[TouchMyGlock]

I am interested in buying a .357mag with a 4 inch barrel. I can't decide whether I want a S&W 686 or a Ruger GP100. The price difference at my local gun shop is about $200, with the Ruger being the less expensive of the two. Is it worth the extra $200 for the S&W, or am I paying for the name? What would be the pros and cons of the two? And is there another .357 that I should be considering?

Thanks!

[tiberius10721]

I own both and love both of them. The gp 100 is built like a tank and very accurate . The smith and wesson has a nicer trigger in my opinion . Both guns are definatley worth their price. If you can afford the 686 it's worth it.

[mcb]

I own a 6 inch 686 and once owned a gp100 4 inch, both will go to your grandchildren. The Ruger is built like a tank the Smith has a better trigger.

I traded the gp100 on a single action Blackhawk. I now have four single action rugers and love them.

In double action revolvers I now only own smiths and one colt. I would spend the extra money, you get what you pay for.

[Jeremy1912]

I went through the same thing when I went to get my first revolver. I ended up doing weeks of research and review reading on both of them. I think that they are both great guns. I personally went with the gp-100 in 4" as well and I love it and have never once thought that I made the wrong decision. I held them both and yes the smith does have a slightly better trigger but to me the ruger just felt better in the hands. And I can always get a trigger job done for less than the extra it would have cost me to get the smith.

In the end though I don't think you could go wrong with either one. Just go to your local shop and hold and possibly shoot them both and go with what feels best to you.

[BikerRN]

I would not buy any new S&W with a "Hillary Hole" for home or self defense after having an ILS equiped S&W Revolver fail on me at the range.

While Ruger has a locking system it is under the stocks and not able to be activated by recoil. If you can find a Used "non-lock" S&W I'd say go for it. If new I think Ruger is the only way to go. The triggers and actions on Rugers can be cleaned up quite well to rival even a "worked on" S&W.

Biker

[rugernut]

I own a gp100 6" and it's the most reliable gun I own and have had it covered in mud and it still shot the 686 is a real acurit gun but I don't think it would handel as as many heavy loads as the gp100 don't mind the spelling

[mcb]

Originally Posted by BikerRN

I would not buy any new S&W with a "Hillary Hole" for home or self defense after having an ILS equiped S&W Revolver fail on me at the range.

While Ruger has a locking system it is under the stocks and not able to be activated by recoil. If you can find a Used "non-lock" S&W I'd say go for it. If new I think Ruger is the only way to go. The triggers and actions on Rugers can be cleaned up quite well to rival even a "worked on" S&W.

Biker

Biker you make a good point all of mine but a 642 jframe are pre Hillary hole.

[fmj]

My 4" 686 is a GREAT gun. Its my carry piece when i am trout fishing or deer hunting. Its been soaked, submerged in silty rivers and mud caked and has never failed to function perfectly. It also has the Hitlery hole (that has never been engaged) and as of yet, in the 10 years i have owned it, never had a problem. It has also shot some pretty high velocity rounds thru it.

The only thing i regret about my 686...is i should have gotten a .44 mag instead of a .357 mag.

The 686 is the weapon breathing that fireball in my avatar picture.

[orangello]

I've been very happy with my GP100; the trigger is fine for my needs.
I haven't noticed a locking system on/in it, but i haven't needed one.

[Olympus]

My recommendation would be to find a nice, older S&W 686. Quality has gone down from the older guns to the new S&W revolvers. 686s are common guns, so you shouldn't have any problems finding one. Check on the various classifieds sections on forums as well. I'd much rather have a nice older S&W than the new ones they are selling now.