JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
179
Reactions
207
I am looking at the two, ruger is 6" blued and the Smith is 4" blued, R is 550.00 and the Smith is 825.00 I will be shooting 357mag mostly its a woods gun. From what I have researched the ruger is stronger but the Smith is more refined better triger for what I want I think the ruger is the better choice what are your thoughts
 
If the prices were within $100, I'd go S&W, for the same pluses you mentioned- but at that difference I'd get the Ruger and change the springs if needed. I don't think the trigger is that ghastly
Or actually I'd look around for a cheaper model 19 or other options such as stainless 357s if you're going to be yomping through woodland...I might be out of touch with current pricing, but $825 seems high..
 
Prices are closer between the GP 100s and the S&Ws but I love the grip on the security six and I think the weeker S&W would be stuck in the back of my mind. I think my mind is made up, what little that matters, at least my wife is happier cause I told her I was going to be spending around 8-9 hundred dollars on a revolver as I was ducking lol thanks for your thoughts be safe
 
IMHO go with the Ruger as a woods gun. If it were for bragging rights at the range I prefer S&W.
My first .357 in '77 was a Ruger, I fired a lot of abusive loads in the time I had it with only good results, loads that I would not feed my Smith's. A spring kit and a little action work go along ways with Ruger's. And that extra 2"s of barrel will help performance. Pachmayr IMHO are a must on the Security Six.
If you could find a stainless Ruger... blue OK stainless just allows me to be lazy. ;)
 
Of the two I'd go with the Ruger Security Six . ( as much as I love vintage S&W revolvers )

With that said...I find that a 4 inch barreled revolver is a bit easier to carry , as a general rule....
Holster design and carry method may well make a difference , no matter the barrel length.
Andy
 
Ya I know SS would be better with rust and bad weather but I just love a blued revolver, another thought I had was changing the front sight to a gold beed as the front sight is pined where would be a good place to start looking
 
well they have a GP Match champion for 725.00 but its in 10mm and I want 357 what are your thoughts on that, I have to make certain this is the gun as I can only afford one hand gun
 
Now that you've changed the choices to include the GP-100, I would absolutely buy a S&W 686 before a GP. The GP100 is strong, but is unrefined and clunky.
 
Holly cow my head hurts too many choices I can find a new 686 for 779.00 if I can talk the boss into that maybe thats the way to go I haven't seen any older one in this area in awhile
 
Holly cow my head hurts too many choices I can find a new 686 for 779.00 if I can talk the boss into that maybe thats the way to go I haven't seen any older one in this area in awhile

If you're not in a huge hurry, Security Sixes do surface fairly often. It'll be cheaper, and it's still my overall choice.
 
for what I want I think the ruger is the better choice

Given your original choices, I'd tend to agree. Like others here, I prefer S&W revolvers too, and the K frame .357 mag in 4" is a perfectly balanced revolver for me. As much as I prefer the S&W over the Ruger, for practical carry in the woods the Ruger should do just fine, especially considering the price difference.

The other choices brought up are well worth considering. Last year at the last couple gun shows I went to, I saw a used S&W 586 .357 for $500. I saw it at both shows on a local dealer's table. I'd have bought it if I didn't already have one and could have justified the expense. I'm sure it's long gone by now, but my point is just that they are out there if you're patient.

For a solid, practical, woods revolver though, you can't go wrong with a Ruger either. :)
 
The good news here is you can't make a bad choice. I personally would choose the Smith 19-4, because I prefer 4" barrels and the -4 has all the desirable features like PB/RC. I was never really a fan of the 586/686 if make the jump in frame size I'll go to the "N".
 
The good news here is you can't make a bad choice.
Having owned both 'names' I have to agree.

You mentioned shooting .357 mag mostly and if this is the case you should probably go with the Ruger.

While some disagree the reality is the 'K' frame S&W .357's should not be shot with 'full house' .357 regularly but lighter factory and reloads wouldn't be as much of a problem. I load on the 'lite' end of .357 for my Mod 66 and even though the load is in the .357 Mag data it's probably more like a +P+ .38 Special load (7 grains of Unique) with 158 grain lead or plated bullets.

I won't speak for the 6" barrel of the Ruger as the issues of longer barrel carry will vary from person to person.

The GPs are nice guns, well made and strong enough to handle anything but they are a bit 'clunky' as previously mentioned. Definitely not nearly as trim and balanced as a K frame Smith or the Security Six.
 
For years I carried a SS 6 inch Security Six as my woods gun and home defense gun and a Ruger SS Security Six snubby as my concealed gun. I put Wolf springs on both. I was very happy with them...up until the SW 686 (L frame) came out. It was love at first heft. Turns out I really like the muzzle heavy feel of the 686. And while the Wolf springs plus plenty of dry firing lightens and smooths the Ruger trigger, its still not in the same league as the SW 19s or 686es. I ended up replacing my Security Sixes with a 686 snubby for conceal carry and duck flock protection and sometimes woods and various .44s in the 6 to 9.5 inch range for woods, hunting, and recreation.

Besides price, the major issues with the 586/686 is weight and the muzzle heavy design, which people tend to either love or hate. The GP101 is also heavy and muzzle heavy. If you heft them you'll probably immediately decide you love or hate that design. I love it because if its necessary to fire with the gun not fully extended, the heavy muzzle makes it easy for my hand to tell exactly where the gun is pointing. So I can shoot from the hip or other strange positions with a muzzle heavy revolver with a good bit of accuracy. Useful, as not all self defense scenarios give you the luxury of holding the gun out in front and using sights. In addition, a muzzle heavy design gobbles up recoil so even the heaviest .357 mag loads fired from my 686 snubby are so tamed I don't even notice recoil.

I agree with those who prefer a Ruger or a 586/686 SW to a SW 19 if you practice with full loads.

The difference between 4 and 6 inch barrel lengths might be the critical factor. If you know you are willing to carry a 6 inch gun in the woods, that's fine. If you are much below 6 feet tall and belt carry you may be unable to sit down without taking off gun. It also matters whether your belt is high or low. If you know carrying a 6 inch gun works for you, there's much to be said for going with the 6 inch Ruger as a woods gun. There's usually a serious difference in muzzle velocity with full loads between those two lengths. And the 6 inch .357 is a better gun for hunting small and medium game than a shorter barrel revolver.

Have fun choosing. And let us know what you get and how you like it.
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top