# NOOB - SW 686 vs GP100 with trigger job.



## gahboo (Jan 15, 2016)

Hi, I'm a new poster and am a newbie to handgun hunting. Think I originally posted to wrong forum so I am posting again here.

My only weapon now is a Browning Buckmark .22. I started with a .22 in order to learn to shoot without a flinch due to beginning with a hand cannon. I can now shoot the gun accurately and with proper form, so now it is time to get the hunting gun. For various reasons I want a .357 Mag. I'll be hunting small South Texas Whitetail and I know that the .357, with a good shot placement, is more than enough to reliably bring these deer down at appropriate distances (25 - 40 yards) with the .357. The range might be a little closer because I do not want to use optics. I have no problem with getting the deer close enough. 

I am on a budget and can afford a SW 686 or a Ruger GP100. Since the Ruger is less expensive, if I go with the GP100, I will be able to afford a trigger job too.

My question is which do you think would provide the best shooting gun. I have no preference for looks, handling, etc because I like them both. My Buckmark has an awesome trigger and I want something that will at least match that gun in terms of trigger. I know the 686 is known to have a better trigger than the GP100 out of the box, but I am wondering if the trigger job on the GP100 might make it better than the 686 stock.

I am also interested in hearing about other alternatives that might work for me. The price has to be at about $900 or less and I want the best shooter I can get for the money.

Thank you for your time.


----------



## pblanc (Mar 3, 2015)

I am not much of a revolver guy and I own only one, a blued GP100 4" I bought used a few years back. I have shot a number of Smiths and one might have been a 686 but I'm not certain.

There is no uniform consensus but I have heard the opinion expressed on a variety of forums that Ruger trigger actions have improved in recent years and Smiths have gotten worse. Although the predominant opinion seems to be that older production Smiths have the better triggers, with new production revolvers opinions seem to be divided Smith vs. Ruger.

I am no gunsmith whatsoever, but I have detail stripped my GP100 except for cylinder disassembly which requires a special tool. The Ruger GP100's modular design makes it pretty easy to disassemble. There is a nice on-line tutorial on doing a trigger job on the Ruger SP101 and the parts on the GP100 are equivalent:

Ruger SP101 Trigger Job Guide

I followed this guide, carefully stoned the sear surfaces of the trigger and hammer, polished up the action parts including the trigger plunger spring channel and hammer dog, swapped out the hammer spring and trigger return spring, and shimmed my hammer, trigger, and hammer dog. I would say that the trigger action on my Ruger is as good as any Smith I have shot, and better than a friend's Colt Python that I have occasionally shot.

I bought my Ruger for around $350 used. I have invested perhaps $60 total in new springs, a Hi-Viz front sight (the GP100 front sight is extremely easy to change without special tools), new springs (I used a Wilson Combat spring kit), and shims (triggershims dot com).


----------

