Both are nice pistols, but I'm leaning toward the S&W. I'm getting one this winter, hopefully a 4" stainless model.

I would go with the S&W as I have shot both, and the smoother trigger of the 686 will pay off better when hunting.

I can say that you will be fine with either revolver. I have owned a 4" KGP100 for almost twenty years and is a great revolver, very accurate and a real good trigger.

I also own a newer 629 and it is a very good revolver as well. I have shot the 586 and 686 and they are certainly worth the money.

I have a 4” GP100, 4” 686SSR, 4” 627Pro and 5” 627PC. All are similar. The trigger on the Smiths is typically better from the box, but the GP100 is readily amenable to smoothing. When you get done, there really isn’t much to choose but personal preference. My preference is actually for the 5” 627PC.

You might want to re-visit the triggers on the GP-100's. They are now as smooth and sometimes, smoother than the S&W's. My current GP-100 has a better trigger than I have experienced on any modern S&W revolver. As to which one to purchase? it's really a toss-up. Except the Ruger does not have a hole in the side.

I like my GP100 4".

Ruger doesn't make a 5" GP100, they do make a 3", 4" and a 6" GP100. I went with a 6" GP100.

They are both fine guns, but since you want to hunt with it, I would lean towards the Ruger. The GP-100 is built like a tank, meaning that it is capable of shooting a steady diet of hot loads. The S&W might stand up to that, too, but the Ruger certainly will. Generally speaking, hand loaders prefer the Rugers because of this.

I love my 686

I was mistaken in my earlier post. I did a little research and discovered that Ruger did make a limited run of 5" GP100's prior to 2002 and some for special distributors like Talo and Davidsons.

I looked at both when I recently bought a .357. (I did own a 686 many years ago).
I personally liked the trigger on the Ruger over the current 686.
I saved money and went with a 5" GP-100 (From Davidson's Gallery).

Built like a tank.....

Lateck,

Personally I would go with the S&W. I truly love my 6" 686. Nothing wrong with the Ruger but I prefer the feel of the smith much more.

I am a S@W man...so I love the 686. It fits my hand like a glove. I hoisted a Ruger, and it is also a fine piece, just didn't have that "feel" for me. Your choice, two great revolvers.
Eli

In 357 I wouldn't worry too much about one being more heavy duty or durable than the other. i personally find the S&Ws to be much more refined and more accurate. The Smiths trigger (double action and single action) will normally be better out of the box and can be tuned to be a much much better trigger. Rugers are great guns, just not in the same league as S&Ws in my experience.

I have several 686's and only one GP100. Get the Smith

Decided to add revolver to my collection of semi-autos recently. Spent a great deal of time researching and trying to decide between Smith and Ruger. Handled and shot many examples of each. I concluded that late model Ruger GP100's are better finished and the quality is higher than late model Smiths. The newer Smiths use MIM parts and the fit is not up to their old standards. After a few hundred rounds and simple installation of hammer and trigger return springs, the Ruger trigger is at least as light and smooth as any Smith I have shot over the last 40 years. I had my gunsmith check the action on the GP100 and he said he could not improve it.

Just my opinion.

Bob W
Cogito, ergo armatum sum