Please Sign In

Please enter a valid username and password
  • Log in with Facebook
» Not a member? Take a moment to register
» Forgot Username or Password

Answers

Q:
Still looking for a .357 revolver. Smith and Wesson vs. Ruger vs. Taurus? I'd like your opinion and any tips on were to find a quality new our used revolver in the Sacramento CA area. My lead on a S&W 686 didn't pan out. Thanks

from Bull Elk on 12.14.10

Answers (10)

Top Rated
All Answers
from DSMbirddog wrote 3 years 30 weeks ago

I have owned both Ruger and S&W and you won't go wrong with either. I have had a S&W 686 for a number of years and doubt I would get rid of it. It certainly shoots better than I do.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from DSMbirddog wrote 3 years 30 weeks ago

I've had both S&W and Ruger, Both are good but have had a S&W 686 for anumber of years. Doubt I would sell it now since it shoots way better than I do.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bull Elk wrote 3 years 30 weeks ago

I bought the Ruger GP100 6" barrel in .357 stainless. I'm kind of kicking myself for not getting the 4" however.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bo wrote 3 years 31 weeks ago

I am NOT a fan of that caliber.I have had several over the years and really doubt that I will own another. As far as a revolver, I am a huge Smith fan.
I would recommend a .44 Smith. You can use light load magnums or heavy load .44 Specials with less punishment than you will get with any .357 (Other than maybe a Model 28 smith, if you can even find one)
As far as a backup gun for hunting the .44 does a much better job. If you are concerned about the recoil, I was too, until I fired one. It was not as intense as I thought it would be. I had far more control over the gun than with any .357 I ever shot.
Smith makes several really nice model 29 and variants thereof. There is a mountain gun, which you probably won't want to shoot heavy magnum loads for practice, but can in a crunch. Depending on the situation, if you have enough adrenaline going on, I promise you, you will not notice ANY recoil. You may have to pop the cylinder out just to know how many times you shot it. The .44 covers many more areas than does a .357.
The .44 magnum is a reasonable gun for taking a deer down (at a reasonable range) the .357 (IMO) is not. Many people who have tried had wounded deer andf get someone to help them track it down to finish the job, IF they found it.
As I said, I am not a fan of the caliber. I was until I shot the .44 Magnum. I have had several .44's and love them.
I am NOT large of stature. I stand around 5'6" and weigh about 150. If I can handle this gun, just about anyone that wants to can.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from AMM0 wrote 3 years 32 weeks ago

I'd still opt for a Smith & Wesson revolver. If you mentioned it being a true backpack gun, you're going to want something to withstand the wear & tear of that abuse. By that, I mean, you're going to be out hiking... treking through rough terrain... it's going to inevitably be roughed up in your backpack. I'm assuming you'll want easy access to it in case of an emergency so I doubt it'll be packed away nice 'n neat in a zippered and locked carry case inside of the pack.

I know of far too many individuals with Smith & Wesson revolvers who have had them for years. Regardless of the punishment you put them through, you get what you pay for and they hold up to anything you can dish out.

My two pennies.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bull Elk wrote 3 years 32 weeks ago

The .357 would be used for home protection, backpack gun when hunting and for target practicing. I have a 9mm Glock and a .22 Browning Buck Mark and thought I'd like to have something wit a bit more power.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from X2DKkiller wrote 3 years 32 weeks ago

Sorry meant to say Nicks.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bo wrote 3 years 32 weeks ago

Most of your choice should be dependent upon the use that the gun will have. What will be the primary function of the gun?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from X2DKkiller wrote 3 years 32 weeks ago

Check out Kicks gun shop in Lodi. He is an old friend of my dads.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jcarlin wrote 3 years 32 weeks ago

Bull,

I've fired some S&Ws and rented some that were over 20 years old and I don't think you can go wrong with them. My usual CC gun is a Taurus 605 (which was purchased partly becuase of the price). I've grown to love it because it just seems to fit my hands right, shoots where I point it naturally and easily, and is lightweight and compact. On the downside, I swear there's slightly more seperation between the chamber and the barrel than there used to be and I've wondered if the .357 recoil is causing that. I'd changed to practicing with mostly .38 due to that and cost. Haven't noticed any excessive blast or shavings out the side of the revolver, but I do think it's crept a little over the years. Otherwise it's a handy, easily concealed piece of machinery in .357.

0 Good Comment? | | Report

Post an Answer (200 characters or less)

from Bo wrote 3 years 32 weeks ago

Most of your choice should be dependent upon the use that the gun will have. What will be the primary function of the gun?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from AMM0 wrote 3 years 32 weeks ago

I'd still opt for a Smith & Wesson revolver. If you mentioned it being a true backpack gun, you're going to want something to withstand the wear & tear of that abuse. By that, I mean, you're going to be out hiking... treking through rough terrain... it's going to inevitably be roughed up in your backpack. I'm assuming you'll want easy access to it in case of an emergency so I doubt it'll be packed away nice 'n neat in a zippered and locked carry case inside of the pack.

I know of far too many individuals with Smith & Wesson revolvers who have had them for years. Regardless of the punishment you put them through, you get what you pay for and they hold up to anything you can dish out.

My two pennies.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bo wrote 3 years 31 weeks ago

I am NOT a fan of that caliber.I have had several over the years and really doubt that I will own another. As far as a revolver, I am a huge Smith fan.
I would recommend a .44 Smith. You can use light load magnums or heavy load .44 Specials with less punishment than you will get with any .357 (Other than maybe a Model 28 smith, if you can even find one)
As far as a backup gun for hunting the .44 does a much better job. If you are concerned about the recoil, I was too, until I fired one. It was not as intense as I thought it would be. I had far more control over the gun than with any .357 I ever shot.
Smith makes several really nice model 29 and variants thereof. There is a mountain gun, which you probably won't want to shoot heavy magnum loads for practice, but can in a crunch. Depending on the situation, if you have enough adrenaline going on, I promise you, you will not notice ANY recoil. You may have to pop the cylinder out just to know how many times you shot it. The .44 covers many more areas than does a .357.
The .44 magnum is a reasonable gun for taking a deer down (at a reasonable range) the .357 (IMO) is not. Many people who have tried had wounded deer andf get someone to help them track it down to finish the job, IF they found it.
As I said, I am not a fan of the caliber. I was until I shot the .44 Magnum. I have had several .44's and love them.
I am NOT large of stature. I stand around 5'6" and weigh about 150. If I can handle this gun, just about anyone that wants to can.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from DSMbirddog wrote 3 years 30 weeks ago

I've had both S&W and Ruger, Both are good but have had a S&W 686 for anumber of years. Doubt I would sell it now since it shoots way better than I do.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from DSMbirddog wrote 3 years 30 weeks ago

I have owned both Ruger and S&W and you won't go wrong with either. I have had a S&W 686 for a number of years and doubt I would get rid of it. It certainly shoots better than I do.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from jcarlin wrote 3 years 32 weeks ago

Bull,

I've fired some S&Ws and rented some that were over 20 years old and I don't think you can go wrong with them. My usual CC gun is a Taurus 605 (which was purchased partly becuase of the price). I've grown to love it because it just seems to fit my hands right, shoots where I point it naturally and easily, and is lightweight and compact. On the downside, I swear there's slightly more seperation between the chamber and the barrel than there used to be and I've wondered if the .357 recoil is causing that. I'd changed to practicing with mostly .38 due to that and cost. Haven't noticed any excessive blast or shavings out the side of the revolver, but I do think it's crept a little over the years. Otherwise it's a handy, easily concealed piece of machinery in .357.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from X2DKkiller wrote 3 years 32 weeks ago

Check out Kicks gun shop in Lodi. He is an old friend of my dads.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from X2DKkiller wrote 3 years 32 weeks ago

Sorry meant to say Nicks.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bull Elk wrote 3 years 32 weeks ago

The .357 would be used for home protection, backpack gun when hunting and for target practicing. I have a 9mm Glock and a .22 Browning Buck Mark and thought I'd like to have something wit a bit more power.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bull Elk wrote 3 years 30 weeks ago

I bought the Ruger GP100 6" barrel in .357 stainless. I'm kind of kicking myself for not getting the 4" however.

0 Good Comment? | | Report

Post an Answer (200 characters or less)

bmxbiz