I still like my GP100 better than any Smith. Don't care what Indi has to say.
This Ruger has a really sweet trigger. You'll get to see someday.You'll grow out of that....
the rugers are built like tanks. I have the security six in 357, oh what a beast. People treat sw revolvers on some pedestal. I own both but for the price I can have a whole lot more fun with the ruger and still not suffer quality.
I never cared for the warning paragraph printed on the barrels of Rugers.I never cared for the side plate and screws on S&W revolvers.
So just what does "built like a tank" mean in the gun world? I'm thinking, heavier than it needs to be, sturdy, resists abusive treatment and continues to function. It doesn't mean slim, buttery smooth, shiney, dainty.
Now which sentence sounds more Ruger like and which more S&W like?
I never cared for the warning paragraph printed on the barrels of Rugers.
Me either. I choose warning paragraph over the side plate in 1986 though.I never cared for the warning paragraph printed on the barrels of Rugers.
So just what does "built like a tank" mean in the gun world? I'm thinking, heavier than it needs to be, sturdy, resists abusive treatment and continues to function. It doesn't mean slim, buttery smooth, shiney, dainty.
Now which sentence sounds more Ruger like and which more S&W like?
All cosmetic. I've never had an issue with S&W sideplates or durability. It's your money; spend it as you see fit.Me either. I choose warning paragraph over the side plate in 1986 though.
Excellent! Just like the term tack driver! Today that could mean the ability to hit a man sized target at touching range!"Built like a tank" is a nonsense gun nut term of art that is used by those who do not know what it means:
https://youtu.be/A7LcUmg4UtU
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/08/23/you-broke-it-44-magnum-barrel-failure/