Revolver - Smith or Ruger?

[Leo]

Maybe Ruger did not have a warranty in the 1980's but they did take care of their customers. I had a several year old MKII that got fired a lot. Like a brick a week. It was a recreational gun and was shared by two people for bullseye leagues most of the year. It started becoming undependable and accuracy was deteriorating, no matter how much it was cleaned. I sent it to Ruger and was nervous when it was almost 3 months without notice. (No email in those days) They changed the upper receiver/barrel assembly, the extractor, all the springs and even replaced the grip panels as a corner was chipped from the originals. There was a hand written note on the statement that said something like "If you shot it enough in a few years to wear it this heavily, you must really like it, so enjoy this rebuild no charge"

I never forgot this service and bought a Super Redhawk, a couple of GP100's an SP101 and a Rifle from them.

I have had one S&W rifle covered under warranty, and sent back a couple of worn revolvers. The repairs have always been satisfactory, and really cheap.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Ruger still doesn't have a warranty. They just take care of their customers.

 

[M67]

Ruger still doesn't have a warranty. They just take care of their customers.

Only if they have parts

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Only if they have parts

I know a few people who've been offered a new GP100 for a non-repairable six series.

 

[M67]

I know a few people who've been offered a new GP100 for a non-repairable six series.

A few years ago I sent in an older SP101 cause it was shooting way off. Got a letter from them stating all what was wrong with it and that they didn't have any parts for the older ones but I could purchase a new SP101 for a mildly discounted price. The list of things wrong with it were ridiculous and if true, shouldn't have left Ruger in the first place. I had to send a decently nasty e-mail to one of the people at Ruger. Next day they finally agreed to give me a new SP101

I know several people that have sent in Red Labels, older Mini 14s, and Deerfields to Ruger to be worked on and they' just been returned to them with a notice saying they won't work on that specific "generation" anymore

 

[One Shot One Kill]

A few years ago I sent in an older SP101 cause it was shooting way off. Got a letter from them stating all what was wrong with it and that they didn't have any parts for the older ones but I could purchase a new SP101 for a mildly discounted price. The list of things wrong with it were ridiculous and if true, shouldn't have left Ruger in the first place. I had to send a decently nasty e-mail to one of the people at Ruger. Next day they finally agreed to give me a new SP101

I know several people that have sent in Red Labels, older Mini 14s, and Deerfields to Ruger to be worked on and they' just been returned to them with a notice saying they won't work on that specific "generation" anymore

If the gun is that old and having problems... Ima gonna have to say it's probably use/age and not a quality issue. Can't blame Ruger for choosing to repair or not repair those at their discretion.
If it was a true quality issue, I have a hard time believing Ruger would ignore it.

When your older car has problem, do you go crying to the manufacturer or dealer, or do you take it to a professional who can repair it, or just outright replace it? Hint: it's not the first option.

 

[M67]

If the gun is that old and having problems... Ima gonna have to say it's probably use/age and not a quality issue. Can't blame Ruger for choosing to repair or not repair those at their discretion.
If it was a true quality issue, I have a hard time believing Ruger would ignore it.

When your older car has problem, do you go crying to the manufacturer or dealer, or do you take it to a professional who can repair it, or just outright replace it? Hint: it's not the first option.

By older, I mean maybe 15 years. If had a very easy life, didn't get shot much (double action only snubbie) just carried.

And I wouldn't expect that out of an older vehicle no. Hell I have a newer vehicle with plenty of issues and the company basically tells me to pound sand so...

 

[TheVictor]

I have a gp100 with Wolff Springs that breaks like glass. Cheaper and better trigger then the S&W. Plus there built like a tank

 

[BE Mike]

I have a gp100 with Wolff Springs that breaks like glass. Cheaper and better trigger then the S&W. Plus there built like a tank

Which S&W revolver are you comparing it to?

 

[BStarkey 46947]

I own both and both are 20 years old. The 686 feels better in your hand and pretty with the wood grips. The Ruger is my carry gun when deer hunting and is a very reliable solid gun. No intentions of parting with either. If I had to have just one, I would lean toward the S&W. Have never had a quality issue with either.

 

[devildawg00311]

S&W...tried and trued from the very begining

 

[4651feeder]

Have owned the GP100, SP101, and 686 at one time or another. The 16 plus yr old 686 being the only one that remains in my possession. For me there is just too much frame on the GP and not enough on the SP, especially with hot .357 loads. That said the only current generation 686+ that I've fondled didn't leave me feeling all warm and fuzzy with it's sloppy lock up. To me they just ain't what they used to be.

 

[LCSOSgt11]

Smiths are the "standard", however, I am not familiar with their new models. I had an M66, and an M586. Both worked well. Ruger is known for being rugged. Due to the different action types, it may be a bit more difficult to find a qualified Ruger gunsmith to tune the action. With that said, now days, I'd probably go with a Ruger.

 

[Pinger5560]

I myself have shot both, I would agree with others I did like the trigger on the GP100 better. They both where 6" revolvers, I so also like the feel of the Ruger over the S&W, like I have read that these newer 686 don't have the same feel has the older one's did when I was younger shooting my father's. At this time I have thought about a GP100 myself, I really like the Match Champion version of that pistol, the feel of those custom wood grips is great in hand. I haven't shot the Match Champion yet but really want to.

 

[tcecil88]

I feel that on the Smiths I have, there is a cleaner trigger break as it usually surprises me when it goes off. They are a little harder to stage the trigger with.
But with the Rugers I have, there is a definite click when the cylinder indexes to the next shot that I can stop on and settle the sights, then pull through to the shot.
IMHO, Smiths are built more for elegance and prestige, Rugers are built for hard use, but I love them both. YMMV.

 

[Leadeye]

What, no Colts? Bah.

 

[gregr]

S&W is VERY, VERY proud of their weapons. Ruger makes as good a weapon for a LOT less money. Can`t go wrong with either, but Ruger is the best deal for the money!

 

[gregr]

Have owned the GP100, SP101, and 686 at one time or another. The 16 plus yr old 686 being the only one that remains in my possession. For me there is just too much frame on the GP and not enough on the SP, especially with hot .357 loads. That said the only current generation 686+ that I've fondled didn't leave me feeling all warm and fuzzy with it's sloppy lock up. To me they just ain't what they used to be.

I have an SP101, and yes, it`s something to try to hold onto when you let loose a hot load, but I like that. I`ve always wanted a GP100, and still today would like to acquire one, but just haven`t yet. I like the Rugers very much.

 

[red_zr24x4]

Pre lock S&W
Now, single action, Ruger

 

[indiucky]

What, no Colts? Bah.

"Stay gold Pony Boy..."