I don't have. S&W 357 snub, but need one

[mdauben]

Certainly lots to choose from!

• S&W Model 686+ (great choice for a real "user")
• S&W Model 66 (the classic .357 but its OOP status and dearth of replacement parts makes me reluctant to shoot much hot ammo through one)
• S&W Model 60 (great 5-shot steel frame snubbie)
• Ruger SP101 (another great 5-shot)
• Ruger GP100 (if you consider 3-inches "snub" this is one tough gun)

I'm not too familiar with Colts or DW, and IMO anything besides S&W, Ruger, DW and Colt is settling for second best with regards to .357 revolvers.

You know it would be punishing to shoot, right? So many have big ideas about these guns and wind up shooting little but .38 Spl.

The smaller J-frame size guns like the Model 60 and the SP101 can be a bit sharp (even moreso the alloy frame 357's), but IMO a 2.5 inch 686 is no harder on the hand than a 4 inch 686 is.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

S&W was being cheap when they made the M19? Not in the least.

The K frame magnum revolver was developed when hardly nothing but 158gr bullets were being used in .358 Magnum ammo. The K frame magnum started to show weakness when 125gr bullets started to show up in .357 Magnum ammo at much higher velocities than a 158gr bullet were pushed. Like said above, the hyper velocity light bullets along with not keeping the forcing cone and top strap clean caused problems. The L frame was the answer to those problems. The K frame was perfectly fine when it was developed, subsequently the ammo outran the revolver.

 

[TennJed]

What a man!

No reason to act childish. I asked for advice on 357 snubs. You gave advice on why I might not want want assuming I didn't know what I was getting into. I respectively explained I have.

Everyone one else here has given good mature answers. No need to act like a kid because I didn't take your advise. Surprising, because I have never noticed you to be immature until now.

If my original response came across the wrong way I apologize. I was just trying to respond to the fact that I was experienced with 357 snubs. I meant no disrespect. Your post obviously did mean disrespect.

Thanks to everyone else

 

[content]

This might not be in your budget now... but 750+ 100 might get you a used one.

I have .357s of many types and the S&W 327 night guard with Trijicon, tritium night sights is the one I'm most impressed with.



The grip design greatly reduces recoil.
8 rounds of .357 is a plus but the sights really make the revolver special.

Can't say much about longevity, only have 300-400 rounds of .357 thru mine, but time will tell.

Hope you find what works for you.

FWIW, I don't mind shooting .357s out of snubbies either...at least once I find the right grips.
Course I'm 6'4", 250lbs and using an 18v, cordless, hammer drill often at work, kind of strengthens your hand/wrist.
Guess I'm a "real" man too,,,lol.

 

[Riomouse911]

I have a Dan Wesson with the 2"VH in the 4-barrel pistol pac, a M-19 with the 2.5" bbl and a FBI model 3" M-13. The DW is a bit easier to shoot with magnums because of the weight, but the FBI model looks the best IMHO. If you can find one, give one a try.

 

[TennJed]

A Dan wesson would be nice too

 

[Field Tester]

You mean like this?

(If you do get the seven shot model be aware that you aren't going to be able to find any speedloaders for it; and who would carry a revolver, nowadays, without a couple of speed loads!)

Correction, they have speedloaders for it, but they partially are blocked on the back end by the grip. At least that's how it is with my 6 inch 686+.

 

[RealGun]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RealGun View Post
What a man!

No reason to act childish. I asked for advice on 357 snubs. You gave advice on why I might not want want assuming I didn't know what I was getting into. I respectively explained I have.

Everyone one else here has given good mature answers. No need to act like a kid because I didn't take your advise. Surprising, because I have never noticed you to be immature until now.

If my original response came across the wrong way I apologize. I was just trying to respond to the fact that I was experienced with 357 snubs. I meant no disrespect. Your post obviously did mean disrespect.

Thanks to everyone else

That's the sort of thing for which you might want to confirm your inference before launching. Same here. I guess there was some good reason you seemed to be bragging, while others might think of the SP101 with full up .357 ammo as a little sonofabitch.

 

[MagnumDweeb]

I when it comes to snubs I own a Rossi 462, Sp101 2.25" and 3 1/16". I can't get into larger snub nose revolvers for .357 magnum. I like snubs because with loads like Remington's 125 grain SJHP I can get 1200+ fps out of my Sp 101 and Ross 462 (never chronied the 3 1/16"). Now that's not great performance but it's nearly on par with service size semi-auto 9mms using +P loads.

I can't get interested in Smiths because all the velocity reports I've been finding show the Smiths to be slow while on Rugers, Rugers tend to be fast. Why that is I don't know. Some folks say it is just the individual gun and that's probably the case but till you show me a factory standard 686 keeping pace with a Ruger GP100, I'm just not budging. The whole point of .357 magnum is to get the velocity factor. Granted I do like shooting only 158 grain loads out of my two 6" GP100s but I can handload those to easily do 1400 fps without risk of destroying the gun.

If I could find a 686 2.5" that kept pace with my 2.25" Ruger Sp101, I'd definetely consider it if I could get it for less than $600.

 

[mdauben]

I have .357s of many types and the S&W 327 night guard with Trijicon, tritium night sights is the one I'm most impressed with.

I just recently picked up a NOS S&W 386 NG and I'm quite taken with it, too. I love the feel and balance of the gun in my hand, and the sights are IMO much better than the stock S&W adjustables for combat use. With the alloy frame, recoil is a bit sharp with full power .357 loads but its not uncontrolable.

Correction, they have speedloaders for it, but they partially are blocked on the back end by the grip. At least that's how it is with my 6 inch 686+.

I guess it comes down to the grips. The 386 I mention above is a 7-shot, and the speed loaders work fine with the stock rubber grips.

 

[BlindJustice]

Depends on what "Snubbie' is defined as.

S&W beefed up the J frame in the 1990s for .3357 Mag
S&W Model 60 and 640 are solid stainless steel
and in the 25 oz. empty weight range.
Bbl. Len. 2 1/8" ( unlike the .28 J frame's 1 7/8" bbl. Len)
S&W Model 640 DAO Shrouded Hammer

I have a MOdel 60-15 .357 Mag. 3" Bbl.w/full length underlug
and it has the W&E Adj. rear sight. Black Ramp front sight
and the extractor rod gets the emptiy cases all the way out
unlike the 'snub' bbl. lengths.

I'll go check some of the O.A.L. of some of the S&Ws mentioned in this thread

Randall

 

[BlindJustice]

For the O.P. SIze and Weight from the current catalogue

S&W ‘Snubbies’ .357 Mag

MOdel 340 M&P CT Crimson Trace grips
Scandium alloy frmae/Stainless Steel Cylindder
Bbl. Len.: 1.875” Weight Empty: 13.3 oz.
O.A.L.: 6.41”

S&W Model 60 J-frame 5 Shot cyl.
Stainless Steel frame & Cylinder
Bbl. Len.: 3” Weight Empty: 24 oz.
O.A.L.: 7.5”
Bbl. Len.: 2.125” Weight Empty 22.6 oz
O.A.L.: 6.875”

There's also the 60LS whichhas different sized from a woman grips
the 640/649 shrouded hammer maldels

S&W Model 686P 7 shotcyl.
Bbl. Len.: 2.5” Weight Empty: 34.1 oz.
O.A.L.: 7.75”

Model 627 N Frame 8 shot cyl.
Bbl. Len.: 2.625” Weight Empty: 37.6 oz.
O.A.L.: 7.625”

I had a 686P 4" bbl. and just didn'tconnect with it
but I enjoy the 60 3" usually only fire
10 rounds of .357 Mag. and then the rest would be .38 SPecial.
Carry load is .38 SPecial +P 125 gr. Gold Dots

Randall

 

[Field Tester]

I just recently picked up a NOS S&W 386 NG and I'm quite taken with it, too. I love the feel and balance of the gun in my hand, and the sights are IMO much better than the stock S&W adjustables for combat use. With the alloy frame, recoil is a bit sharp with full power .357 loads but its not uncontrolable.


I guess it comes down to the grips. The 386 I mention above is a 7-shot, and the speed loaders work fine with the stock rubber grips.

I have the stock rubber grips. Although mine protrudes put a bit now. Not sure if that was from using the speed loader or not. I know I'm not the only person who has said it's a very tight fit.

 

[Crowman]

I live in the north Georgia woods and my personal EDC is a S&W 386 Night Guard in an open top Galco Speed Scabbard. I really love the self-illuminated front night sight, which is very quick to acquire, especially in low knight. I carry 2-4 HKS 7-shot speed loaders, and a couple of 8 round speed strips and two 7-round leather ammo slides made by Black Hills Leather. The Night Guard is super easy to carry all day, but has enough mass to be controllable in rapid double action fire. The excellent fixed sights are regulated for 158 grain bullets but I carry 180 grain hard cast Buffalo Bore loads for defense against hogs and black bears, both wander through my property from time to time. I replaced the factory grips with Pachmayr Presentation grips to be more hand-filling. I have no problem concealing this revolver for town carry under a loose vest. In my opinion, this is the best balanced every day carry revolver out there. I've shot a police qualification course with it using full house 158 grain magnum loads with little discomfort.

 

[sig228]

Lest we not forget the humble model 60 (with the IL "fixed" )

 

[gamestalker]

I have two 66's with 2-1/2" barrels, absolutely love em. you can find 66's like these in the $400-$500 price range pretty easily. I got my 66-5 about 5 or 6 years ago for about $400. It was a trade actually, I gave a Tec-9 that I got for $400 for a 98% 66-2.

But I have recently seen a few other really nice 66's for $400 - $450 in my LGS, so they are out there.

GS

 

[Glock Doctor]

Originally Posted By: Hapworth:
It certainly can and does occur, and seems largely relegated to the K-frames designed for .357, but it's misleading for a S&W rep or anyone else to call it common. Where are the hard numbers? Piles of anecdotal reportage on the S&W forums indicates it's actually quite uncommon and tends to be associated with two things: shooting hot, lightweight .357 Magnum loads, and failure to regularly clean around the forcing cone and top strap.

And the Model 19's origins weren't based on going cheap. On the contrary, S&W spent coin developing a .357 capable K-frame when they already had the sturdier and proven N-frame; they did this at Bill Jordan's request, as many in law enforcement complained that they needed a .357 capable revolver that wasn't as heavy to carry and bring into action as an N-frame. The Model 19 and its twin the 66 were the result, and were never meant for a regular diet of .357, but instead .38 Special for regular practice and .357 for occasional practice and everyday carry.

For intended purpose, the 19s and 66s were huge successes, and used as intended will last.

According to a Senior Gunsmith at the S&W factory whom I've known for many years: The problems with Smith's Model 19 were, indeed, common enough to persuade the factory to start handing out free replacements - NONE OF WHICH were other Model 19's!

The problem was, also, common enough to cause S&W to invent the, 'L' frame. Sorry if I, 'ruffled your feathers' so to speak; but, while your opinion is an admirable statement of brand loyalty, many people (with me among them) think otherwise.

 

[Hapworth]

According to a Senior Gunsmith at the S&W factory whom I've known for many years: The problems with Smith's Model 19 were, indeed, common enough to persuade the factory to start handing out free replacements - NONE OF WHICH were other Model 19's!

The problem was, also, common enough to cause S&W to invent the, 'L' frame. Sorry if I, 'ruffled your feathers' so to speak; but, while your opinion is an admirable statement of brand loyalty, many people (with me among them) think otherwise.

No ruffled feathers or brand loyalty here; inaccurate information needs correction is all. The forcing cone issue, while present, can hardly be called common without the numbers to back it up, especially with a preponderance of evidence against it in the form how many hard use 19s and 66s are still going without problems, and that S&W produced them for over fifty years, more than 20 of which were after the L-frame was introduced -- hardly a replacement.

The L-frame was created to solve the problem of shooters who preferred the lighter K-frame but wanted to shoot hot, lightweight .357 Magnum rounds full time, something the K-frame wasn't designed for. Used as intended, the K-frames are excellent, durable revolvers.

 

[jfremder]

So I have one glaring omission from my collection (ok maybe more than one). I do not have a snub nose S&W 357.

I want to pick one up, not necessarily a carry gun, just want to add something I don't have. Blued or SS, doesn't matter. I would want to keep it under 750 or so (give or take $100)

Off the top of my head I would probably want a 686, 7 shot. Just because it is unique. I don't care one way or the other about the internal lock. It doesn't bother me, but was wondering what are some of the older classic 357 snubs to look at? I am not well versed in Smith's models.

If I could find one for $500 or less even better

This seller has S+W in .357 in both 2.5" and 2" PC versions...

http://is.gd/revolvers

 

[kym]

My 686 has a 4 inch barrel. I consider it to be one of the finest revolvers made. I carry a Ruger LCR a lot and just a couple weeks ago picked up a Taurus Model 65 (.357) snubbie. No magazines, no jams and no safety. A no-brainer for them times when by the time you think of something, it's all over with.

 

[Guy B. Meredith]

I do not care for the HKS 7 round speedloader as I always had problems with a round hanging up in the speedloader while reloading. On the other hand, I have too often experiences dumping rounds prematurely from other speedloaders.

I have converted my 686+ and M66 for use with moonclips. They drop in and eject more easily and there is no danger of dropping rounds.

MagnumDweeb I think the velocity thing you mention with Rugers vs S&W is individual guns. My 4" M66 sends them through the chrono faster than my 6" 686+. As far as I can figure, the B/C gap on the M66 must be tighter and containing more gas as the bullet passes by.

 

[Lucky Derby]

S&W was being cheap when they made the M19? Not in the least.

The K frame magnum revolver was developed when hardly nothing but 158gr bullets were being used in .358 Magnum ammo. The K frame magnum started to show weakness when 125gr bullets started to show up in .357 Magnum ammo at much higher velocities than a 158gr bullet were pushed. Like said above, the hyper velocity light bullets along with not keeping the forcing cone and top strap clean caused problems. The L frame was the answer to those problems. The K frame was perfectly fine when it was developed, subsequently the ammo outran the revolver.

This. Nothing wrong with the K frame .357s. Use it as intended and it will outlive the user. Abuse it, and well, stuff happens.
If you use your knife as a screwdriver, and break the tip,does that mean it is a poorly designed knife? No, it means it was never meant to be a screwdriver.

 

[rbernie]

It also seemingly bears repeating that many of the 'problem guns' talked about in my circle of shooters wound up being early 19-5's, where the change of barrel fitment from pinned to crush-fit seemingly added to the stresses in the forcing cone area until S&W figured out how to do it. This is probably a good read for folk interested in the Model 19:

http://www.gunblast.com/Butch_MagnumLoads.htm

I currently have a number of S&W 357 Magnum snubbies in range and HD/SD duty. My current favorites in use are the 3" Model 60 Pro, followed by a 2" Model 649 Centennial. I've never been much fond of the N frame snubbies due to their weight and girth. I <heart> the old K frame lightweights (a la the Model 12, Model 315) but S&W doesn't seem much inclined to keep a scandium K/L frame snubbie in the lineup, much less one chambered in 357 Mag, since they discontinued the 386...

 

[Hapworth]

It also seemingly bears repeating that many of the 'problem guns' talked about in my circle of shooters wound up being early 19-5's, where the change of barrel fitment from pinned to crush-fit seemingly added to the stresses in the forcing cone area until S&W figured out how to do it.

Interesting -- I'd like to see more on this; I thought the crush fit had always been S&W's method, both during and after the pinned era, and the pin was simply a hedge against barrel loosening under torsional forces?

 

[rbernie]

There are very different torque needs between the two installation and retention methods; the crush method relies solely on the crush ('interference') fit to keep things snug and has a much higher torque value as a result. This works OK for rifles and other things that have large and well supported mating surfaces and such, but required some refinement from S&W before it proved reliable on their revolvers. One of the big changes from the K to the L frame was to 'fix' the geometry of the frame in the forcing cone area to better accept a barrel fitment that utilized high torques and a strong crush fit.