S&W 686 or 686+


PDA






lvflyer
February 24, 2011, 09:31 PM
It looks like it is the 4" for me. NOW how can I decide if it should be the 686 or the 686+ ?

If you enjoyed reading about "S&W 686 or 686+" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
BlindJustice
February 24, 2011, 10:45 PM
get the 6 shot model... I had a 686P 7 shot with the HKS speedloaders
and ejecting cases - if you didn't have the cylinder lined up right 1 or 2 cases
would hang and same thing trying to load it up with the speedloader

my .02 but I believe the 686 6 shot cyl. is the best .357 mag. medium frame revoler out there.


Randall

W.E.G.
February 24, 2011, 11:17 PM
There are some relationships I just can't get my mind wrapped around.

7 rounds in a six-shooter just seems wrong to me.
Maybe its true that different strokes for different folks. Only count me as not one of those different folks.

LawofThirds
February 24, 2011, 11:24 PM
The 6 shot is easier to use for IDPA and is traditional.

The 7 shot has more shots and is stronger.

Manco
February 25, 2011, 02:54 AM
There are some relationships I just can't get my mind wrapped around.

7 rounds in a six-shooter just seems wrong to me.
Maybe its true that different strokes for different folks. Only count me as not one of those different folks.

I used to think that way, once upon a time, but then I discovered that some extremely popular and classic revolvers were only five-shooters. :eek: That stung a little, but I was undeterred--by gum, any real, full-size revolver still had to be a SIX-shooter, dagnabbit! And then I learned that THE six-shooter--namely the Colt Single Action Army--could only be safely carried with five cartridges loaded. :what: I tell you there were bitter tears shed for innocence lost that day. :( I just don't care anymore, ya hear! :cuss: Bring on the seven-shooters! WOO-HOO! Seven is more than six, so it's better! YEAH! ;)

But seriously, that's a true story (minus the hyperbole). I'm OK with 7-shot revolvers, and I'd take the extra capacity over tradition (nothing more than a myth that fueled my broken dreams ;)).

KJS
February 25, 2011, 05:23 AM
Seems there likely is some reason more valid than "tradition" to explain why S&W continues to make a 6-shot non-plus version. If the 686+ was unquestionably better they'd drop the 686 from production.

Ruger refuses to put more than 6 rounds in any of their .357s, including the GP100 that's the most direct competitor to a 686.

I'm guessing it has to do with how strong a gun one needs/wants. More holes equal thinner cylinder walls, which would seem to produce more potential for damage if one were to accidentally fire an excessively hot round. (I suspect they thought of idiots who'd intentionally do such as well.)

If a .357 is used for recreation -- shooting targets or hunting -- it doesn't seem like 6 rounds would be any handicap. After all, somebody who failed to kill an animal with six shots isn't likely to get it done with a 7th.

I can see how a 7th round could literally be a matter of life or death if this was to be a defensive handgun. Of course, I can't really imagine many who'd want to wear this as a concealed carry gun. I could see a point to having that extra round if it were to be a home defense gun.

Guess it all depends on what you plan to use it for.

Brass Rain
February 25, 2011, 07:51 AM
Something about seven-shot revolvers bug me, for reasons unknown. But I have nothing against five-shot revolver and I love the idea of eight-shot revolvers.

TikiG
February 25, 2011, 08:43 AM
At one point in time I had a 686+, I would definately own it again. No drawback that I could tell. Best trigger (after Wolff spring change out) and most accurate out of anything I've had previous or after.

Manco
February 25, 2011, 11:34 AM
Something about seven-shot revolvers bug me, for reasons unknown. But I have nothing against five-shot revolver and I love the idea of eight-shot revolvers.

I'm like that with some things, too, and I have no idea why, either. :confused: But I've grown to like the idea of seven-shooters, probably because it gives me one more than everybody else has, sort of like how Spinal Tap's amps go to 11. ;)

Just imagine Dirty Harry with a (hypothetical) 7-shot Model 29:

Harry: "I know what you’re thinking: 'Did he fire six shots or only five?'"

Crook: "My mama didn't raise no dummy! I counted six--you all out, sucka!"

Harry: "Well I've got seven, punk." BANG! :evil:

Schuarta
February 25, 2011, 11:54 AM
Carried my S&W 586 for eleven years before Co. ok'ed semi-autos. 6X speed loaders worked just fine. :D

BTW, if you're considering the 7-shot, I'm sure I saw somebodys .357 mag. in an 8-shot in a recent magazine. Anyone else remember seeing an 8? :scrutiny:

And if it really floats your boat, I have a .357 in a 14-shot. :eek: A Sig P229 in .357 SIG.

Manco
February 25, 2011, 01:16 PM
BTW, if you're considering the 7-shot, I'm sure I saw somebodys .357 mag. in an 8-shot in a recent magazine. Anyone else remember seeing an 8? :scrutiny:

Sure, the S&W 627 (N-frame).

And if it really floats your boat, I have a .357 in a 14-shot. :eek: A Sig P229 in .357 SIG.

Well, it's not REALLY a .357.... :neener:;)

Hanshi
February 25, 2011, 02:42 PM
Mine's an early 6" six shot 686 and a favorite. Get the six shot and a couple of speed loaders.

joed
February 25, 2011, 03:27 PM
I owned a 686+ and loved having 7 shots available. I sold this gun to buy something else and regretted it.

Bottom line, between the 686 and 686+, hands down on the +.

Steve_NEPhila
February 25, 2011, 03:37 PM
The only reason to not get a 7 shot 686 is if you plan on using it for IDPA SSR competition. I take it you are not an IDPA SSR shooter, so get the 7 round cylinder.

The 7 shot cylinder is not weaker and it does not jam more. I carry a seven shot revolver every day (sometimes a five shooter) and have done countless drills shooting and reloading and have never had a problem. My 7 shooter is a Smith and Wesson 386 mountain lite, the same L frame as the 686.

I can think of absolutely no situation where a seventh shot will in any way hurt or leave one at a disadvantage (except for IDPA, which only allows the revolvers in SSR to hold six at a time). Anyone who says "tradition" or "it is supposed to be a six shooter" demonstrates a lack of an ability to think for themselves. BTW, anyone who may be unhappy with that remark feel free to post logical reasons as to why a 7 shot revolver is inferior to a 6 shot revolver.

I just checked and as of last week I no longer own any six shot revolvers. I have only Smith and Wesson revolvers and they are 5 shot, 7 shot and 8 shot wheel guns. The 8 shooters are my favorite to shoot at the range, here is one of my pets:

http://i983.photobucket.com/albums/ae315/snarewski/IMG_1704.jpg

http://i983.photobucket.com/albums/ae315/snarewski/IMG_1703.jpg

It is a bullseye gun, not a carry piece. :)

SwampWolf
February 25, 2011, 04:44 PM
[QUOTE The only reason to not get a 7 shot 686 is if you plan on using it for IDPA SSR competition. I take it you are not an IDPA SSR shooter, so get the 7 round cylinder.

The 7 shot cylinder is not weaker and it does not jam more. I carry a seven shot revolver every day (sometimes a five shooter) and have done countless drills shooting and reloading and have never had a problem. My 7 shooter is a Smith and Wesson 386 mountain lite, the same L frame as the 686.

I can think of absolutely no situation where a seventh shot will in any way hurt or leave one at a disadvantage (except for IDPA, which only allows the revolvers in SSR to hold six at a time). Anyone who says "tradition" or "it is supposed to be a six shooter" demonstrates a lack of an ability to think for themselves. BTW, anyone who may be unhappy with that remark feel free to post logical reasons as to why a 7 shot revolver is inferior to a 6 shot revolver.[/QUOTE]

Absolutely true. And I also am interested in learning of any "logical reasons as to why a 7 shot revolver is inferior to a 6 shot revolver."

420Stainless
February 25, 2011, 07:04 PM
I got a 3" plus version just because it was available and I like it. Can't see any down side to it over a six shot yet, but I must admit I don't carry reloads or shoot competitively - so I don't use speed loaders.

If both were available and one was in better shape for the same price, or one was lower price for about the same shape, I would let that be my deciding factor. I don't spend any time worrying about capacity. It don't hurt to have more, but I don't really care one way or the other.

roaddog28
February 25, 2011, 09:10 PM
Hi,

I prefer a 6 shot pre-lock model.
Here is mine.

Good luck,
Howard
http://i656.photobucket.com/albums/uu283/HPitt74985/DSC00008.jpg

Curt Blunt
February 25, 2011, 09:44 PM
Harry: "I know what you’re thinking: 'Did he fire six shots or only five?'"

I only counted four...but that's the movies for you.

ms6852
February 26, 2011, 01:33 PM
The only reason to not get a 7 shot 686 is if you plan on using it for IDPA SSR competition. I take it you are not an IDPA SSR shooter, so get the 7 round cylinder.

The 7 shot cylinder is not weaker and it does not jam more. I carry a seven shot revolver every day (sometimes a five shooter) and have done countless drills shooting and reloading and have never had a problem. My 7 shooter is a Smith and Wesson 386 mountain lite, the same L frame as the 686.

I can think of absolutely no situation where a seventh shot will in any way hurt or leave one at a disadvantage (except for IDPA, which only allows the revolvers in SSR to hold six at a time). Anyone who says "tradition" or "it is supposed to be a six shooter" demonstrates a lack of an ability to think for themselves. BTW, anyone who may be unhappy with that remark feel free to post logical reasons as to why a 7 shot revolver is inferior to a 6 shot revolver.

I just checked and as of last week I no longer own any six shot revolvers. I have only Smith and Wesson revolvers and they are 5 shot, 7 shot and 8 shot wheel guns. The 8 shooters are my favorite to shoot at the range, here is one of my pets:

http://i983.photobucket.com/albums/ae315/snarewski/IMG_1704.jpg

http://i983.photobucket.com/albums/ae315/snarewski/IMG_1703.jpg

It is a bullseye gun, not a carry piece. :)
Someone just printed recently where they had a problem ejecting their brass because the cylinder got to hot after rapid firing the 8 shot revolver made by S&W. They stated the brass got to hot in the cylnder and expanded, that made it difficult to eject and reload. Have you found this to be true?

mes227
February 26, 2011, 08:36 PM
I have the 7-shot 686. Fantastic gun! I can see no downside to the 7th round, and can see plenty of up-side. I also like that it's different. I also like the 8-round S&Ws but they are a bit too pricey for me.

I own plenty of 6-shooters, as well as some 5s. I was happy to add a 7-shot to my collection.

GLOOB
February 26, 2011, 09:55 PM
The only downside that I know of is you might have a harder time finding a fitted holster. An open trigger holster relies on proper form-fitting to the cylinder flutes as a safety measure.

If you enjoyed reading about "S&W 686 or 686+" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!