GP100 or 686 for ESR—which one shoots straight?

Question

GP100 wins on the dollar. Ruger built it to work. Trigger's rough out of the box but gets better with dry fire. The gun itself—lockup, timing, cylinder gap—is solid. You'll shoot it for years and it will keep returning fire the same way it did on day one.

The 686 is the better revolver. Better trigger, better sights, better ergonomics. S&W's trigger reach is shorter. The gun points more naturally for most hands. But you're paying for that refinement, and in ESR you're shooting the gun, not the badge.

For IDPA Enhanced Service Revolver the question isn't which one is better. It's whether you want to spend the difference on ammunition and range time instead. The GP100 does the job. It will pass inspection. It will eat 38 Special and 357 Magnum and *not care*. You'll get more practice with the money you save.

If you've already got the cash and trigger feel matters to you, get the 686. If you're building a working revolver on a budget, the Ruger does the work. Either one will teach you more about shooting than most shooters ever learn.

Vic Calloway · Accepted Answer

You're right that the GP100's timing stays put, but I want to dig into why that matters for ESR specifically. A Ruger's hand engagement and the way it indexes off the cylinder stop—that's a built-in tolerance stack that holds up. The 686 uses a different geometry. Both can be solid, but I'm curious what you're seeing on round count that makes you confident about the GP100's retention.

Here's what I'd check before either gun goes to the line: Does the cylinder gap stay consistent after five hundred rounds? Are you measuring the hand fit—is there slop developing between the hand and the recoil shield? The trigger bar engagement on a Ruger is forgiving; S&W's is tighter, which means if something shifts, you feel it faster but you also might have caught it earlier.

For ESR, that robustness you mentioned is real. The GP100 is harder to break. But I'd want to know: are you planning to shoot this gun hard for a season or two, or run it for years? Because a 686 that's been hand-fitted and the hand replaced with a quality fit—that gun will outlast a stock GP100 if you maintain it. The stock GP100 just requires less maintenance to stay in time.

What's your round count plan looking like?

Margot Delacroix · Answer

I've run both through ESR matches over two seasons. Here's what the numbers show.

GP100 out of the box runs 4.5–5.2 lbs depending on the individual gun. I measured five at retail and got variance there. Dry fire smooths it to low 4s, but the wall stays pronounced. My splits from ready to second shot: 0.38–0.42 sec on a six-yard line, consistent.

686 averages 3.8–4.1 lbs from the box. Better predictability across guns. My splits on the same line: 0.33–0.37 sec. Smaller variance shot-to-shot. That's real time, and in ESR where you're stacking six shots clean under par, the trigger matters.

On timing: shop.rat's right that the hand engagement on a Ruger is forgiving. After 800 rounds on my GP100, cylinder gap held at 0.006". My 686 at 650 rounds sits at 0.005". Both fine for ESR. But my GP100's double-action trigger weight crept up to 5.4 lbs by round 600. I documented it. The 686 stayed flat.

Budget favors the GP100—you pocket $200–250. That buys you 500 rounds of 38 Special and better ammunition performance on the line. That's a real trade.

If your round count plan is two seasons and you're chasing times, the 686 closes the split gap measurably. If you're building for durability and keeping dollars for ammo, GP100 does the work. Measure your gun before you match it.

Dave Kowalski · Answer

GP100 works. That's settled. But m.delacroix's splits don't lie, and neither does trigger creep at 600 rounds.

I've run both. The Ruger's hand engagement is what shop.rat said—forgiving, built to tolerate variance. You can neglect it and it still indexes. The Smith requires you to actually maintain the gun, which means you *will* catch problems earlier. That's not a weakness if you're paying attention.

Here's what matters for ESR: The 686 trigger is objectively better. Shorter reach, cleaner break, lighter and more consistent pull weight. m.delacroix's 0.04-second split advantage is real on the line. In a six-shot string under pressure, that compounds.

But—and this is the point—the GP100 doesn't *lose* because of trigger. It loses because you have to work around it. If your fundamentals are tight, the rough Ruger trigger teaches you something the Smith won't: trigger control when the gun doesn't cooperate. That's valuable.

Spend the $250 on ammo and shoot the GP100 if your budget is tight. You'll get faster because you'll shoot more. Spend it on the 686 if you want to chase times this season. Either gun will pass inspection and stay in time. The difference is whether you want the tool to work with you or whether you want to work around the tool.