The Truth About Ruger Revolvers!?! Why They're Inferior To Smith & Colt!

[@neilsea5771]

I've watched several of your videos and mentally counted the number of inaccurate, false, or technically incorrect "facts". Until now I've refrained from correcting your incorrect statements. I HAVE to speak up on this video made on your ignorance of manufacturing and engineering methods. Ruger doesn't simply use casting methods. Speaking as former (retired) engineer, gunsmith, manufacturer consultant, competitor, builder, and "gun nut" over my lifetime starting 50+ years and THOUSANDS of firearms, I'm not exactly an amateur. To begin with, technically ALL steel is cast, When steel is made from iron, it's in a blast furnace, and the exacting amounts of other ingredients combined with iron in LIQUID form is poured in the shape of whatever mold that is required for that lot. When you say Ruger products are cast, you make it sound dirty and generates mental images of casting lead for fishing sinkers. That couldn't be further from the truth! Ruger has painstakingly perfected the lost wax investment cast process. They use the exact type of steel, speed at which the steel is injected into the mold, cooling length of time, and even oxygen purged enclosed environment. The resulting end product is a LONG way from simply being cast! Ruger designed revolvers frames are solid, not pieced together with a sideplate that automatically weakens the frame strength. Solid vs 2 piece frame (main) is obviously no comparison. Also, while I readily concede that S&W and Colt revolvers seem more refined, the action of Ruger revolvers can be easily smoothed and slicked up to rival even vintage Pythons! An example is the Redhawk revolver line (NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH Super Redhawk line with VASTLY different clockwork and spring setup/design). It's MY opinion that the Ruger Redhawk is THE BEST big bore revolver EVER designed. The unique clockwork design of Redhawks features a single spring, serving as both mainspring and trigger return spring. The single action pull, while not in the same class of S&W or Colt, can be tuned/polished for a very nice, smooth, light pull. Now, when we talk about double action trigger pull, the Redhawk internals can EASILY be polished, installing one of the excellent Wolff spring kits, and surface treated with Brownell's Action Magic 2, or comparable products, resulting in ice on glass sub 6# double action trigger pull. I extend standing offer to discuss firearms/design/engineering/tuning in just about any related subject, with not only you, but anyone needing info. You do have a lot of experience, as an "old school" influencer I respect that, and I'm sure someone with your amount of experience, and an influencer with tens of thousands of subscribers, and MANY times that of people watching your videos offering your opinion and recommendations (nothing wrong there), would appreciate technically accurate info to pass on to your viewers.

[@radical026]

The number of people online especially in gun spaces that conflate different casting processes as all one thing infuriates me as well, thank you for typing an explanation so I didn't have to.

[@ronalddunne3413]

THANK YOU! You said what I wanted to, in far better fashion. 😃

[@tormentorxl2732]

The Redhawks, gp100 and sp101 are damn fine revolvers.

[@hawks2252]

I went a sp101 and think it is a fine revolver. Don't have a ton of rounds through it (stupid prices of ammo).

[@FCV0511]

The Redhawk is seriously underrated. Cool name, partial underlug, robust as hell, and the 357 models hold eight rounds!

[@monotech20.14]

This guy just likes being contrarian.

[@Tony-q8f6o]

What about security six

[@FCV0511]

@@Tony-q8f6o I would love for Ruger to bring back the Speed/Service/Security Six series. They're some of the best double action revolvers ever created IMO.

[@PassivePortfolios]

The best revolver is no longer made - Ruger Security Six.

[@hesstonclement4933]

YES!! No doubt, my first big bore handgun at 13, 4" blued brand "new" with box was grandfather's. Found a blued 2.75 in barrel one last year that I refurbished and jeweled trigger/ hammer is now my edc, also bought a complete parts kit for cheap to hand down with them so my grandkids grandkids can keep them running😂 traded a gp100 for a stainless speed six for my mother, it's her go to. also picked up a stainless 2.75 in security for my big brother a few years back. One of the sexiest best feeling guns I've held and seen. Very accurate for snubbies I'll add. The security six series runs strong in my family. Not that you give a shit haha just love seeing love for the six series out there

[@pnwoods]

Agreed. The Security/Speed Six's were the working man's Cadillac. Retired California Highway Patrolman's Stainless Speed Six on the nightstand.

[@magnum_0710]

My Security Six was made in 1974, one of the first stainless ones made. No idea how many rounds before me but I've put countless rounds of 357 through it, still locks up like it's brand new. Yankee is right to an extent, Rugers are bigger because they're cast. As for durability it depends on the model. I can run as many hot 125 grain magnums through a Security Six or GP100 as I want, you can't do that with a vintage K frame with the undercut forcing cone. Now the 686 or N frame is a different story, it becomes a wash.

[@FCV0511]

Agreed. The Speed and Police Service Six were fantastic too!

[@magnum_0710]

@FCV0511 I'm hoping to find a used Speed Six snubby for CCW...the 4 inch Security doesn't pack as easily as I thought it would

[@jayv9286]

And now we know why Yankee only has 360K followers and Hickok 45 has 8 million.

[@TheGV50]

LOL!!!!!! Good One Ha Ha!!!!!

[@flynt1977]

Numbers don't lie.

[@vigilantobserver8389]

Hickok is sponsored by Bud's gun shop. He's great! I looked Bud's up and the reviews were horrible! Apparently, Customer Service is a big problem among other complaints. I dodged a bullet because I was interested in a weapon but checked the reviews.

[@timothyellis596]

why?

[@arielwasiak9573]

I like Yankee better than that Hickok hore. I just disagree on this rant. And he tells you to go Fk yourself often enough to prove he does not care what you say.. I trust him ,even if I think he is too liberal. Hickok has sold out the 2a number of times. He is a Hore. No values. BUT free country still, we all believe what we want and act accordingly.

[@gregbrown5129]

My dad gave me a Security Six when I turned 21 back in 1985. Of course I still have it. You will never be able to convince me that Ruger's are inferior to Colt and S&W.

[@philiphill6697]

He's correct about the triggers though.

[@MilitaryTalkGuy]

you try the double action trigger on your security six and then try the double action on my SW and you would change your mind. Rugers are well made and reliable but when it comes to double action triggers... they are not even close to old SW revolvers.

[@totizabayle377]

@@philiphill6697 True . My model 64-1 and model 15-3 have the best trigger action among my hand gun collection.

[@snowgorilla9789]

That fact that S&W service SUCKS and they don't give a shit about customers should COUNT FOR SOMETHING

[@MoxJet629]

I've dealt with them twice any they were great. I'm convinced the people who have a problem with them are not too bright.

[@snowgorilla9789]

​@@MoxJet629If you call replacing their brand new (less than 100 rounds) with a replacement model taking ONE YEAR and ONE DAY good service, have at her bud. And they had the dud gun for that entire time.

[@mrbee145]

That’s nonsense. Smith has wonderful customer service.

[@atkinsjoe5754]

S&W has great customer service

[@MoxJet629]

@@snowgorilla9789 No. I'm calling you stupid or a liar.

[@postal1911]

Body shaming…… thicker will keep you warm all night :)

[@martinflanigan650]

Big disagree this time Yank! You made the Smith & Wesson better than Colt because its slightly more durable. Nothing is more durable than a Ruger. And that's just the standard GP100. Then consider the Redhawk. How i would love to have the eight shot .357! They are the best! My opinion takes precedence over yours. Every girl i've ever know tells me i'm the most opinionated man in the world. lol!

[@chrispierce1988]

Gp100 all the way!

[@soondead007]

Yikes... Ok, they are more durable, but they are also a hunk of metal. Ruger double actions make me long for the smooth lines of a Taurus

[@TheGunsNBlades]

No one listens to someone with a degree from Marshall University anyway 😂😭

[@benn454]

@@soondead007 That bulky extra metal is what makes them so strong. You buy a Ruger if you want a dependable revolver that you can shoot for decades and pass on to your grandchildren. If all you want is a pretty safe queen, then you're not a shooter. You're just a collector.

[@MrDoverfield]

Good argument except Yankee is ALWAYS right and you’re not Yankee so therefore you’re wrong

[@TalonID]

Talk to the guys that build premium cartridges loaded with solids. They flat out tell you to not shoot them in a S&W and limit them to Rugers - enough said.

[@brycet6866]

There are factory loads of 44 mag that specifically say that they cannot be used in S&W because of the SAAMI pressure. How does that make them better than a Ruger ?

[@poacher-ec9zo]

Not the pressure, the overall length

[@richjageman3976]

@@poacher-ec9zoNot the OA length, the pressure. From a webpage selling higher pressure ammo "This new load is designed ONLY for certain firearms. They are as follows; Ruger Red Hawk, Ruger Super Red Hawk (the Ruger Alaskan is a short barrel Super Redhawk), Ruger Super Blackhawk or Vaquero, Freedom Arms Model 83, Taurus Raging Bull All Steel Versions (no lightweight alloys), Colt Anaconda, Magnum Research BFR and Dan Wesson Revolvers. Suitable rifles include T/C Encore, CVA Hunter, Handi Rifle and any rifle with a falling block action. Please note that this website list of approved firearms is more up to date than some of the lists found on our boxes of ammo. We get hundreds of emails asking if this load can be fired in S&W revolvers or some firearm other than what is in the above list. The answer is NO." Notice where it states All Steel Versions (no lightweight alloys).

[@Wildwestwrangler]

​@@richjageman3976it's not the pressure with those smiths it's the inertia from the insane recoil of 300gr or heavier loads because the inertia caused by the recoil can cause problems with lockup and timing, and can potentially cause the cylinder to turn backwards. You're not harming the frame cylinder or barrel themselves as would happen from pressure it's the internal mechanisms for lockup and timing that get screwed from the beating, but it's not from the pressure of the round going off, it's from the violent recoil of the heavies.

[@Wildwestwrangler]

​@@richjageman3976at least not in the model 29's and 629's on the larger steel frames, but you are right about the lightweight alloy models. All those smiths should really be kept to 240gr loads. Although, you would probably be ok with the newer 629 deluxes.

[@richjageman3976]

@@WildwestwranglerThe pressure is what causes the harder recoil

[@madsatyr]

Why do I have 44 mag buffalo bore loads that will work on my Redhawk and not my model 29?

[@OutbackExotics]

Same with the anaconda it will take that ammo as well colt and Ruger kick smiths ass and don’t get me started on those keys you need for Smiths this is a horrible take

[@Wildwestwrangler]

​@@OutbackExoticsjust don't use the lock on the Smiths and it's no big deal.

[@Wildwestwrangler]

True, you don't want to run the super heavy 44 mags in those 29's or the lock and timing gets screwed. Sometimes the cylinders can even turn backwards under recoil!!! But that's with the 300gr or heavier weights.

[@meatballs2849]

Ruger's revolver designs are weaker than the S&W designs, and the proof is there are NO .500 magnum Ruger revolvers being offered from the factory. Ruger actually cannot easily offer that round, because the cast billet steel they work with cannot handle it, without becoming a BFR sized revolver. A model 29 is actually much stronger than a Super Backhawk or Redhawk, for the simple FACT, forged steel is much stronger than cast billet. Ruger's cylinders are oversized simply due to the fact they must to be, in order for the weaker billet steel Ruger uses to contain STANDARD .44 mag round pressure. Buffalo bore taking advantage of the extra space Ruger needed so they can offer a longer, heavier .44 mag projectile is a meaningless argument for Ruger's "strength", as the pressures are no greater in that round than any other .44 mag round. Buffalo Bore 300 grain is just a longer, heavier projectile, and anyway, it ain't shit compared to a .500 S&W.

[@ShaunZimmerman668]

​@meatballs2849 thats not right is it? Because ruger makes new 44 mag blackhawk and Redhawks and they are small frame fluted cylinders with a rounded trigger guard cast like u say and are chambered in 44 mag. So now if u want the light frame again u can get then. I think they were new read in guns and ammo!

[@markmeador1137]

I own S&W, Colt, Taurus and Ruger. My first Ruger was the 357 mag Blackhawk, I have had it since 1971. No problems at all. I bought a Taurus double action 357 in 74 and I cracked the frame on it shooting the same ammo I used in the Blackhawk. Taurus sent me a brand new pistol and no more problems, I still have it. I love revolvers, my favorite is my Colt Python with a 4” barrel. No one has a trigger like the Python.

[@benn454]

Are you talking about the same Colt that had such bad QC issues for so long, they eventually had to be bailed out by CZ?

[@Joeak74]

exactly.

[@tbjtbj4786]

And cz not the first to try. How many times has colt failed?

[@vigilantobserver8389]

The Python? It's so sad. Most American manufacturers are owned by foreign companies now. CZ makes awesome stuff, though!

[@richardmyers1250]

Ruger disassembles from the bottom. Smith and Colt have side plates. I would think that alone would make the Ruger stronger.

[@michaelschweimler7292]

Jupp, Rugers are thicker because they use cast frames. Ruger makes them thicker to make them as strong as S&W or Colt frames - and then ad even some more thickness. And they are stronger because they have proven to be. And the lockwork is more robust to. I have seen many S&W and even more Colt Revolvers out of time but less Rugers with issues. And that despite the imho fact that people with Ruger revolvers tend to shoot hotter loads and maybe use them in rougher environments than people carrying Colts or Smith. The lockwork is smoother on those - without doubt and they are good and reliable and also sturdy guns - but the lockwork of Ruger Revolvers is - at least for me - just fine. I love S&W, but if it comes to the end of the world i would take a Ruger.

[@coltonthompson958]

Me to

[@takumisato7126]

Agree 100 percent

[@vigilantobserver8389]

S&W are pretty expensive by comparison, aren't they?

[@timothyhoover9343]

Ruger cylinders are machined from solid stock, just as S&W cylinders are. Ruger frames, and many of the other parts, are made from Investment Castings, which are much stronger than die cast or sand cast parts.

[@michaelscafe2818]

In my prepurchase research of a 44 mag carry revolver, I read accounts of buddies that went and bought revolvers together where one bought the Colt Anaconda and other got the Ruger Redhawk. A few hundred full power loads later, the Colt shot loose with timing problems while the Redhawk was fine. Colt went in for repair and had the problem reoccur after another few hundred. Another person had a Smith and Ruger Redhawk who made a mistake reloading and overcharged using fast powder by setting his scale to the wrong weight. Shot some through his Redhawk and was fine, but then shot some through his Smith and buldged his gun. Smiths and Colts are certainly more elegant, but I find it hard to argue with the experience that folks have which indicates a strength advantage in the Redhawk. My research led me to buy the Redhawk because I wanted durability more than elegance

[@joeyskunk]

Better is subjective. I do agree with most of your assessment. The reasons for a heavier trigger pull come from how the gun is made and cost-cutting measures. However, these reasons can be addressed easily with parts and no filing. The gun's hammer tends to scrape on one side of the frame. The hammer is not centered but has side-to-side play in it. This lack of centering will cause drag. Ruger's solution is to put in a heavier hammer spring. The power of spring will make the hammer hit every time, regardless of the scraping. The trigger spring is also quite heavy because the trigger also tends to scrape one side of the frame. You can put lower-weight springs in both the hammer and trigger return springs. You can add shims to both the hammer and the trigger. Both will be centered without scraping the frame. These simple additions will make the Ruger GP100 have one of the smoothest and lightest pulls.

[@RockAnywayBand]

Correct. I've done that (springs and shims) and now my GP100 is as smooth as my S&W K-14.

[@marekburza7425]

Ruger revolvers are simply more durable and the frame design is superior. Sorry bruh..... Pretty doesn't mean better

[@monotech20.14]

This guy just likes being contrarian.

[@drewmoore365]

Heard from a few different gun stores that for rentals ruger revolvers last longer than smiths. Also no side plate is a better construction design imo

[@branmuffin5159]

I have heard from a few sources that Rugers are utilitarian tanks.

[@drewmoore365]

​@@branmuffin5159plus they have one of the best customer service. If you blow one up they'll fix it or send you a new one lol

[@PerceptionVsReality333]

I read about that.

[@edljnehan2811]

I also love the push button cylinder release especially since I've had the release buttons screws strip out on other revolvers😮

[@1974Imperium]

100% Agree

[@robertmckeown3014]

There are a few things I regret ever selling, my 78 Bronco, my 83 Mustang and my Ruger Super Redhawk with a 9.5 inch barrel. Now that was a great gun!

[@pb68slab18]

This guy is so FoS! He has no understanding of metallurgy, or the designing parameters for machined forged steel vs inv.cast. I've been hearing this BS this since the 70s. Besides, the strength against blowing up a revolver is the cylinder, and Ruger cylinders have always been made from machined and heat-treated bar stock, same as a Colt or S&W, but the Ruger Redhawk cylinder is still physically bigger in diameter and length. I've put tens of thousands of my off the book handloads thru my Redhawk back when I shot metallic silhouette competition. I've seen many S&Ws 'shoot loose', and even have distorted frames.

[@hardingdies7811]

I reload 12 calibers including several magnums, and if you look in the major reloading tables, you won't find any that restrict the max loads for RUGER, while several warn about S&W and COLT. Those warnings aren't because they publisher is bias, it's because they have data - like Hornady. My life depended on my revolver in SE Asia, and I wasn't taking any chances. Today I have several RUGERs, one S&W and no (overpriced) COLTs.

[@kangjames6227]

Ruger for the WIN!!! I'll take your advice sice you actually reload to get the max out of your weapon

[@kangjames6227]

Plus Im biased because I used a Ruger SR40 to save myself and my siblings lives' so Ruger reiterated why they're favorite gun maker

[@TerryBurian]

Modern Smith and Wesson revolvers are half-assed, shortcut handguns. I know this is true because I used to own a S&W Model 69 and I couldn't believe how half-assed it was. First, the barrel had been crowned after it had been button rifles, and I knew this had happened because of the displaced metal at the muzzle. Fixing that cut my group size in half. Next, when the 11% forcing cone had been cut, they didn't allow time for the cutter to bottom out for a revolution or two, and ended up with a strange dished forcing cone which I fixed with my own cutter. Then, since the S&W Model 69 is a five shot 44mag. L frame gun converted from a 357mag. It required a taller front sight which they didn't do, and as a result I HAD to use 200gr. bullets in order to sight it in. Lastly, most of the internal parts are MIM parts including the hammer, trigger and firing pin and others besides. I have already had my experiences with MIM parts and don't trust them AT ALL. All of these problems are fixable, but require a ridiculous amount of time, money and effort. If you want a S&W I'd highly recommend sticking with the older ones unless you feel like spending time, money and effort to fix it.

[@ernestclements7398]

Wait just a minute! Years ago when I first started working in Public Safety, my first sidearm was a Ruger Security Six, it was a great pistol, but I had to let it go when I went to work for a department that required a Smith & Wesson, 64, 65,66, or 67, so I traded it for a 64 ( bad idea, I should have kept it) then later I traded that for a 65 ( worse idea ever that one was built under Bangor Putas ownership of S&W, and it was a piece of garbage) so I replaced that with a GP 100 and that revolver continues to serve me today, My Brother In Law is a retired Chicago Cop, and he bought a Ruger Service Six when he was in the academy in 1981 and it saw him through 281/2 years on the force! Ruger continues to be the best quality for the price on the market, and one buys a Colt, or S&W he's paying 5 to 800 dollars more, just for the brand!

[@jarhead3038]

As a retired gunsmith..this is pure baloney.

[@adamesd3699]

Can you please explain further? Also, would you say revolvers are better built now or before? I have read that with the move towards semi-autos, a lot of the knowledge need to make really good revolvers has been lost at some companies as revolver gunsmiths have retired.

[@LogisticallyMisrepresented]

Good thing for the revolver industry you retired.!

[@GeorgeBryson-y1o]

I have a Python, 686+ and GP100. What I love about the GP100 is that it can be field stripped easily, which makes cleaning easier. And the crane locks into the frame in front of the cylinder.

[@mikeherrmann5360]

Super Redhawk is the best revolver I've ever had

[@reb1050]

I'll stick with Rugers. One, they are less expensive and two, they suit my purpose and three, I trust them. I bought my first high powered pistol back in 1976 and it's a Ruger Security Six .357 magnum. That's 47 yrs. without any malfunctions. That's good enough for me. Since then, I have bought numerous Ruger firearms, both rifle and handguns and never regretted purchasing any of them.

[@Seregtir]

Colt is just too expensive. Smith is excellent Ruger just looks too cool. I only shoot in single action mode, so the Ruger is fine for me.

[@porscheguy3820]

You are absolutely wrong . The Ruger GP 100 4 '' heavy barrel is the most dependable and most accurate handgun ever made.

[@jonpetry7314]

I got a 6" GP100. I've got my SP101 snubby for everyday... and the GP100 is for when the world goes to shit... If the world is still turning by the time I'm on my way out, my baby girl when be the recipient of my irons.

[@risby1930]

Absolutely correct. Ruger used to be an inexpensive "working man's gun, but they are pricing themselves out of the market.

[@davidkachel]

I'd say their prices have already surpassed the "ridiculous" bar.

[@MrDoverfield]

Ruger fanboys: I am about to completely disregard metallurgy facts to defend my favorite revolver

[@moobutt]

A GP100 is still a better revolver than a 686 and at better price point. What are you guys even talkin about???

[@MrDoverfield]

@@moobutt have you seen the prices recently? Smith and Wesson 686 revolvers are only a bit more expensive

[@moobutt]

@@MrDoverfield 100-150 isn’t a bit. And the trigger on my GP100 rivals the trigger on my PC Smith’s.

[@RickHuddle-nd4bc]

While you are badmouthing the modern casting methods used by Ruger, pop the side plate off of one of your beloved new manufacture Smiths and you will see MIM parts. MIM-Metsl injection molding. A CASTING process. Don't get me wrong, Smiths are wonderful but the dispersions cast on Ruger are misplaced.

[@christopherstephenson2119]

MIM parts are sintered powder metallurgy and is a completely different process than investment casting. Plus these parts are used only where the benefit of this process is realized. The frames on S&W are not MIM parts.

[@RickHuddle-nd4bc]

@christopherstephenson, I agree, MIM is a sintered metal process where metal particles are injected or forced into a mold and then heated. But please re-read my post. I DID NOT say S&W frames were MIM. S&W frames are machined from forgings. BUT, in current production S&W firearms, many internal lock work parts are MIM, or sintered metal. In older S&Ws, these internal parts were machined. YM was disparaging casting vs forging I just wanted to point out that the forged S&Ws included cast parts. Have a good day!

[@alanrawson-wg8io]

My buddy has a 44Redhawk that he used for years in IMHSA silhouette competition. It’s had 10s of thousands of full power handloads thru it with never a problem. Meanwhile the M29 guys either had to use lighter power loads or have the cylinders rebushed every season.

[@MidwayShooter]

A ruger is just a click below a smith? I sent my smith back and the customer service is shit & I paid much more than I did my Ruger GP100. I’ll Take Ruger

[@PerceptionVsReality333]

My friend had to send his S&W 686+ awhile back because of a canted barrel & cylinder timing issues...

[@SuspiciousGanymede]

S&W QC/CS is absolutely dogshit. I had to send an M&P CORE 9mm to the factory straight out the box. The gun shot so far to the left no amount of sight adjustment would fix the issue. I dropped $800 at my LGS, took it to the range an hour later and came back with a return label that day. I couldn't get a refund because it was a custom shop gun..

[@MidwayShooter]

@@PerceptionVsReality333 exactly

[@kirkneff2247]

I bought my first Ruger Security Six in 1973. It was deadly accurate right out of the box with a smooth action. I had wanted one in stainless, so in 1978, I acquired a stainless Ruger Security Six, which I still have and often use as my “carry gun.” In January of 1985, I signed on with a sheriff’s department, not knowing at the time that the department was dirty and run by anti-gun Democrats. They required that new deputies had to provide their own duty weapons because the staff had a history of abusing issue weapons. The snarky lieutenant sneered at my Ruger and ordered me to “get rid of that piece of shit Ruger” and get a “real gun,” a S&W or a Colt, within a couple of paychecks. We new recruits were sent to the range for familiarization and possible qualification on the PPC. Because I was an experienced shooter, hunting and targets, I qualified on the first round. The new recruits had a hard time, largely because they mostly had purchased S&W Model 13s(?) that a) seemed to have metal galling issues in the lockwork and b) were lubricated NIB with oil, which gummed up at 10 below zero on that winter day. Having grown up in the Upper Midwest, I still use graphite to lube all my guns. So the new recruits had to borrow my “piece of shit” Ruger for their familiarization and qualification efforts. The next morning, the lieutenant sneered at me and said, “You may keep that piece of shit Ruger.” I moved to the desert Southwest twenty years ago and my Ruger is my carry gun, especially for jeeping and hiking. Fine dust and fine sand can be a real problem here. I can easily field strip my Security Six and clean out the fine sand and dust with a toothbrush. Not so with a S&W, especially one with a “Hillary Hole.” That might require a trip to the gunsmith. Instead of action jobs a lighter springs, just use graphite and some dry firing to smooth out the action. And use hand weights to make your grip stronger.

[@nickmiller9262]

Did Smith & Wesson and Colt each send you a revolver for spewing this propaganda.😂

[@BigBlue1026]

I just sold off my S&W 686 and Mod 19 carry comp. I kept my Ruger Security Six, Speed Six and SP101. Nuff said.

[@darrenvanderwilt1258]

To me, it’s like comparing General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler. Everyone has their likes and dislikes, and each manufacturer has its ups and downs. I’m happy with my S&W 686, have friends that are Ruger collectors (I own a couple Rugers also), and some that love Colts. They all get the job done. Don’t get wrapped up in justification bias when Yankee does or doesn’t choose your favorite. I agree with Yankee, the S&W has more refinement, but that shouldn’t keep someone from choosing a Ruger.

[@NewswithJakenator]

I dont have the extensive revolver collection that you do, but with the ones that I have I have only had 1 issue with a Ruger. The cylinder pin would come loose on a 1993 Vaquero .44. One quick call to Ruger and I was sent a new pin and latch assembly free of charge. I am sure there are turds out there but my personal experience has been nothing but top notch. Not so with Colt and SW.

[@dawudasha977]

I used to be Ruger fan until ever Ruger I bought had to be sent back! Also let's not forget Bill Ruger was the one who thought up and pushed for 10 round magazine capacity for guns in California and wanted it implemented nationwide

[@earlelkins9086]

Let's not forget when S&W caved to the Clinton administration, and Taurus told them to go pound sand.

[@dlclane1]

If I’m not mistaken, as I was alive and an adult at the time, the legislation on the table at the time, democrat Clinton era, would have outlawed most if not all semi-auto tools. If not for Bill Ruger you would have been forced to buy revolvers, pumps and lever actions

[@Alien300Blackout]

Last time I checked nobody’s revolves have been cracking and getting blown in half unless they have been shooting reloads

[@theintrovertedcalifornian5047]

been shooting nothing but reloads out of my ruger gp 100 for 15 years now with no issues lol

[@Alien300Blackout]

@@theintrovertedcalifornian5047 Everyone that reloads cannot make that claim

[@theintrovertedcalifornian5047]

@@Alien300Blackout Then they are not reading their reloading manual correctly lol.

[@williamforbes5826]

The same applies to automobiles. Some people crash and bash while others wear the vehicle out from decades of service. Your mileage may vary!

[@jimmysp4des229]

​@@Alien300Blackout if youre blowing up, or even damaging your guns by shooting reloads, than you are not doing something right, and by something i mean using too much powder.

[@richardkev3077]

A few decades ago, a friend and I used S&W and Ruger for handgun metallic silhouette shooting. That meant maximum, heavy bullet, hand loads, and nothing but. 200 meters and 55 lb targets demand it. The Smiths had a better trigger. No question. The Smiths felt more precise, and try were. But they shot loose after a while. I got rid of my first Smith and replaced it with another. But the Rugers? Never a problem. They worked the same from day one until I stopped shooting in competition. I kept my last S&W. I really love how it feels, how it shoots. But after all the abuse, I really need to send it to S&W for refurbishing. Maybe I’ll do that… I didn’t like my Ruger enough to keep it. The friend who bought it used it for years with no problem. I did, however, buy a Ruger Bisley in .44 Magnum and had it heavily modified-which would have been illegal for competition. This one, I like. And 320gr bullets don’t bother it at all. Don’t try that with an 80s vintage model 29. Which is stronger? Ruger or S&W. In the 80s, there was no question. Today? I don’t know.

[@johnalexander7369]

S&W and Colt are specials with magnum capabilities. Rugers are magnums

[@harveycamacho2247]

My Ruger GP 100 has had over 2000 round and it looks and work as good as the day I got it. Great gun but the trigger on SW is better

[@jefferyfite7122]

Yankee, you need to sell off all your Colt revolvers (not SAA), Smith & Wesson, Ruger, Taurus or any other wheel gun you own. Free up the cash and get a Maunurhin MR73. There will be no further debate on who makes the best .357 revolver.

[@bladeduffer]

yes, I've heard that those and Korths are the pinnacle of revolver design. I wish I had the scratch for either.

[@theshapeexists]

I have a 1975 ruger Super Blackhawk with 7.5" barrel. It has seen the most insanely hot rounds through it for many years. Still going strong. I can only speak on my experience, but ive never had any issue with the several rugers i have owned. Rugers casting process is so refined that they do several other companies castings for them. Train axels are cast and there are axels on trains over 80 years old. Ruger has overbuilt guns and i look at that as a piece of mind rather than a problem.

[@dmw3086]

I like all three. Have shot all three and the colt was my favorite and it’s what I own now. The one thing I think might make the rugers “stronger” is that lock up on the crane rather than on the front of the ejector rod like a smith. But I know some smiths lock up on the crane as well but if it is any stronger I don’t think it’s a world of difference.

[@PeterKushubar]

Thank you, Sir! What you said is 100% true!! I agree with everything you said, I own many handguns and love everyone, yet, my Ruger's simply have issues with triggers and QC!

[@samsmithmotovlogs]

I have never owned a colt revolver but I have owned Smith's and I hated them. I owned two and traded them both for a rifle after only six months. I have owned half a dozen Ruger's firing factory loads as well as handloads and have never had a single failure after thousands of rounds. Oh my main complaint about Smith was the sights. They did not adjust in a consistent and predictable manner. I also don't like some of the political positions Smith has taken in the past. I say buy Ruger and you will never be sorry. In my opinion of course.

[@mausermongerkoziczkowski8104]

Yet because of their design, Ruger Revolvers will handle heavier loads than S&W or colt. AKA buffalo Bore Bear loads.

[@paulll47]

The weird thing with Rugers is that it isn't even that hard to touch up the trigger a bit and get it to Smith level, I wonder why Ruger keep making it like this, the prices for them have gone up anyway might as well get something nicer for it.

[@kenibnanak5554]

Back in the day when I used issued +P+ ammo I had a choice of all 3 handgun brands. Colts (OP and PP) models were withdrawn by the agency because Colt cylinders kept cracking when fired with +P+ ammo. The S&Ws (Model 10 HBs) could take them safely for extended firings, but you could normally only take it down so far for maintenance. Later on both S*W and Ruger had gone stainless. However our Service Six guns worked well with the +P+ ammo and were easy to take down for maintenance. I still have my old Service Six. It was the better gun.

[@edg5102]

If Rugers are thicker to be "as strong" as S&W, why is it that the Ruger .44 magnum revolvers can shoot the Buffalo Bore 340gr +p+ rounds, but not any S&W's? Colt's can shoot them, though.

[@charlieandmabel2763]

Ruger offers the .44 in an 9.5" barrel for hunting. S&W only offers 7.5" and those are expensive Precision Center revolvers. Ruger for the win!

[@Salieri47]

I now remember why I like Paul Harrell so much. Just choose the make you like the best, that best fits your budget (or you think is worth some buget stretching).

[@00Klingon]

Go to any shooting match where revolvers are present and you will see a vast majority are Smiths, with a minority of Colts, followed by one individualist with a Ruger. Now I don't know if that actually says anything about who's superior or inferior, but I do find it interesting.

[@garymarson7170]

AH geez. How many angels fit on the head of pin? I have Rugers and Smiths. Smith triggers "slightly" better. Other than that, its a wash. My favorite is still a Ruger Super GP100 in 357. As sweet as you can find.

[@greybone777]

I like my ruger single six a lot. I like the mk lll. My smith and wesson revolvers just have a feel and aura of personality whereas guns like the gp100 and the sp101 while functional feel utilitarian and soulless

[@glennstruckman7173]

Handloader magazine had a Ruger REDHAWK ONLY handloads for 44 magnum that were +p. They said that particular Ruger is stronger so they gave recipes for that gun only. I was just rereading it a couple evenings ago.

[@stillshakes5499]

Had a model 29 S&W .44 mag. Started shooting. After 24 rounds the cylinder wouldn't release. Once the weapon cooled I was able to open the cylinder and extract the brass. I was infuriated by this expensive new gun failing so hard. I sold it. Bought a Ruger Redhawk. It has never had a single issue. Smith and Wesson is great if you are buying from the performance center. If not, don't waste your money. Buy the Ruger. I know my story is anecdotal, but I bet it's also not unique.

[@PepperGeorge]

Ruger is an american Icon, you show them some respect 🤬

[@JohnCoxe-mw1cq]

Hey Yankee! I agree with most of what you say in regard to a concealed carry revolver. But what about a field revolver subject to falls, mud, water, and abuse? I can take my Ruger revolvers apart in about 30 seconds flat and clean them right up and change out parts. What happens if you fall in a mudhole? The best you can do with a S&W is spray Ballastol into the action and hope for the best. With Ruger you can take it apart and clean as necessary. I don't carry blued S&W revolvers into the field because they are too delicate in comparison to a Ruger. I consider a Colt to be a waste of time and money. Ive owned Colts, which did not work and the factory said, "What Have YOU DONE to OUR REVOLVER?" A 22 LR Colt Trooper MkIII that locked up solid on every cylinder full. I never altered Their Revolver! They REFUSED to Fix MY DEFECTIVE REVOLVER. That was 40 years ago- and Ive long gone the Ruger/S&W route. Let me add that S&W K-frames have a flat spot on the barrel that has caused barrels to split with 357 Magnum Jacketed Bullets. Not so with Ruger. If I cannot put anything stronger than a +P38 Special in a K-frame, why would I waste my time and money on one?

[@turtletruth]

I've had firing problems with the Smiths but never with any of the Rugers!

[@stolnpckup]

I have always liked smith. All the revolvers that I have are smith.

[@richardkluesek4301]

Decades ago there was a S&W advertisement in firearms magazines comparing theirs to Rugers with the tagline "where's the beef" mimicking a tv commercial about fast food ingredient comparisons. The casting is thicker (the "beef") but not as strong as a forging. Its physics. One day perhaps this comparison will expand to include Henry revolvers, Kimber K6, and Diamondback SDR variants to come.

[@moobutt]

Fake news. Investment casting nowadays, and even decades ago, was significantly stronger than it was at its inception. Old Fuddlore has persisted and kept that myth alive. As Fuddy as the dry-fire myth. Has been an issue in half a century

[@Eddievoneddie13]

I find the Ruger GP100 to be the best all-around .38/.357 revolver. With just some simple work, the Ruger's trigger action can be super. Some GPs come with a great trigger. Due to the modular lockwork, the Ruger can be fully field stripped with only a cartridge rim needed to remove the grip screw. I consider the Ruger's cylinder lockup design to be the best, and the offset cylinder bolt notches are a plus for the chamber wall strength. As for the investment casting construction of the Ruger frame, the castings are fully heat treated. I think the thicker front of the frame is better for threading a barrel into. The grip peg design of the Ruger allows much greater grip size options than S&W or Colt. As for Colt, they made a decent variety of good revolvers several decades ago.

[@takumisato7126]

The strongest revolvers in the world, the Manurhins, are based on RUGER frames, that says ALOT, if I were going to spend any amount of time in the bush in bear country I would 100 percent take a Ruger over a Colt and Smith and Wesson, and I've owned all 3 and love all 3, the Rugers are the AKs of the revolver game, they just work when you need them to no questions asked

[@Wildwestwrangler]

Ruger does make up for the fact of being cast by being a 1 piece frame without side plates which does help strength.

[@stevenk5733]

Can't comment on Colt, never owned or shot. Got 3 GP100 and 3 S&W, 686 and 629's. Never had the first problem with the Rugers. 2/3 Smiths had to go back to factory, 1 twice For failure to go off, soft strikes in single action. Everytime I take Smiths to the range, I make sure gun bag has a screw driver in it to tighten up the side plate screws and cylinder release screws. I'll take the ruger trigger anyday over the smiths.

[@kenmanx1298]

I'm guessing You don't like Ruger firearms??? Your poison words will never ever convince me that S&W are superior! 👎 (Same goes for Colt)

[@lornaburns9600]

I love revolvers have a good amount. My two favorites are S&W mountain gun in 41 mag and a Dan Wesson 357 mag. The Dan Wesson has the best factory trigger of any revolver I have owned. My brother in law was a range master witnessed a person with a squib fire a full power 357 mag round in the Dan Wesson the gun contained the round, he is a S&W person. He was very impressed, he said that most guns have the top strap come off.

[@shawncagle1736]

My K6 is feeling left out!😩😳🥹

[@ReichenbachEsq]

Not a single mention of Ruger’s Triple-locking cylinder, how the cylinder in a Ruger double action revolver is locked into the frame at the front, rear & bottom for more positive alignment & dependable operation shot after shot.

[@360BLK]

S&W and Ruger are both great. I lean Ruger because they wowed me with the customer service with my other Ruger guns. I just don't like the look of the Colts, though. Unpopular, I know. Subjectively, I just don't.

[@joemarchinski914]

101%disagree... I have a mid 80's 4" stainless police service six since 1997 that is 100% reliable and has well over 100;000 rounds and just keeps going and as far as your description of cast versus Forged...Ruger was a metal casting company before they started producing firearms... maybe do some research on casting techniques...Ruger was the first to do " INVESTMENT CASTING" and it is as strong if not stronger than forging... My mid 80's service six still shoots 1" at 10 yards off hand....very biased and uninformed and lack of actual experience with the Ruger's you just shit on...glad I unsubscribed a long time ago ..

[@TheAverageFisherman99]

Forged > cast, but I personally like how the gp100 looks much better. Has nothing to do with function at all, and less to do with how good of a gun it is. However, the vaquero line are super nice looking western-style pistols

[@elsuperpollo2273]

I'm just learning about revolvers, so when I get a 357 with da/sa with a 4 to 5 inch barrel. I will use as my new EDC and keep a semo auto as a back up.

[@stevenclark7070]

You had made a video years back explaining this very thing. At the time I only owned the gp100 and had changed springs out and polished the internals, and these things made it very nice. Since then, I purchased 686 plus and understood exactly what you were talking about. My ruger, with the changes, has an exceptional double action trigger, but it just doesn't compare to the S&W trigger. They are both good triggers, but mechanical the S&W is, as you say, more refined.

[@pete7389]

I agree. I stopped buying Ruger revolvers. Too many other revolvers with better triggers to buy in the market these days, especially old S&Ws.

[@stevenclark7070]

@pete7389 I don't think you should stop buying rugers. There are many great revolvers on the market these days, and it looks like they are becoming very popular again. I think people are tired of all these polymer guns and the limited calibers they come in. I only own a couple of striker fire, polymer guns, and the rest are hammer fire steel or alloy framed. I just like the way the feel and shoot.

[@ChadBoss-qr4hl]

@@stevenclark7070Nothing better than a gun made of actual metal. Don’t get me wrong, I like all guns, polymer included. But there is just something about the heft and feel of a cold steel revolver in your hand.

[@stevenclark7070]

@ChadBoss-qr4hl I agree. An all metal gun just feels better in the hand. I only have a couple of polymer hand guns. A Walther PDP with a 5" barrel and my old carry, Springfield XDs 3.3" barrel. All others are steel framed. You can't go wrong with all steel. That's why so many manufacturers started making their polymer handguns in steel. To attract people like us.

[@Super64heavy]

Yankee, thanks again for another informative and entertaining video. As a long time owner of Ruger firearms(especially wheel guns) I appreciate what you said in this video. With the Smith & Wesson's and Colts being $200 to $400 more then the comparable Ruger, I'll stay with Ruger....even with its investment casting frames, non-Colt clockwork and non-S&W slick trigger. 🎯🍻

[@johnalexander7369]

Rugers are better if you want to shoot a steady diet of magnum loads. Ive had both S&W and Colt go out of time because I made the mistake of believing the "magnum" on the side.

[@brandonbowerstx]

So effectively what you have just said: Do a trigger job on a Ruger to get a superior revolver. I will not carry smiths or colts at all because I can do my own trigger jobs and work.

[@elijahbrooks8589]

Roger Sp101 is the only revolver I’ve ever broken. First few cylinders the frame broke Ruger fixed it within a month

[@danielaramburo7648]

I love my Taurus revolvers.

[@aldousorwell3807]

😲...Booooo!! *...ADMONISHED!!!😕*

[@benn454]

@@aldousorwell3807 My Raging Bull cares not for your admonishment. It's too busy dropping hogs and deer.

[@aldousorwell3807]

@@benn454 ...Only out of necessity... ...too poor to buy food.😢 Maybe some day you'll be able to afford a Real Gun, like my Rossi.👑

[@benn454]

@@aldousorwell3807 I have actually been wanting an R92 for a while. Probably in .454 Casull to match my Bull.

[@OOICU812]

​@@aldousorwell3807you do know that Taurus owns Rossi, right? 😊

[@patrickshannon4854]

You forgot to mention the rear sight. I don't know what the rear sight on a current Colt is like, but I've always thought the S&W rear sight to be the best in the business. Sleek, low profile, good looking & precisely adjustable. Also you don't have to keep pushing the sight retention pin back into the frame. Ruger rear sights are adequate at best.

[@mhlevy]

I cal't speak to the engineering differences between the S&W or Rugers, but I bought a Model 57 in 1989 and a Redhawk in 1990, and you're right, the stock S&W action & trigger feel was far nicer than that of the Ruger. Of course, when modified by a good gunsmith (Ron Power,) even after, the S&W was still slightly better than the Ruger, but only slightly.

[@johnmetz1158]

If you think Ruger isn't as good or better , You got rocks in your head

[@mikejohnson2938]

😂

[@robase2665]

Never had a ruger break.. sent smiths back twice..

[@Guns_N_Gears]

I added a comment yesterday and also joined the chat last night with no answer. I am by no means in Ruger camp, Smith and Colts here. The Buffalo bore 44mag+p+ ammo will fit in a Smith, but on the website, it is specifically printed in RED letters. NO SMITHS! If you go to the Swith and Wesson forum this has been beaten to death. A Smith will not blow up, but rather, it will eventually get shaken loose. The internals are not designed to take that kind of punishment. A ruger may not have as nice if a trigger, but is certainly not on Buffalo's NO list. It has nothing to do with cylinder length unless maybe 340gr, I personally have never tried it, nor would I. If I need that kind of power, I'd rather use my .460mag as to not beat the piss out of any of my N frames. Good day

[@michaelzinsli9623]

Had a Model 29-4 Smith. Yep, they shoot loose, even with just a steady diet of 240 grain factory magnum loads. Cylinder eventually would unlock under recoil and free spin backwards from the weight of the unfired ammo in it. Had S&W rebuild it twice. Sold it. Bought a Redhawk 45 Colt. 18 years, no problems, including shooting 300 grain hardcast at 1200 fps for hunting.

[@jeffhamby74]

Never had a ruger go out of time like a smith

[@grumpyoldretiredcop8382]

Having owned and fired Colts, S&Ws and Rugers, I call BS. Nothing but whining here.

[@stefanfful]

Whenever I hear Yankee start sayin' "Like I said" I know he will spend the rest of the video repeating everything he's just said.

[@01rcpena]

LOL! True and that's what so endearing about Ol' Yank!

[@stefanfful]

@@01rcpena You're right, of course!

[@michaelzinsli9623]

Yank talks a lot of smack and repeats it. Turning a 3 minute incorrect video into 25 minutes of repeat wrong.

[@shawnwells5719]

Rugers are stronger. I prefer Smiths, but there's no way my M29 is going to stand up to heavy loads as well as a Super Blackhawk or a Redhawk. I bought the Smith (30+ years ago) because it's more refined, better looking and has a superior trigger pull.

[@hesstonclement4933]

Forged vs modern casting technology? Are we dealing with swords or guns? The metallurgy isnt whats going to fail 99.9% of either customer in most instances. Its the durability of the design and the mechanical integrity that i care about. If ruger had the same weak design as S&W, then you could compare metal melt. Ive never heard of a security six or gp100 failing because of its cast construction. Ive heard NUMOROUS first hand acounts of S&W's frames warpping,and have plentiful personal experience working on refurbishing and fixing S&Ws. Seen bent side plates and snapped internal pins. They are generally quality examples of a revolver but not something i confidently believe my grandkids will be handed down without common potential problems to be dealt with unlike my rugers. The only Dan Wesson ive laid hands on left me without the desire to ever handle one again. Experience is worth more than emotions in the gun world. S&W have some great functioning, sexy, solid guns, but they still have some technological and design advancements before the idea of being "better" has merit.

[@chrisbonnett6783]

I agree with TYM on all of this. The Smith is a 9.8, Colt 9.7, and Ruger 9.6 on a 10-point scale. I chose Smith over Ruger because Smith's have forged frames. At the time Colt wasn't making revolvers. My one exception is a Ruger Vaquero. It's awesome fun to shoot. Smith doesn't make a cowboy single action. Because I'm used to the action of Smith I won't buy Colt. You can't go wrong with any choice. All are quality firearms.

[@BehindTheGoldenCurtain]

All I know is that I have had to send my Colt and my Smith back to the factory, but never my GP100. Gimme the Ruger every time.

[@kentuckyheadhunter2413]

Colts are for show. Ruger Blackhawk gets it done.

[@steveschott645]

Ruger revolvers have proven themselves to be strong, but that is about all I can say good about them. I don't talk down about Ruger revolvers just out of hand. I have owned four different Ruger revolvers. Their single action revolvers patterned after the Colt 'Peacemaker' are great and I have no issues with them. As a retired law enforcement officer and having started my career carrying revolvers, so I feel I speak with a fair amount of expertise. I carried a revolver for many years and banked my life on them. That being said, the most significant reason I would never carry a Ruger revolver is because the Ruger double action revolvers ALL have an exceedingly long lock time when matched against both Colt or S&W double action revolvers. The lock time is how long it takes one to starting to pull the trigger to when the weapon actually fires (goes BANG). When tenths of a second matter in a life or death situation, that lock time becomes vitally important. It mattered so much that my department which let us carry our choice of Colt or S&W, but absolutely said NO to any Ruger revolver. The other big reason I do not like Ruger double action revolvers is that accuracy wise I have found that they just are not very accurate in comparison to Colt or S&W. I had a Ruger Redhawk that my wife bought me for hunting.Even with a 3x pistol scope mounted it had unacceptable accuracy for hunting usage.Two of my hunting partners also had Ruger Redhawks and they both found the same thing to be true. For those reasons I do not think that Ruger double actions are in the same league as Colt and S&W. As a Sheriff's deputy, I carried a S&W model 686 with a 6" barrel. If I had to draw it, it was a very intimidating weapon. For hunting, I carry a Taurus Raging Bull in .454 Casull with a 6.5" barrel. Good shooting and keep your powder dry!

[@gwidwock]

I have the Single Six, Security Six, Speed Six, Police Service Six, GP100. SP101 and many Blackhawks. I'm a big Ruger fan as well as a S&W fan.

[@arielwasiak9573]

Garrett Cartridges disagrees with you bub. The top pressure loads on ALL cartridges they produce are limited to Ruger Redhawks and Super Redhawks. Has been for at least two decades

[@josemfernandeza5979]

I boil it down to a price-quality ratio. A 686, 4.2 inch barrel S&W has an MSRP of $979. A GP-100 4.2 inch is $999. A S&W 629, 6 inch is $1099. A Super Redhawk, 7.5 inch is $1499. A J-Frame Model 640 is $819. An LCR is $859. I LOVE Rugers, but the price-quality ratio is just better for S&Ws, if Rugers where cheaper than S&Ws they would easily beat the S&W in that ratio.