686 VS GP100

[Plinkuh]

I'm in the market for a first wheelgun. Been debating between these two models. Now, I will say this; all the reviews I've come across, on the GP100, are ALL comparing it to the 686. To me, that seems like they're saying the 686 is the quintessential .357...

What are some of the reasons I should buy a 686 instead of a GP100 or vice versa?

I hear a lot about the 686's trigger being better out of the box, as opposed to the GP100 not so much. Can anyone confirm this?

 

[Dogman]

Wife bought a 686 last year and has no problem with the trigger. The 686 is one of those guns you want if the shtf. It's just sturdy and well made.

 

[teddy12b]

In my opinion the GP100's just feel like they are built like tanks. I used to have a 6" and it was a very nice shooting gun.

 

[billybob44]

I have both..

Actually, I have two S&W Model 681's,(Same as 686 with fixed sights) and one GP-100.
The 681/686 have an "Out of the Box" smother action+have spring kits available to tune to your heart's content. The exterior of the Smiths are also better finished.
The GP-100 to me, seems the "Tougher" of the two+have the option of front sight changing a lot easier than the Smiths.
If you just want a GREAT .357 Mag. to woods carry, hunt, knock around with-get the GP.
If you want a "Pretty" gun with a GREAT action to target shoot+brag about at the range-get the Smith&Wesson...Just my 2 cents worth..Bill.

 

[Ahgo]

I use the 686 6" to shoot in a shooting league. It is stainless so it looks beautiful. The trigger pull is fantastic, and it has adjustable sites which are great for the league. I love the gun and have not had a single problem with it. I also bought it used. Great Gun!!!!!!!1

 

[woodsie57]

I have owned both, still have the Ruger. It seems the more durable and utilitarian of the two,and a bit less cash! Fact is they're both superb guns.

 

[Plinkuh]

Thanks for all the replies guys. Primarily, I'd be using either model to target shoot/plink with. Everyone says the trigger is better out of the box on the Smith, and that's what seems most important to me.

If the Smith will hold up to incessant firing of full .357 mag loads, and has a better trigger, that's all I'm worried about.

 

[NIFT]

I have owned both, still have the Ruger. It seems the more durable and utilitarian of the two,and a bit less cash! Fact is they're both superb guns.

This...except the Smith has no problem with durability: My model 66 and 686 are about 30 years old, been "rode hard and put away wet" many times over many thousands of rounds and have at least another 30 years left in them, likely more.

When taking the actions apart on Smiths and Rugers, the Smith is more "refined;" while the Ruger is built like a hockey puck! Both work great, and, as woodsie says, the Ruger is a bit cheaper.

Get the one you like, and you will have made the best decision!

 

[sbcman]

Thanks for all the replies guys. Primarily, I'd be using either model to target shoot/plink with. Everyone says the trigger is better out of the box on the Smith, and that's what seems most important to me.

If the Smith will hold up to incessant firing of full .357 mag loads, and has a better trigger, that's all I'm worried about.

Is this a serious question? If it is let me answer it plainly- 686 ALL THE WAY

There's seriously no comparison between the two. 686 gets better trigger, better accuracy and yes, better looks. And don't let anyone tell you the gp is stronger than the 686. I assure you that the 686 can't take more rounds down the barrel than you can shoot through it. Mine is running on around 7000 rounds right now- still as tight as the day I bought it.

Maybe I'm baised and not being fair. If you want a big chunk of metal with parts that don't know the definition of "smooth" and a trigger that could substitute for hand strengthening tools- the gp is what you want.

The 686 is the revolver the GP100 hopes to be.

If you want to know what I really think, just pm me

 

[Plinkuh]

Is this a serious question? If it is let me answer it plainly- 686 ALL THE WAY

There's seriously no comparison between the two. 686 gets better trigger, better accuracy and yes, better looks. And don't let anyone tell you the gp is stronger than the 686. I assure you that the 686 can't take more rounds down the barrel than you can shoot through it. Mine is running on around 7000 rounds right now- still as tight as the day I bought it.

Maybe I'm baised and not being fair. If you want a big chunk of metal with parts that don't know the definition of "smooth" and a trigger that could substitute for hand strengthening tools- the gp is what you want.

The 686 is the revolver the GP100 hopes to be.

If you want to know what I really think, just pm me

Oh, I know your take on it. And yes, perhaps you're a bit biased...

 

[ruger1800]

Have shot both, the gp handles better for me, smith has a much better trig out of the box.

 

[Fordtough25]

I just traded off my GP100, it was built like a tank! Shot great, felt good in the hand, rugged and reliable for sure. I have shot a Smith 686 and it was purdy, shot nice as well. I would be happy with either if I could get past my love for single actions.

 

[Plinkuh]

I just traded off my GP100, it was built like a tank! Shot great, felt good in the hand, rugged and reliable for sure. I have shot a Smith 686 and it was purdy, shot nice as well. I would be happy with either if I could get past my love for single actions.

Hah, so that was the magnum you said you got rid of?

 

[Wild Deuce]

I have no experience with the 686 but I love my GP100's. Even though the Smith has a better out-of-the-box trigger, there is such a thing as getting an action/trigger job. I suppose that would equalize the cost advantage of the GP-100.

As far as better looks ... I wouldn't be so sure that couldn't be fixed as well.

 

[Hap Hazard]

GP 100: if you shoot a LOT of cast bullets between cleanings(say, oh, 500 or so!) that front lock can get crudded up.

686: just the new ones: Smith seems to be having problems putting barrels on so they are not canted. Doesn't affect function but it looks BAD. Pick your 686 out of the showcase as opposed to ordering it if possible(Smith will redo the barrel under warranty, by the way but it shouldn't happen in the first place).

 

[casey2011]

I agree with billybob44

 

[Fordtough25]

Hah, so that was the magnum you said you got rid of?

Yessir sure was. I will probably get another one someday, I liked it a lot.

 

[shooter1054]

From what I know of each, if you choose the "wrong" one, You still have a great gun. And I don't think there is a wrong answer. Of course, the "right" answer is to get both.

 

[Leo]

I have one of each. The smith has the trigger tuned up and a replacement spring. The Ruger has a wolfe spring kit that brought the trigger to the same level. The smith wears hogue fingergroove grips. I was satisfied with the rubber grips on the GP100. Both are equal in the single and double action trigger pull. They both shoot the same ammo very accurately. They both use the same safariland speedloaders. Neither has needed any repairs over the years. When I get one out, the brand is never the issue, it is simply a matter of choosing a 4 inch revolver or a 6 inch. I agree with the poster who said that you probably will not be able to wear one out, especially if you mostly shoot .38 spl practice ammo. Get the one you feel most comfortable with, you will not go wrong either way

 

[Plinkuh]

I have no experience with the 686 but I love my GP100's. Even though the Smith has a better out-of-the-box trigger, there is such a thing as getting an action/trigger job. I suppose that would equalize the cost advantage of the GP-100.

As far as better looks ... I wouldn't be so sure that couldn't be fixed as well.