S&W 686 7 shot VS 6 shot

[xena]

I'm thinking of getting a S&W 686 ( 4")revolver. Is there any draw back to the 7 shot as opposed to the 6 shot model ? Also which wood grips do you like? Thanks for yoru input.

 

[GUNKWAZY]

Hhhmmm

Here's my 2 pesos.
For carry purposes, having the extra round is nice.
For target shooting I found myself always dumping 6 empties and one full round when I was done popping holes. I prefer the six when punching holes in paper.
I guess it depends on the use of the gun and what you are used to shooting.
If you've shot 6 shooters for a long time, the 7th my drive ya Kwazy.

Jeff (GUNKWAZY)

 

[GUNKWAZY]

By the way...

By the way,
They may not be 100% wood, but I like some of the badger grips for comfort and looks. Here's my 686 plus ( 7 shot )with Badgers.

Jeff (GUNKWAZY)

 

[Ala Dan]

I prefer the 6-shot S&W model 686. I tend to believe that the
cylinder walls are weaker in the 7-shot model. Probably never would
be a factor, unless you load stout handloads?

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

 

[Old Fud]

I fought for the 6-round version just because there were more speed-loaders to choose from for it. Besides, I was raised on Westerns and anything else just wouldn't have felt right.

 

[farscott]

While I prefer the six-shot cylinder because I grew up with it, I believe the seven-shot cylinder is actually a bit stronger because the bolt locking cuts are offset from the charge holes. On a six-shot L-frame .357 Magnum S&W revolver, the metal thickness between the charge hole and the bolt cut is very small. By moving to the seven-shot geometry, the bolt cut is relocated to between charge holes. The distance between adjacent chambers appears to be larger on the seven-shot cylinder than the distance between the charge holes and bolt cuts on the six-shot cylinder.

One other possible benefit of the seven-shot cylinder is lighter rotational inertia. In other words, the lockwork does not have to work as hard to rotate and stop the cylinder due to the lighter cylinder mass. In addition, the shorter rotational travel from one charge hole to the next should allow for a better feeling DA trigger. Less mass moving less distance means less energy to do the work, so the trigger should be better on the seven-shot.

The only negative that I can find is that now seven charge holes need to be drilled in the exact right spots (as well as seven bolt locking cuts), and 360 degrees divided by seven is not a nice integer number. This is where a really good CNC machine, fixturing, and operator can really shine.

All that said, I still like my six-shooters to have six charge holes. I must be getting old.

 

[DHart]

I believe farscott has it right... the 7-shot is at least as strong, possibly stronger and the trigger pull should be a tad easier for the gun. And the extra round doesn't hurt any. I decided to make my 2.5" 686 defense gun a 7-rounder, although I do have some nice 6-rounders on hand as well.

 

[antediluvianist]

The speedloader "problem" posted by Old Fud above is a significant one. You are limited to 1)SKS slow-loaders; or 2)Maxifire plastic thingamajigs (most posters don't like them); or 3) S. L. Variant spring-assisted speedloaders, but FX3 Enterprises of Las Vegas are apparently going to stop selling them.

 

[SnWnMe]

Are there any documented cases of 7 shot 686s blowing up that can be blamed directly on the oft bandied less metal between charge holes "feature"?

 

[Omaha-BeenGlockin]

Have the 7-shooter here----no problems at all---but she's kinda been spending more time in the safe since I purchased the 5-shot SP101.

 

[Guy B. Meredith]

I have the 7-shot. My opening to purchase a handgun was when my wife was concerned about home defense. For that I thought it would be cute to watch a BG count down six shots, try to go for it while I reload just to find out there was one more available. Well, at least my wife bought the story.

Anyway, I don't even bother with speedloaders as I consider them a nuisance. All my revolvers are or will be set up for moonclips. The 686+ was the first to get the conversion. It now sits within easy reach along with several loaded moonclips.

The only reason I would go for a 6-shot is for use in IDPA where a 6-shot limit is in place.

 

[R.H. Lee]

So the general consensus is that the 7 shot 686 is functionally as good, maybe better than the 6 shot? 7 shots would work for me, transitioning from a 1911.

What's the 7 shot 686 cost? Does Ruger make a 7 shot revolver?

 

[happy old sailor]

several years ago, Taurus came out with an eight shot .357. i had to have one. i got one. have never been real happy with it. revolver is good quality, i just cant get used to it having two more chambers. i cannot explain it, my brain refuses the idea. all the next revolvers i have bought have six holes and my brain accepts them as "normal". YMMV

 

[Highland Ranger]

One other possible benefit of the seven-shot cylinder is lighter rotational inertia.

I have to think that with the extra hole filled with an extra bullet, rotational inertia comes up near a wash for a loaded gun - or at least not enough to make a difference.

(Density of powder, case and bullet and air gap in front of the cartridge as compared to stainless billet not withstanding)

 

[Bandit01]

686 7 shot is the way to go

Hell, I reload extremely hot rounds. And I have no problem with 7 shots. On average, I put on or about 300 rounds through it and never/ever/ever had a problem. And I use H-110 powder (which will make your hand feel like it's bleeding). Go for the 7 shot, in this case more is better. Imagine that you're in a gun battle with some perp., s/he knows that you have a revolver and is playing coy until they've heard the 6th shot, they come out of hiding with a big grin but you give them the surprise of a life time. That 7th, final shot.

 

[R.H. Lee]

hehe. "I know what you're thinkin' punk. Did he fire 6 shots or only 5. Well that depends on if ya feel lucky. Well, do ya punk? Do ya feel lucky"?

 

[NEtracker]

I only ended up with the 6 shot 686 because that's what was in-stock, otherwise I would have walked out with the 7.

 

[L-Frame]

For me at least, the question between 6 and 7 shots is so obvious and simple. They are the same gun, feel exactly the same, to me, when it comes to shooting, so why in the world would I choose a platform that only has 6 rounds when I could have the identical platform with 7? Maybe if you carry an autoloader the difference between 15 and 17 is not particularly important, but when you have 6, a seventh can be a big deal, especially when you lose NOTHING to get the seventh. I can understand why someone would not go to 8 rounds because the N frame is alot larger, but with the same frame size, it's a no-brainer for me. That being said, it is a bummer that Safariland does not make a Comp II for the 7 shot.

 

[R.H. Lee]

How well does the L Frame hold up to fullhouse .357 loads? I want the 6" barrel, specifically for heavy/hot loads. Maybe I should stick with a Mod 28 on the N Frame instead.

 

[Guy B. Meredith]

RileyMc,

The L-frame was made to handle a steady diet of full strength 158 gr .357 magnum and hot burning 125 gr defense rounds. Dunno the specifics on handling very hot handloads.