Ruger 101 or S&W 60 with adj. sights. Whats your pick?

Have had a couple of SP-101 and they just feel like a brick and the trigger pull both SA and DA are heavy....all were sold off...

Have two of the S&W 60-10 .357s and they are one of the best "little" guns I have ever owned... If I were in the market for a small .357 I would find a used 60-10 but I have friends who have the 60-15 and 60-15 PRO and they ae fine shooting guns despite The Hillery Hole....

Bob

I really like my SP101 2 1/2" barrel Trigger pull double action is smooth and the revolver is easy to hit with.

SMART MOVE. Be sure to get something with ADJUSTABLE SIGHTS or you will be looking for a "load to hit to sights". It will be an elusive and mind twisting adventure otherwise.

Both equal in their own right. If your priority is concealment, then the 60. If your priority is shootability, then the SP101.

I bought both in .357 magnum. I bought the Ruger first, then polished internals and experimented with trigger springs, and while it was better than stock, I just didn't care for the trigger pull. It seemed to "stack" a lot just before breaking. Then I bought a 3" model 60, which I've wanted for years, worked over the trigger on it and really liked it. Found no real difference in accuracy between the two guns, but I liked everything about the Smith better. The looks, the lighter weight, and the trigger pull. So I sold the Ruger to a friend. He thought it had one of the lightest trigger pulls he ever felt- but then he's never shot anything but a stock trigger before, and only shoots single action.

I also widened the rear sight window a little on both to be able to see a little light on each side of the front sight and added some white outline. The 4.2" Ruger had a nice fiber optic front, the 3" Smith doesn't. I painted the Smith's hot pink with my daughter's fingernail polish to make it stand out better. I also changed grips on both guns to something that suited me better. The stock Smith grips have a deep curve that made the recoil hit me in the most tender part of my hand.

Ignore the Ruger front sight here. I was in the experimental stages of cutting it off and JB Welding it back together. Hogue wood grips here.



The Smith with it's .22 twin. Shows the front sight and Altamont grips.

What will you be using it for?

I am done with the new Smith and Wesson revolver guns. They have lost the art. If you do buy a smith get one with the barrel sleeve, they routinely over torque the std one piece barrels on their new guns. I no longer feel any pride of ownership, so don't post pictures of my beautiful guns, I prefer dead animals and holes centered in paper, all else is twaddle.

How large are your hands?

S&W J-frames are too small to fit my hand comfortably and look odd with over-size grips on them. For me, a 2.5" or 2.75" S&W 66 would be a better fit.

Needless to say, any recommendation of S&W on my part is referring to pre-82 S&W revolvers. Post-81 S&W revolvers will often have defects that require a return to the factory for correction or replacement, or possess undesirable features.

I like old S&Ws as much as anyone and don’t care for the guns with the lock. But S&W made some pretty cool stuff after 1982 that wasn’t available before. I’m curious as to the 1982 cutoff date TRH?

I got a 2 1/4" SP 101, .357 Mag quite a few years ago. At the time, I was putting in a lot of time between the wheel for work and I probably dry fired it a few thousand cycles. That smoothed out the double-action trigger pull an incredible amount. I shot it quite a bit and it was a handful with full-house 125 loads. My younger son liked it so much he eventually got one just like it and it's seldom out of his reach. My brother liked mine so much I haven't seen it in probably 20 years. He's a city court judge and it's his "bench gun." That's okay, these days I'm very happy with my Sig 365.

That the Rugers are rock solid revolvers goes without saying.

I'm a big S&W fan and have many more Smiths than Rugers. That said, for a snubby, I'd take the Ruger over the M-60.

I think adjustable sights are an unnecessary complication on a snubby.

The OP doesn't make clear whether we're talking about a snubbie or longer barrel.

IMO, the 3" 60as is one of the most useful and shootable for size revolvers, ever. But if you intend to shoot heavy loads or otherwise abuse it, you're better off with the Ruger.

For a kit gun I went 4" SP101 in 32H&R and a Smith 4" stainless 22LR but I didn't want that heavy a chunk for concealed so I've got an Airweight 32H&R snubbie and a stainless 38 snubbie.
Why choose one, get some of everything!

They did make a lot of good stuff after 1982, but 1982 was the beginning of their descent in quality control. Increasingly, after that date, they put out problematic revolvers. At first the rate of descent was slow, but increasingly it became a problem thereafter. Add to that factor that they began also incorporating unpopular features, such as reduced quality of polish and blue, incorporation of MIM parts, elimination of the hammer mounted firing pin, and the incorporation of key locks. All along this time frame, general quality also deteriorated. So there are lots of well made S&W revolvers, with cool features, made after 1982, but that was the date (the elimination of the pinned barrel being the mark of the dawn of that change, even if that's not an important feature in itself) that marked the beginning of their decline in quality. Buy if shopping for a gun made after that date, you would do well to exercise more care in your selection, the later the date of manufacture after that date, the more care that should be exercised, is all I'm saying.

Not looking for concealment have J frame snubby for such things.Trail, truck type gun using light 357 loads.Close range pest control skunks, coons, real dumb yote wounded or sick animal. Do not see any new Smiths or Rugers on small frame with adj. sights with barrel shorter then 3". What adj. sights for ease of load change. Never had Ruger 101 or 100 their full break down seem nice and easy.

The S&W 60-15 and 15 PRO are still being made...there are plenty of them on GunBroker for sale...

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/855062121

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/846119994

Also have you looked at the UgglyDuckling...

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/848500529

..because there never has been one.... There was the Model 36 and 60-1 Target model but were made a long time ago.... I have one of the 60s but it is .38 Special only...

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/850627413

Having owned them all...for a field gun you want a 3" .357....

For that use, I'd go SP101 and at least 3". But I'd also give the LCR a close look.

I got rid of my SP pretty quickly, but I wanted it for CCW and IMHO it was too heavy for my purposes. As always YMMV.

I’ve never needed a trail gun slowly, so except for caliber and concealability, I want a trail gun to have the qualities of a good defensive handgun: high visibility sights, relatively light weight, the power to hit hard at 50-60 yards, the trajectory and accuracy to make those hits possible, and ergonomics that let me shoot it well in a hurry up close. Depending on where I am, my trail gun is either a Glock 19 or a 4” S&W Model 29. The G19 is basically a light 357, and I like the 44 for bigger stuff.

The Model 60 and the SP-101 are both too small for me to use well at speed but they meet my other criteria. The Ruger is heavier and can take a steady diet of hot 357 loads should that need arise. The S&W trigger is far superior out of the box. Both are available with adjustable sights, but 3” is about the shortest barrel that you’ll find on either one. Speaking of sights and barrels, both companies have a 5” version with adjustable sights, although the S&W seems to be out of production. That makes it legal for big game in a lot of places, so you can use it as backup in states where any weapon you have in the field must be legal for the species that you’re hunting.

Have you considered the S&W Model 66? It’s bigger and heavier than the guns you mentioned, but it’s also better for long shots than a small-frame gun. I mention that because you said that you might need to shoot a skunk. The only skunk I ever shot was about 20 yards away and I was lucky as hell not to get hit with the spray. I’ll probably never shoot another one but if I do, then the range will be a lot more than 20 yards.


Okie John

While the purists all bash S&W for the way they make their revolvers, I will say this. They work, they work well, and its rare they have any problems. So the opposition is really mostly aesthetic.

The MIM internals of the S&W consistently produce better DA pulls than the investment cast Ruger internals. When I receive modern S&W's for action work, I never have to take a stone to ANYTHING inside the sideplate. The issues are ALWAYS the cams on the ejector star. Whereas the Ruger typically needs attention to both the internals, and the ejection star. I will say this, Ruger does their ejector stars a little better than S&W, as they routinely need less attention than the S&W's need. I have also observed that FAR more S&W's have DA actions that are good to go right out of the box than Ruger's.

Both S&W and Ruger cut their rifling with wire EDM so the quality of their bores is pretty much the same. We have seen that both S&W and Ruger tend to make revolvers with perfect, or near perfectly sized chamber mouths, so that's a draw.

I absolutely LOVE the grip shape of the SP 101, it's a bit of ergonomic brilliance in my opinion. And while I really like the S&W grip shape on the K/L frames, I love it less on the J & N frames. The Ruger easily wins the ergonomics department.

That's about the only meaningful differences I can find between the two. If I had a use for either, I'd be quite happy with either revolver.

Dude I have returned 4-5 smiths in the last 4-5 years, the last one I just took back to the store and lost money on it. One return was so bad they gave me my money back. New Smith revolvers are a crap shoot, but again I am not an expert just someone that has bought and sold north of 20 or so smith and Wesson revolvers in my life. The old ones worked better and they shot better.

I guess you've had a run of bad luck then. I bought 4 S&W's last year. All of them were fine other than a bit heavy on the trigger pulls. Three of them were revolvers, a 60, 63, and 617. They've all had a trigger spring change and are now even better.

I guess I am the only person who has seen poor quality in new smiths

Bought an S&W Scandium J-Frame .38 for my mom in the 1990s, and it seized up with the first cylinder full at the range, needing a return to the factory. I bought a 442 Airweight .38 for myself a couple of years ago that had made it through factory inspection with a rough cut forcing cone, i.e., it looked like someone hacksawed it off. Zero finishing procedures on it with razor sharp jagged edges. S&W took it back and sent me a new one with a correctly finished forcing cone.

Quality control at S&W is a crap shoot. And, from what I've heard, they don't always stand by their product, i.e., sometimes they tell you that they think it's just fine with the defect, and send it back to you.

There's also the Ruger LCRx. Might be worth consideration. I like mine.

Cool bullets.

Thanks, I have 3 Smiths bought new the past 5 years and they have been fine. 67, 36 classic, 637, the 67 has over 4000 rounds threw it without A hitch.I have returned more Rugers then anything else but I really like the feel of the 101 not A fan of fiber optic sights.

So that's your observation, and I would never deny your observations.

My observation is as I stated. I only have one 'modern' S&W, but I work on 3-4 per month, so I've worked on dozens over the past few years. So sorry you've had such bad luck, but the guns that come my way really don't show any serious issues. I do my thing, and return them to the customer.

Indeed. I went with a 4" 32 H&R Smith though I own a few Ruger SA's as well.

This is a wicked stupid thread that belongs on either the S&W or Ruger forum. In the bashing section, of revolvers post 1980 production. To those hating on the current production S&W’s I have e two words - Bangor Punta. And four more - S T F U.

For a trail, truck type gun for the purposes you mention, I'll take my SW Governor over anything mentioned on this thread.