[O2BShooting]

Not trying to start a fight or anything just trying to get a question or two answered. Of the two listed which would hold up better with a steady diet of moderate to heavy loads? I currently own a S&W mdl 28 and plan on loading 357 magnum and shooting lots of it. I was just wondering if the mdl 28 could handle it or if it would be better off getting a Ruger GP100. I know the Ruger is built like a tank and will take more abuse than I could probably ever dish out but if the mdl 28 will stand up to lots of shooting of heavy loads I'd rather not make the investment.

Thanks for any & all replies.
O2B

 

[McNutt]

Can't comment on the S&W, but I own a GP100 and wouldn't be afraid to put a stick of TNT in it. The gun is rock solid. It might not have some of the finesse of a S&W, but it is definitely a tank.

 

[sam1963]

I think that you are right, the GP100 is stronger but if you are not
handloading super hot loads right to the top of the scale the S&W
should be fine. I do have a Ruger. I just wanted the extra weight.
The Smith will have a better trigger.

 

[Richard]

I am sorry but I don't agree with the two prior posters. The M28 should eat everything a sane person puts through it. If it is hotter than hot buy a Blackhawk. Regards, Richard

 

[mike benedict]

Richard is correct M28s are rock solid.

Besides S&W makes the best revolvers period. Nothing else compares.

Mike

 

[sam1963]

The one part that is defiantly strongern and thicker on the GP100
is the top strap. Also it locks up thighter. I am do saying its better
just stronger.

 

[k_randomfactor]

my $.02,

most reloading manuals (mine anyway) have a special list of loads for T/C and ruger that would make most guns run away screaning like a little girl. they will take a lot of punishment. the gp100 will need work (quite a bit) to achieve the level of smoothness of a smith. they are awesome guns and i would feel perfectly comfortable with one in an iwb holster.

the smith is a much more finished gun. much better trigger, better fit, more parts availability for repair or customization. the older smiths (pre about 85) are much stronger than people give them credit for. recent production smiths are again top notch guns (political considerations not withstanding)

i currently own a 2 1/2" s&w 686+ 7-shot. it eats pretty much anything i feed thru it, even really warm (not really hot) handloads that a friend makes up for me. that being said, a ruger is in my near future.

keep your powder dry and your blades sharp,
chris

 

[k_randomfactor]

oh yeah, i forgot, the smith has a lock up on the ejection rod. it works, but puts a lot of stress on the ejection rod.

the ruger has the lock up on the cylinder yoke. much stronger design.

chris

 

[i like colts]

I don't want to be a threadjacker or anything, but this thread made me think of a question. Is a Security Six considered as well built as a GP100? I bought a used one a few months ago and have been wondering.

 

[Cactus]

The M 28 is an N frame. That's a frame that was designed for the .44's. If it will handle .44 mags, the .357 shouldn't be much of a problem!

If you just want to buy a new gun, great, there's nothing wrong with a Ruger. But don't feel that you need to in order to shoot hot .357 loads.

 

[Cactus]

Is a Security Six considered as well built as a GP100? I bought a used one a few months ago and have been wondering.

The GP100 is a stronger gun than the Security Six. But unless you shoot ALOT of hot loaded 125 gr. loads, your Security Six should last you a long time. They are a solid gun and personally, I prefer them to the newer Ruger's because they are lighter.

 

[Zenmeister]

Smith &Wesson= refinement. Nice triggers, accurate, good resale value.

Ruger= The Glock of revolvers. Tough, accurate enough to do the job, designed to withstand consistent shooting of max power loads(okay, so maybe tougher than a Glock ).

Take your pick and don't feel bad. Both are the right choice IMO, having owned both brands.

 

[Rob96]

The M 28 is an N frame. That's a frame that was designed for the .44's. If it will handle .44 mags, the .357 shouldn't be much of a problem!

The GP-100 is equall in size to an L-frame but has at minimum the strength of an N-frame.

 

[BGPD]

Correct in the 28 being the N frame. Remember the original Model 27 in 1935 as the Registered Magnum had a loading of a 158gr 357magum at over 1500fps. You can't get much more punishing than that and today we have much better steels and tempering.

 

[Richard]

k_randomfactor, are these loads,

most reloading manuals (mine anyway) have a special list of loads for T/C and ruger that would make most guns run away screaming like a little girl.

for a GP100 or a Blackhawk? If my memory serves me right they are for the later. I also want to agree with what Albert Shear said and add shooting full loads all day long in a Security Six is no picnic. Regards, Richard

 

[Dave T]

When the loading manuals say "TC Contender or Ruger" they are talking, for the most part, about the Blackhawk. As strong as the GP100 may be a solid frame single action will always be stronger than a swing out cylinder double action. The Ruger Red Hawk may be an exception to that, but it is a notch or two above even the GP 100 in terms of being over engineered.

 

[HogRider]

If durability and toughness are the goal in buying a 357 revolver, the Redhawk is hard to beat. Check out cylinder wall thickness.

The are somewhat hard to find lately, but I got lucky and found one on gunbroker for around 400.00 a few month ago.

 

[hjk]

If you really like the M28, I don't see any advantage that the GP100 has to offer. At the risk of starting a heated debate, the reason the GP100 is built with such a beefy frame (particularly the topstrap) is because the Ruger frame is a casting. The S&W frame is forged. IMHO, the M28 is a superb gun.

 

[Cactus]

When the loading manuals say "TC Contender or Ruger" they are talking, for the most part, about the Blackhawk.

If you re-check your loading manuals, you will notice the "TC Contender or Ruger" is refering to 45 Colt. The original 45 Colt was loaded to a very low pressure (SAAMI 14,000 psi) and most guns were never designed to handle the additional pressures of the hot 45 Colt loads (25,000+ psi).

Revolvers in .357 mag. were designed from the beginning to handle the maximum design pressure. You should NEVER exceed the maximum listed pressures in a .357 mag. no matter what gun you are shooting. Any revolver, including Blackhawks and Redhawks will shoot loose if you put enough rounds through them. Some just take longer than others.

The hardest loads on any revolver are the light 110 and 125 grain bullets loaded to the highest velocities. In addition to the wear caused by the high pressures, they suffer "flame cutting" of the top strap at the front of the cylinder from the excessive flame from hot loads. This is one reason why Ruger discontinued the Blackhawk in .357 Maximum. People kept loading 110 and 125 grain bullets to insane velocities and the guns were wearing out from flame cutting.

As long as you don't intend to put thousands of maximum loaded light bullets through your S&W 28, don't worry, it should last many years. If you plan on firing thousands of the maximum light bullet loads every year, any revolver you buy will wear out quickly, even a Redhawk.

 

[gordo63]

I don't know my S&W model numbers but if the M28 is the N-frame, don't worry. It'll be fine. I have seen some M27s shoot some potent stuff over the years without any trouble. Their K-frame models, on the other hand, will have some problems IF heavy loads are constantly fed it.

I have always been under the opinion that if one is wanting to soup up .357s that high, one really needs to take the next step to the .44. Just MHO.