, then by larger I'm thinking something in the 44 or 45 cal range. Do you handload? If not, that is a consideration. 44 Special is a great cartridge if you handload. The Ruger/Lipsey 44 Flattop is almost legendary here. It is a SA, of course. They have become one of my favorite big bore packing guns. But ditto the S&W Model 24/624 that can be found on the used market, at a substantial price. Both will take stout handloads, the Ruger moreso than the S&W. How about 45 Colt? Again, handloads are the way to go. The Ruger edges out the S&W there for stout handloads and some of the SAs are really nice to carry and relatively inexpensive. For a DA you will have to find a good one of either make and they often come dear in certain configurations. The Redhawk in 45 Colt is a good choice. Takes monster loads. The S&W 625 Mountain Gun another. Plenty adequate power but more moderate handload potential, very smooth action and light to carry.

How about 45ACP? No Ruger potential there for DA, plenty for S&W. They won't be cheap but the have a lot of models, and there are a lot of used ones too. Plus, there are good factory loads available reasonably priced if you don't handload.

Then there is always the 44Mag. Good options in SA from Ruger, heavy option in DA, the S&Ws are classics in that chambering. A 629 will not let you down with any factory load. If you want more than that, then you need to handload a heavy Ruger DA in 45 Colt.

357? I don't consider it particularly "larger" in function in any gun over what you already have. Plenty of options from both. If you get an older 686 or Security Six, they are both great guns. I would give the nod to the 686 for smoothness and trigger; it is equally rugged, but a little heavier. The GP100 seems its Ruger equivalent. [/b]

 

[gregs45auto]

The best trigger ever was a 4' Python sn 81300. BAD news was the timing was a pos . This was a new Python and would not print on target until I put up a 4' sheet of cardboard. My S&W model 66 would choke on what I fed my Ruger security 6. I'll stick with Ruger thank you. greg

 

[Jayhawkhuntclub]

Aside from the LCRs, I have only handled one factory Ruger trigger that was worth a crap (not counting OM SAs). It was a SRH and it was used so I can't be sure it was factory. I'm a big fan of both S&W and Ruger. But I'm more of a Ruger guy overall. You're not going to go wrong with either one. As a general rule, Rugers are beefier and more rugged and smiths have better triggers. But there are exceptions. If you can handle and dryfire both of your finalists, that would be ideal.

 

[stantheman86]

For example, my 1982 Service Six .38 Special 4" has a little "gag" in the action, probably from fitting that isn't 100% perfect. But the timing is perfect,the gun is tight and solid,.........and I have 0 trouble hitting the 10 ring at 25 yards in DA and it would no doubt outlast it's S&W "counterpart" the 10,64,13 or 65.

If I were to take a revolver into combat, you can bet your bottom dollar I'm taking a Ruger.

Drop one in a creek or mud puddle, you can take it down easily and clean it out, and reassemble it in minutes. A S&W, well, good luck with that 8)

 

[Sal1950]

The triggers on my Redhhawks were and are ~ right out of the box ~ every bit as good as any Smith & Wesson I've ever owned.

I can not say the same thing about the GP100's or "Six Series" but ~ you said you've got the itch for a "bigger" wheel gun so ..... I'd steer you to the Redhawks.

Gotta agree with you on that one hitman. I don't know why but the Redhawks do seem to come with outstanding triggers. I have a .41 mag 5.5" Redhawk I bought new in Jan 1985. OTB it had as smooth a DA pull of any revolver I have ever handled. I put a Bullseye spring kit in it to lighten it a bit but never touched it otherwise, never saw any need to do any action work on that one. And that's saying a lot for me. LOL
Sal

 

[roaddog28]

For me the all around 357 magnum I like is the one I have owned the longest my Police Service Six bought in 1985. Feels and handles like a S&W model 19 only stronger. Going to a large medium frame 357 magnum like the GP100 or S&W 686 is a good choice but they are heavier and if you plan to carry that could be a issue. I own larger frame revolvers including a large frame Blackhawk. I like them but if I am out in the woods and carrying I will take my Service Six. My Avatar picture you see is my Police Service Six. I have carried it many years and gone through thousands of rounds. It has a lot of holster wear and surface rust but still shoots great. I shoot mostly 357 magnum 158 gr rounds. Still locks up tight and is accurate enough for most situations.
Bottom line: I don't think you can go wrong with a Security or Service Six.
Good luck,
Howard

 

[stantheman86]

My advice is to get yourself at least one 2 3/4" Speed Six before the prices get ridiculous!

The S&W craze for 3" k-frame .357's like 65's and 13's is spilling over into the Ruger world and the shorty Sixes are starting to shoot up.

Sure there's always the SP101, but the 2 3/4" Six gives you that 6th round, plus they don't make them anymore and they have that "vintage" factor.

 

[infantryman]

One major advance of the GP100 over the S&W and even the Ruger Six series is the locking latch on the front crane. Absolutely impossible to shoot loose with extended magnum sessions that have been known to even bend ejector rods on the old plunger-ejector rod system of front cylinder lock-up. A very ingenious feature of Bill's designs. I still love my Speed and Service Sixes, but that front crane latch of my GP100 is tight as a bank vault lock.