OT Which would you choose? S&W or Ruger

[abcollector]

Okay...
Revolver one. Stainless S&W Model 66 2.5" barrel .357 Mag adjustable rear sight

OR

Revolver two. Stainless Ruger Security-Six 2.5" barrel .357 Mag adjustable rear sight

both are used and both are in excellent condition. both have a turn line on the cylinder which appear about equal, slight. Ruger weighs just a tad more. both have hogue monogrips. They're pretty much equal so which one would you choose?

[mescalero1]

S&W, a purely presonal prejudice, I do work on & know how to work on them.
Looking at it objectivly, the Ruger has more mass in critical areas, making it logically " stronger "
What do you want to do with it?

[bsaride]

Sorry, but I'm a DA S&W fan from way back,
So you know my choice.

BTW pinky finger damage to shootin hand means I can't shoot
a SA and have it feel right in my hand anymore.

[C. Cash]

Unless there is something wrong with either pistol, you really can't go wrong here. The Ruger in that configuration is a really nice set up, and robust. Mine shoots really small groups, even with the 2.75" barrel and it points as nice as a GP-100. I am partial to the Rugers and would personally go for the Ruger...but like Mescalero, that's just my prejudice talking.

[Tycer]

Are you shooting cast or jacketed? Ruger has tighter tolerances and makes a better cast bullet gun. Other than the Hogue grip, the Ruger can be disassembled with a cartridge.

[awp101]

Dyed in the wool S&W fan here.

The ONLY advantage I can think of for the Ruger is it may handle the light, fast rounds (125g) better than the K Frame. Frame cracking from said loads prompted S&W to delevop the L Frame (586/686) to deal with the issue.

[abcollector]

Other than the Hogue grip, the Ruger can be disassembled with a cartridge.

I didn't know that!

Thanks for the replies guys. I was looking at which one I should get just for carry in a belt holster when camping. They are both so close in everything but I too thought the build of the Ruger was a little more beefier.
Is there much difference in the S&W having recessed rim for the cartridge as opposed to the Ruger's cylinder were the rim is above the face?

I wasn't really looking or thinking about shooting jacketed vs cast but maybe I should consider it.

[Tycer]

The Ruger will digest full house 357s all day forever and the K frame has a reputation for loosening up over time. I have both and love both. My Ruger is a Speed Six DAO.

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

I have over two dozen S&W double action revolvers. While I own a bunch of Ruger single actions, I don't own a single Ruger double action, so that's my answer.

No, there is no significance to counterbored chambers anymore, at least not for conventional cartridges, it is pretty much just cosmetic these days. Modern 357 Mag case heads are strong enough to take the pressure of the cartridge without the gun needing the protection of counterbored chambers.

As far as the strength of the Smith is concerned, I doubt if you will ever put enough 357 Mag ammo through it to hurt it. The problems with K frame 357 Mag Smiths was that with high velocity loads the forcing cone would sometimes split. But you had to put an awful lot of ammo through them, and a K frame Smith is just not all that comfortable to be shooting with a great deal of full house 357 Mag ammo anyway. Most of the time I shoot 38 Special in mine. Even if you buy the Ruger, you will probably be putting 38s through it most of the time.

[Doc Hudson]

When it comes to DA six-guns, I'm a Smith & Wesson Man, I'd take the Model 66.

IMO, the K-fram S&W 357 Magnums are the perfect packing pistols, if you don't have a .44 Peacemaker.

Then again, the perfect answer to this question is just exactly what John Taffin would say:

Buy 'em both!!

[2ndovc]

I've always been a S&W guy too.

I bought my 66 around '92 when the PDs across the country were selling off their
revolvers that had been replaced with auto pistols. Don't think it had
been used much if at all. If I remeber right I think i paid about $200 for it after
picking it out of a pile of about twenty ( wish I could have bought them all!).

Only .357 revolver I've owned until last summer I bought a Uberti Bisley in .357.

This little sixgun has been a favorite hiking / camping revolver.



jb

[buckeyeshooter]

I'll take the S & W, but not a K frame. I have a nice 3 1/2 inch N frame 27 for that duty.

[awp101]

I'll take the S & W, but not a K frame. I have a nice 3 1/2 inch N frame 27 for that duty.

This has been my sig line on other boards for years:
The Python is probably the better combat arm, but once you run out of bullets nothing screams "pistol whip" like an N-frame.

[Redhawk1]

Which ever one you like the best get. Either will get the job done.

I own both Ruger and Smith's.

[O.S.O.K.]

You don't say what the price of each is. If they are the same price - definatley choose the S&W as they have appreciated dramatically in value. The advent of the trigger lock dohicky has brought this on and the older models are now prized for lack of this feature.

Practically, if I were to be choosing and knew that I'd need to keep this for the rest of my life and would never have access to a gunsmith, I'd take the Ruger in a heartbeat. It's much more robust and less prone to going out of time - regardless to what kind of sane loads you feed it. They are both accurate when working correctly.

[shdwlkr]

If you are going to be shooting a lot I would tend towards the Ruger but if you are going to be shooting only a 1000 rounds or less a year either will work.
I would never buy a 2.5 inch barreled pistol my self as I prefer longer barrels and the shortest is 4 inches I think.

[Lastmohecken]

I like Ruger Single Actions, but I prefer Smith and Wessons for doubleactions, because I like the trigger pulls better, and I am used to them, and I know how to work on them, better. However, you can shoot a smith loose, but if that is an issue buy several.

[Sixgun]

six vs. one half dozen---get the one that feels best in your hand

When it comes to double actions, I'll take a "Smith.

When it comes to single actions, I'll take a Colt

Whoops-------Colt or Ruger SA's.------Sixgun

[TCB in TN]

I like both, typically I think the Smiths look better, and feel a little better in my hand, but Rugers are a little beffier built, and I have found them to be real good shooters. I have also found that Rugers are typically a little less expensive (at least locally). Either should do you right! Pick the one you like the best, or the one that you can get the best deal on.

[Hobie]

Okay...
Revolver one. Stainless S&W Model 66 2.5" barrel .357 Mag adjustable rear sight

OR

Revolver two. Stainless Ruger Security-Six 2.5" barrel .357 Mag adjustable rear sight

both are used and both are in excellent condition. both have a turn line on the cylinder which appear about equal, slight. Ruger weighs just a tad more. both have hogue monogrips. They're pretty much equal so which one would you choose?

Both.

[JReed]

If you had to chose just one I would get the Ruger. I have had several Rugers of the years they are built like tanks and will digest anything to care to launch down the bore. Yes they tend to be heavier then the other manufacturers but you can hardly break em.

[piller]

After several thousand rounds, a Ruger is just getting broken in, and it is starting to get as slick as you can ask for. I choose Ruger for any used gun over a S&W. New, and if it is not going to be shot much, well, that is a different matter.

[Old Savage]

Well the Smith, I have over 6,000 rounds through a 44 Spl and it is still just fine.

[the telegraphist]

I'll take the S & W, but not a K frame. I have a nice 3 1/2 inch N frame 27 for that duty.

Now your talking Buckeye, model 27 is the ace in the pack, that should probably be four aces. Dont wanna steal the thread, he has gotta go with what he feels most comfortable with. Either would do him proud. But I love them Smiths.

[Leverdude]

I only recently started messing with revolvers. Not having any sentamental attachments I just chose Ruger because its pretty much universally thought of as stronger. I dont know if that really matters or not, but I tend to err on the side of caution.

[RIHMFIRE]

S&W
buy i like the ruger too!

[ceb]

My all time favorite revolver is a 4" Smith model 19, but having said that, I was a Ruger fan before Ruger was cool as they say. The Security-six family of revolvers are great and I keep one secreted around the house for emergencys. I used to shoot them in PPC competitions against the tuned bull barrel Smiths most were using and did right well shooting in Master class most of the time. I really like both of the guns you mention and you won't go wrong with either one if they are both in good condition. I'd try to buy both and which ever you decide is your favorite, sell the other to me.

[Rusty]

If it was for shooting a steady diet of stiff loads I'd take the Ruger.

If I was going to be carrying it in a holster for any time I'd pick the S&W.

[jhrosier]

Okay...
Revolver one. Stainless S&W Model 66 2.5" barrel .357 Mag adjustable rear sight

OR

Revolver two. Stainless Ruger Security-Six 2.5" barrel .357 Mag adjustable rear sight
...

Given those choices, I would (and did) pick the Ruger stainless Security-Six.
I've had mine for 30+ years now, bought used, and it shows no sign of wearing out anytime soon.
I lost track of how many thousands of rounds that it has fired years ago.
I've also lost count of how many S&W K frames that I've bought and then sold since then.

If you had to choose between the Security-Six and a 686, I could go either way.

The only possible downside to the Ruger is that I heard recently that Ruger has no more parts for the Security-Sixes so factory repairs will no longer be possible. i have not confirmed this however.

Jack

[marlinman93]

I'd choose the S&W every time!

[JustaJeepGuy]

No matter how much you like the Smith, the Mod 66 was never intended to shoot full loads all the time. The Ruger was. So it's a question of how much you're going to shoot it.

[Streetstar]

I'd go Smith if i could only buy one. My unit in the Army in the Desert Shield/Storm era actively trained with sidearms and the stainless Smith .357 was one of them. The Israeli 9mm carbine load (+P+) would crack slides on the 92 Beretta, but the 6 shooter put a lot of heat out there -- these were stainless K frames, so they may have been 66's too, because i know they definitely were not as big as a 686.

The Smith is almost universally loved ------

that said, i only know the Rugers by reputation . They are not as handsome as a Smith, but then again, an AR-15 is not as
"handsome" as a Swedish Mauser either --- but the Rugers have a rep to be claw hammer reliable without having to put a screwdriver to them. I will admit that with 1000 round training weeks at times, the Smiths had to be cycled through the armorer's post occasionally , but we put those things through more hell than most could , except for maybe a pro bowling pin shooter or IPSCA guy, -- 50-75 mozambique drills a day coupled with marksmanship training and other drills -- all with full house loads, because as one instructor put it, "we dont go to war with .38 wadcutters if we can help it"