I agree, and although they never really made it very big, I would have sure loved for CZ to have continued to produce the Dan Wesson 715 .357 Magnum pistol pack. I have heard nothing but good from owners of the Dan from any of their several "eras" of production.I love them both. They are the main two serious revolver manufacturers. Colt is worthy too but not nearly as prolific as Smith and Ruger and more expensive.
I like S&W for lightweight and ergonomic and I like Ruger for value and built like a tank. As far as recent and current production is concerned, I would have to go with Ruger.
I see a lot of interesting revolvers by other manufacturers at gun shows...I look at them and say "but it ain't a Ruger or Smith". The other makes are OK if you plan to shoot 2 boxes through them in your lifetime.
Ruger beats them all for high round count.
I second that!I used to have friends who would RAVE to me about Ruger's factory repair/customer service.
I'd say, "I have S&Ws. I have no idea what their customer service is like, because I've never had to return one."
I've never returned either one to find out either way. But I will also add that I have only bought one recent version new from each of them. A 642 and an SP101. Both immediately came apart to correct the horrible triggers, clean out the crap the factory left in them from manufacturing, deburr what should have been done at the factory, and polish up the parts left rough.I second that!
Which Charter do you have? I had the opportunity to buy a Mag Pug for $299 but I passed on it. Mainly because I'm in the middle of paying off a Speed Six.I've never returned either one to find out either way. But I will also add that I have only bought one recent version new from each of them. A 642 and an SP101. Both immediately came apart to correct the horrible triggers, clean out the crap the factory left in them from manufacturing, deburr what should have been done at the factory, and polish up the parts left rough.
I haven't had to do that with the Charter Arms ones that cost considerably less than either of them. Both companies need to get their s@#t together on quality control.
I'm not a fan of the internal lock either but I agree, there are definitely points on both sides. I wish they would make the 637 with no lock. Then again I doubt I'd buy any small lightweight 38 at this point.I honestly think that people on both sides of the aisle can make a case that their pick is best, based on focusing on certain points of superiority inherent in either brand. I have owned more than several examples of each, both have much to recommend their products. While I'll acknowledge that Rugers are stronger, both in theory and historical practice, I do believe that I prefer the way S&W DA revolvers feel in my hand, and their (tuned) action to Rugers, that was at least precisely up to the day they decided they had to put an internal lock on them. With exceptions for only their non-lock bearing revolvers in production today (642/442), all current S&W cylinder guns are dead to me, so there is that.
And of course, without a doubt, Ruger is lead dog between the two on single action revolvers...
I was really considering the 3 inch mag pug for a while, I like the high polish finish. They a have 3 inch mag pug in black nitride with an optic on it too.19 total. My current favorites are a mag pug 3" and a Bulldog Target, but they all get shot.
I will admit my daily carry is a S&W 36. But it's from 1969 when they still used gunsmiths instead of assemblers to build them.
Well that explains why S&W was better at making lighter weight revolvers. Ruger didn't effectively compete with the J frames until recently.If I recall, part of his argument was that the S&W are forged, and the Rugers are cast, and that the heavier metal of the Rugers is to make them similar in strength to the S&W.
New S & W revolves are CRAP! - My 357 S & W revolver blew up in my hand using .38 special factory ammo. (Note: Smith and Wesson would not do anything for me when this happened, they told me to send them $650.00 for a new revolver.) NEVER buy a Smith and Wesson revolver! -- Buy a RUGER!I wanted to see what you guys think about this one, before I go any further this is a Yankee Marshall video. Now I know why people say he don't know what he's talking about. I actually like quite a few of his videos and there are quite a few things I see eye to eye with him on but he is dead wrong on this one. Its funny how I made multiple comments and explained very intelligently, why he's wrong but also right and never got a response.
According to Yankee, Rugers are not stronger than S&W revolvers, S&W makes the stronger more durable revolver period, . I do like S&W revolvers and wouldn't hesitate to own one but Yankee obviously forgot alot of history and has a bias for S&W.
My answer was, it's not that one brand is better or stronger than the other it's that certain models are going to be stronger than other models.