Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,250
Any updates or are you going to leave us hanging?
Which 3" 357 magnum?
- Thread starter Mr. Tettnanger
- Start date
- Status
Mr. Tettnanger
Member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2004
- Messages
- 232
No updates. It may come down to availability and price when I am finally ready to....pull the trigger!
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,250
With inflation being at an all time high and both parties spending like money grows on trees, I'd say grab em whenever you get the opportunity. Prices aren't dropping anytime soon. You can't go wrong with any of them although out of the three I would and did exclude S&W because of the lock...
Most commenting do not have experience witg both the KC and K6S. For a shooter and rugged robust S&W type of carry revolver, I'd go with the KC. For build quality (not that there's anything wrong with the KC) and looks, I'd go with the Kimber. Between the two, the Colt King Cobra has the better trigger. The KC has the leaf mainspring just like the K from on up S&Ws. The K6s has the coil mainspring simular to S&W Jframes.
Attachments
Last edited:
Mr. Tettnanger
Member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2004
- Messages
- 232
gotboostvr
Member
I always wanted a 3" M65 and recently came into one on a fantastic deal.
It carries and shoots as well as I had hoped. Not quite as pretty as the snub 19's I've owned, but it's functional.
I've got some old Magna grips and a spare grip adapter, just need to find a grip screw for them now.
It carries and shoots as well as I had hoped. Not quite as pretty as the snub 19's I've owned, but it's functional.
I've got some old Magna grips and a spare grip adapter, just need to find a grip screw for them now.
wnycollector
Member
Another vote for a 2.75" Ruger Six. I'm the proud owner is a snubbie Security Six. It was my cold weather CCW for a few winters. It was just a great IWB revolver.
Space Ghost
Member
I've been reading good things about the triggers on the new King Cobras, but I just don't like the Colt design of the cylinder open. It's so much more intuitive to push, than to pull.
I love my little 640, but having 7 rounds is much better than 5, so I'll have to agree with the 686 as the go to for my personal choice in a .357 mag. Plus, the added bulk of the larger frame does make for much more comfortable shooting. With the short 3" barrel, my 686 is small enough to carry every day, without being too cumbersome, but still big enough to shoot a lot in practice (something you should do with a carry gun) and to get plenty out of actual .357 mag ammo, as opposed to just shooting +P .38s all the time. I know there's an 8 shot version (don't know the model number) but this 7 shot 686 is already kinda pushing it, and I would think the 8 shot gun would have a pretty bulky cylinder for a daily carry gun. (I'd still like to get one though)
Mine doesn't look like this anymore. I just had big dot night sights put on it not long ago. (also good for a carry gun)
Old Dog
Member
Apparently, a lot of THR folk are now okay with The Lock. And sub-optimal triggers. Just sayin' ... And the OP still hasn't pulled the trigger on a purchase of his new .357 in the last seven weeks...
Well, guys keep sayin' this but, there's really no empirical evidence to support this particular assertion.
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,250
I agree that the Colt's cylinder release is not a big deal at all. Do Iike S&W's better? Yes, I do, but it's not really a big enough difference to fuss over. IMHO it's just something that S&W fans blow out of proportion.
I agree with you about the lock and S&W stock trigger. As far as triggers go on popular revolvers, I put them in this order based on my personal experience: Colt, Kimber, Ruger LCR, Taurus, S&W, Ruger. Build, fit, and finish wise, I say: Kimber, S&W, Colt, Ruger, Taurus. One ceavet is that the S&W trigger can be improved apon the most to be just as good as the others via the pothera of aftermarket trigger enhancement support.
Between Colt, Kimber, and S&W revolvers, S&W will always be last because of the lock though I started carrying a 686+ because it handles 357 mag better than both the KC and K6S (I want to shoot and carry 357 mag and not 38 +P), AND because it offers one more round.
Last edited:
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,250
You can not go wrong with either. I could not make up my mind so I ended up buying both within a month's time. Sorry I am no help.
I started out trying to badically decide between the 640 Pro and K6S. Then I couldn't decide between the KC or K6S. I ended up with the 640 Pro, KC, and K6S. I never really warmed up to the SP101s because I prefer forged over cast and think revolvers of that size and weight should be 6 rounds at least.
I'd say get the KC first and save up for the Kimber at a later date if you still have the itch that needs to be scratched.
As far as the poll goes, I the results have to be taken with a grain of salt being that I'd wager that tbe overwhelming majority of participates do not have experience with all three options. They are merely voting based on which brand they have had experience with.
Last edited:
WisBorn
Contributing Member
I voted for the Smith 19. I have a 3" 686+ and love it. Not a Colt fan. I would like to try a Kimber. I know that they are gaining a good following.
UncleEd
Member
Now that's wonderful logic, i.e. the Smith
more or less sucks but is chosen because
it does the job better.
Of course, the 686 is a much larger frame
than the other two. Hey, what's going on
here?
As far as rating triggers, the order listed seems
to reflect how light/soft/easy to pull the triggers
are, putting Smith and Ruger last. That's talking
right out of the box. And opens the door to a
whole entire debate as to what a combat DA
trigger should be.
In a thread entitled New Colt King Cobra
Trigger Return, member Boom Vang lays
out a view of DA combat shooting. Alas,
I fear many members don't have a clue
as to what he was talking about.
Last edited:
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,250
No, take your emotions out of it because I never said or implied that S&W "sucked." That's just how you took what I said because you did not like the cons I listed about S&W revolvers even though I also listed a few pros to go with them. S&W revolvers are not cheap, so logically I would not have spent $900 or so for the ones I own if I thought they flat out "sucked."Now that's wonderful logic, i.e. the Smith
more or less sucks but is chosen because
it does the job better.
Of course, the 686 is a much larger frame
than the other two. Hey, what's going on
here?
As someone who owns, fired, and has carried all 4 major brands of revolver manufacturers, I mearly listed pros and cons of each based on my examples. I didn't not bash or say any of them sucked. It all depends on what matters most to the buyer. If you hate the lock or you are a trigger snob, S&W revolvers will not be your first or second choice. If size and and weight are your main concern, then S&W and Kimber will be on top, and Ruger will be dead last. If capacity vs size is an issue, again Ruger will be last. If EDC really isn't a concern but being able to routinely shoot and manage hot loads for Hunting or otherwise is, Ruger and then S&W will be at the top of the list.... So on and do forth.
As far as size goes, the 686 is noticeably larger than the other two in both the frame and cylinder. I posted these photos in another thread, but I actually have took a micrometer to the frame and cylinder of all three as well as had them all side by side. The 686 frame is wider, taller, and longer. The cylinder is obviously a bit bigger. There is a noticeable size difference. When comparing the 3" KC and K6S to the 3" 686+, there is also a noticeable weight difference. If we are talking about the regular 6 round 686 that will have a heavier cylinder, the difference in weight is even more. I have held each of these revolvers in hand at the same time to compare the weight differences. While on my waist at 3 O' clock with a good holster and gun belt, I honestly xan not feel a noticeable weight difference, but when I pick the guns up, the weight difference is clear.
Unlike some who are responding, I am not a fanboy of any one company. With the exception of the Ruger SP101, I am actually only one of a few members in this thread who own and carried all of the revolvers we are discussing. If Colt or Kimber had a no lock robust 7 round revolver that was simular to the 686, I would have went that dirrection mostly because of of the lock as I do not mind the trigger. Yes, I went with S&W 686 despite of the lock because it's better at handling hot 357 loads, has 7 rounds, and is still relitively easy to conceal and carry. In other categories, Colt, Ruger, and Kimber beat S&W IMHO. It is what it is. It is okay if everyone does love S&W revolvers as much as you do, and it is okay if we both have different opinions. No need to get upset and snarky. It is not the end of the world.
Last edited:
Space Ghost
Member
Yes there is... because it's different for each person, and for me, I prefer to push.
Not saying the Colt is a bad design. Just one I don't prefer. (and probably so for a lot of people)
Old Dog
Member
No, member Boom Vang laid out his internet CV replete with astounding disclosures such as he's trained more than 30,000 law enforcement officers in (presumably) handgun shooting, won "dozens" of handgun (including revolver) matches and interviewed/debriefed enough "gunfight victors" to fill literally volumes in his 34-year law enforcement career (when did he find the time to do any sailing?)...He also noted his sole "new" King Cobra experience was handling one specimen in a gun shop (yet stated 2 or 3 trigger pulls in the gun shop was enough to detect whether a revolver was worth buying).
Sure we do. We simply don't subscribe to the vague generalities, posting without actual experience of the actual gun in question, brand-bashing and ultimately, the hyperbole.
Lost in all the "discussion" here is the fact that Colt quite producing and selling revolvers for almost 30 years and clearly lost not only its portion of market share, so very few young people and new shooters became introduced to Colt revolvers for well over a quarter-century. The brand, as far as revolvers went, pretty much left the shooting community's collective consciousness, albeit for the relative few aficionados and collectors. Again, as far as the cylinder-release mechanism, again, just because some prefer the "other" brand's method, does not make it inferior, and most often, what's intuitive is simply what one has learned first or has the most experience with.
Anyway, gotta love how some feel that they can speak for all the other folks out there... I've spent a lot of time with the Kimber K6 lately and am growing fond of it. I will freely admit the last Ruger revolvers I've owned and shot were Security Sixes and Speed Sixes, so I've very little trigger time (and haven't owned) the SP-101, GP-100 or LCR) but I like a brother's GP-100 a lot. My S&W 686s have been stellar, and I sold one a few years back I've been trying to buy back for ten years...
At any rate, I'm not here to hoist the Colt banner, but someone has to address all the broad generalizations, brand bias and plead for some objectivity. I love S&W revolvers as much as the next guy (and I'll bet I've owned a heckuva lot more of 'em than many here, excepting guys like Driftwood Johnson and a few others), but there's plenty of room in my safes for even a Taurus or Charter Arms or two...
UncleEd
Member
Old Dog,
When I mentioned a lot of shooters
don't have a clue as to what Boom
Vang was talking about, it was in
reference to DA experience under
heavy stress when short stroking
becomes a greater possibility.
By using the phrase "DA combat
shooting" I thought it was clear
my meaning.
Illustrative of this is Jerry Miculek's
video of shooting a Smith, a Ruger
Security Six and a Python (not current
production which has a somewhat
better DA trigger than the older ones).
He mentions keeping the trigger finger
on the trigger in return/reset as opposed
to having to move the finger off the
trigger.
When I mentioned a lot of shooters
don't have a clue as to what Boom
Vang was talking about, it was in
reference to DA experience under
heavy stress when short stroking
becomes a greater possibility.
By using the phrase "DA combat
shooting" I thought it was clear
my meaning.
Illustrative of this is Jerry Miculek's
video of shooting a Smith, a Ruger
Security Six and a Python (not current
production which has a somewhat
better DA trigger than the older ones).
He mentions keeping the trigger finger
on the trigger in return/reset as opposed
to having to move the finger off the
trigger.
Space Ghost
Member
Never said a Colt was inferior...
"most often"... Well, that could be the way a lot of people think. When I say intuitive, I'm thinking not about learned habits, but about something that seems right when you first pick it up to a novice. Something you don't have to learn. Something instinctive. When you pick up a S&W, you PUSH to open it. Same goes for a Taurus 85, a Ruger SP101, Charter Arms Bulldog... A Colt is the only one you have to PULL to open. It's just not the best design. Sure it works, but it's not as "intuitive".
Kinda like my beloved 1911. A lot of people don't like a frame safety, and guns like the Glock are more "intuitive". Although I love the hell outta my 1911, and I actually shoot better with it, and yes, I learned on it, so I do have a great deal of experience with it... the Glock still has to be considered the more "intuitive" design. By the way, I have both, and carry both.
Sorry you feel I was being so arrogant.
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,250
Much ado about nothing. I can open the cylinder on the Colt just as easily and fast as I can with S&W. It's really not a big deal unless we are looking to nitpick out the differences. I prefer S&W's push design, but it's all a matter of personal preference IMHO. I do not see much of a difference in practice other than, for me, the Colt release is kind of sharp. It is not noticeable unless you are opening and closing the cylinder repeatedly like I just was doing. I had not noticed that before.
UncleEd
Member
Interesting posting for sure.
WWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY too much talk about things that don't matter!!!
1 pushes, the other pulls. Ooooohh my what a fantastic trigger, yada-yada-yada.
News flash, any of them can have excellent triggers with the colt being at the bottom of the heap. Colt pushed the envelope and they have issues with their triggers. Words like longevity and reset issues come to mind. Anyone can learn to either push or pull a cylinder release, besides ain't you herd "Most gunfights are at 7 yards and 2/3 shots". I read it on the internet so it must be true!!!
At the end of the day it comes down to 2 things the cylinder and the barrel. Garbage in/garbage out. The k6 & the kc have short cylinders, this limits bullet selection. It also affects how a bullet performs which leads to the next thing that's kinda important. The design of the bbl and the velocities you get from those designs.
Anyone ever bothered to run different ammo's thru these revolvers over a chronograph???? Heck different bullet designs with the same powder weight can very as much as 70fps+ in these short bbl's.
At the end of the day you're looking at revolver designs that are limited in the ammo selection you can stuff into them along with the design (riffling cut/forcing cone/bore diameter) bbl that limits the limited ammo you can use.
Myself:
I prefer to push the release. I want pressure going forward when slamming the the ejector rod.
When I want to carry a light weight revolver I carry a ca bulldog with a terrible trigger (compared to the s&w/k6/kc) that only has 5-shots. But those 5-shots aren't ear splitting, don't have a massive fireball or a extremely heavy/sharp recoil. But then again I'm only pushing a 200gr bullet 1000fps+. I did do a little testing/looking/shooting of different short bbl'd 357 mags before I put my $$$ down. At the end of the day I ended up with a 586 l-comp for a reason.
Why no one has picked up on the fact that the new s&w 357's bbl's are getting impressive velocities compared to everything else out there is huge. Reminds me of the old ruger service revolvers.
+/- 100fps from the same ammo don't mean nothing as long as I like the logo on the revolver or it has the bestest trigger!!!
WWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY too much talk about things that don't matter!!!
1 pushes, the other pulls. Ooooohh my what a fantastic trigger, yada-yada-yada.
News flash, any of them can have excellent triggers with the colt being at the bottom of the heap. Colt pushed the envelope and they have issues with their triggers. Words like longevity and reset issues come to mind. Anyone can learn to either push or pull a cylinder release, besides ain't you herd "Most gunfights are at 7 yards and 2/3 shots". I read it on the internet so it must be true!!!
At the end of the day it comes down to 2 things the cylinder and the barrel. Garbage in/garbage out. The k6 & the kc have short cylinders, this limits bullet selection. It also affects how a bullet performs which leads to the next thing that's kinda important. The design of the bbl and the velocities you get from those designs.
Anyone ever bothered to run different ammo's thru these revolvers over a chronograph???? Heck different bullet designs with the same powder weight can very as much as 70fps+ in these short bbl's.
At the end of the day you're looking at revolver designs that are limited in the ammo selection you can stuff into them along with the design (riffling cut/forcing cone/bore diameter) bbl that limits the limited ammo you can use.
Myself:
I prefer to push the release. I want pressure going forward when slamming the the ejector rod.
When I want to carry a light weight revolver I carry a ca bulldog with a terrible trigger (compared to the s&w/k6/kc) that only has 5-shots. But those 5-shots aren't ear splitting, don't have a massive fireball or a extremely heavy/sharp recoil. But then again I'm only pushing a 200gr bullet 1000fps+. I did do a little testing/looking/shooting of different short bbl'd 357 mags before I put my $$$ down. At the end of the day I ended up with a 586 l-comp for a reason.
Why no one has picked up on the fact that the new s&w 357's bbl's are getting impressive velocities compared to everything else out there is huge. Reminds me of the old ruger service revolvers.
+/- 100fps from the same ammo don't mean nothing as long as I like the logo on the revolver or it has the bestest trigger!!!
Old Dog
Member
And now, additional "experts" chime in... New "reasons" not to buy the Kimber or the Colt, because the "new S&W 357's bbl's" reign supreme.
More Kimber and Colt bashing, throwing various, lotsa **** at the wall to see what sticks...
Why yes, some of us have ("ammo's?" Only one question mark required, bro.)
Wow, there's a newsflash! 70 fps variances possible out of a short-barreled revolver. You do realize that the short-barreled revolvers, in and of themselves, are compromise weapons, right? And that for most, those that carry them or use them for serious purposes not only understand, but can work around the limitations. So, truly, to make your points, maybe you shouldn't have confessed to packing a Charter Arms Bulldog.
Are you a kinesiologist?
Wait, didn't you just say you didn't like "ear-splitting" shots with massive fireballs and lots of recoil?
More Kimber and Colt bashing, throwing various, lotsa **** at the wall to see what sticks...
Mr. Tettnanger
Member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2004
- Messages
- 232
Just a quick follow up!
After much debate, I have decided on the Colt King Cobra. I just picked it up about an hour ago. I have not fired it yet.
Fit and finish are superb. The finish is much smoother and more polished than ones that I have seen in the past. Trigger pull, smoothness, and break are exceptional. No "gritty" feeling and WAY smoother trigger pull than my last 3 new S&W's!
After much debate, I have decided on the Colt King Cobra. I just picked it up about an hour ago. I have not fired it yet.
Fit and finish are superb. The finish is much smoother and more polished than ones that I have seen in the past. Trigger pull, smoothness, and break are exceptional. No "gritty" feeling and WAY smoother trigger pull than my last 3 new S&W's!
Last edited:
- Status
