King of modern defense revolvers: S&W 686+

U

UncleEd

Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2015
Messages
1,651
Location
N. Georgia
The L-frame sized revolvers, be they Colt Python or Ruger GP100 or the S&W 586/686
models, are the best selling wheel guns in today's market. That size matched with
the .357 S&W Magnum Cartridge/.38 S&W Special Cartridge seals their popularity.

And of that batch, I believe the S&W 686+ model in its many configurations, makes
it the top choice for those looking for an all around home defense/concealed carry
firearm.

The current 686+s all have round butt frames, allowing for nearly the very smallest
stocks to target stocks.

The "plus" of course means a seventh shot in the cylinder. I find that most appealing.
If you can get that "extra" round, why not in a defensive revolver.

And finally but so important, the 686+ comes with skeletonized barrels, regular
full lug barrels and lengths from 2.5 icnes to 4.2 inches. I dare say the 2.5-inch
and 3-inch models are most popular. Just look at the postings on this forum.

Now regarding the competition, first the Ruger GP100. No matter how you look at it,
the gun seems bulky althugh I do like the 2.5-inch and 3-inch models. The stud
design for the stocks does give an owner some decent options but no more than
that of S&W, In fact, less because not as many options exist. Ruger does have
the plus models for a seventh shot but with a checkered past.

As to the Python, it remains a mid-20th Century bulky firearm with its square butt
frame. True, numerous barrel lengths are offered but no model, at least not yet,
offers that seventh shot which I prefer as long as I can get it. And I think its price
works against it as well as having the same quality control issues other makers have.

Regarding the current production Colt King Cobras, the basic D-frame design is
a bit smaller than the S&W K-frame and neither do I believe is up to long term
.357 or hot .38 use nor are they near as comfortable to shoot than the L-frames.

OK, many will have different views but I shall continue to contend that the
S&W 686+ is best for use as a defense revolver by a wider variety of men and
women than the rival firearms.

 
Last edited:
The 686 does seem to be the sweet spot for a carry revolver for the reasons you mentioned. I actually chose to sacrifice a bit of shoot ability for carry comfort and went with a 3” King Cobra. It is a wonderful revolver, actually at the top of my favorites list even edging out my Python but as you said, .357 rounds do grow tiresome.
 
Hmmm, never considered the Python big or bulky.

Ive shot Scandium snubbies w full tilt CorBons, and the old FBI K frame 19/66 2.5" w adj sights running Federal 125 screamers.
They're as annoying as my 180grainer max .44 mag loads in a 4" 629 LOL

Like the 686 just fine, but older models. The newer higher backstrap guns don't look as good to my eye ( and I shoot the old ones just fine ).
Of the new Smiths, the M&P R8 would be my choice.

Revolvers are fine w me :)

But if I really want higher capacity and easier to carry............an auto is the way to go.

One could go with an auto having the trigger comparable to a DA revolver.
Supposedly the HK LEM trigger is like that.
 
I may yet get a 4" stainless new style Python.
A pre lock 686 is getting up there in price these days.
Same for a 629-3
 
OK, I'll disagree. Of course this is personal opinion.

Depends on how you define "defense". Concealed carry for the majority of everybody, no way. While a good revolver, the L frame in any guise is way too bulky and/or heavy for EDC. Open carry in the woods, no problem. At home, no problem.

But regardless of use, the L frame (and Colt I frame) guns are somewhat ponderous compared to the K frame-sized guns, which are the epitome of self-defense revolvers. Most coppers who carried revolvers daily for 8-12 hours, preferred the lighter guns. The lighter K frame cylinder also rotates marginally faster, and the guns point better and faster. Bill Jordan advocated for the creation of the K frame Model 19 Combat Magnum for all of those reasons.

In addition, the "Plus" version of the l frame, while adding an additional 1 round, has less steel between the chambers, resulting in less of a heat sink. Not a problem in most cases, but if you are using original full-strength .357 Magnum (not the current scamdium J frame-influenced reduced version) under a rigorous firing schedule (couple two three 50-shot police qualification courses in a row), you may end up with sticky extraction. I've observed it in those guns. With .38 Special +P, or what passes for factory .357 Mag these days, under typical firing rates, it is less of problem.

More, is not necessarily better.
 
My choice of your 3 would be a Ruger GP100 3” if I was going to conceal carry one of those models .
 
Boom Vang said:
But regardless of use, the L frame (and Colt I frame) guns are somewhat ponderous compared to the K frame-sized guns, which are the epitome of self-defense revolvers. Most coppers who carried revolvers daily for 8-12 hours, preferred the lighter guns. The lighter K frame cylinder also rotates marginally faster, and the guns point better and faster. Bill Jordan advocated for the creation of the K frame Model 19 Combat Magnum for all of those reasons.
Click to expand...
Point of historical reference, when the Model 19 came along its chief rival was
the Colt Official Police/Officer Model which had dominated the market prior to WWII. The
OP had the same frame as the then introduced Python and Colt .357. Bill
Jordan was a S&W fan through and through and in his day no S&W L-frame
existed. If you wanted a stronger gun, the next in line was the N-frame, quite
a jump in size and weight. Supposedly Jordan saw the Model 19 as a .357
that would be used mostly to launch .38s.

Yes, the Model 19 was the preferred "lighter" gun but in the context I've
presented, a Model 686+ 2.5-inch model weighs virtually what a Model 19 does.
And that's a major virtue of the modern revolver.

Just checked S&W site, accordingly the 686+ 2.5- barrel model weighs 34.1 ounces
while the Model 19 Carry Comp with 3-inch barrel weighs 34.5 ounces.
 
Last edited:
OP has an opinion...good for him. No doubt the 686 is a fine gun. I like my GP100 but no issues with S&W.

That said, carrying a revolver other than a snub nose pocket gun as a back-up piece is a choice I probably won't ever make willingly...
 
2.8 pounds, for the 686. For actual carry, I'd be hard pressed to think these models beat out all the ULs, that weigh basically a pound.
 
A older S&W L frame is hard to beat
I’d have to purchase a new production in person.
 
Ive had a couple of 4" 586's and 686's over the years. Was never really big on the full under-lug barrels as the balance never felt quite right. Ive had a couple of the 2.5" 686's too, and currently have a Plus version. Its OK, but its a "lug" too, literally, and not a svelte 2.5" 19 either.

The other "Plus" L frame I have is a 620. I got this when they first came out and really wish now Id grabbed a 619 as well, as both have been discontinued for a while. The 620 is more like a 66 and for me, has better looks and balance than the 686's.

This is the 620...

00-DboCy8WJYzQR_q_dc-F5BNyntOLdWDP5ZdA7LI-ODz-CA8tq5vL7oZpeoQ0gQW9qVZV51t4MhjbEwRNyGscOgg


While I like the 7 shooters, most of my revolvers are 6 shooters, and my brain still seems to be wired to 6. When I scrounge my brass, I often find a single loaded round amongst the other 6 empties where I dumped them. Gotta actually shoot them to take advantage of that 7th round. :)
 
Boom Vang said:
But regardless of use, the L frame (and Colt I frame) guns are somewhat ponderous compared to the K frame-sized guns, which are the epitome of self-defense revolvers. Most coppers who carried revolvers daily for 8-12 hours, preferred the lighter guns. The lighter K frame cylinder also rotates marginally faster, and the guns point better and faster. Bill Jordan advocated for the creation of the K frame Model 19 Combat Magnum for all of those reasons.
Click to expand...

UncleEd said:
Yes, the Model 19 was the preferred "lighter" gun but in the context I've
presented, a Model 686+ 2.5-inch model weighs virtually what a Model 19 does.
And that's a major virtue of the modern revolver.

Just checked S&W site, accordingly the 686+ 2.5- barrel model weighs 34.1 ounces
while the Model 19 Carry Comp with 3-inch barrel weighs 34.5 ounces.
Click to expand...
Yes, the K-frames and L-frames of similar configuration are only within 2 or less ounces difference of each other which is NOT something someone is going to notice on the belt. It's a myth that keeps being perpetuated and won't die that the L-frames are so much more bigger and heavier than K-frames. They are practically the same weight and not that much different in size. You get a more robust revolver with the 686 that handles magnum loads better.

The last thing is the 7 round cylinder is stronger and will be better for a steady diet of full power 357 than the 6 round cylinder.

A K-frame model 66 is 33.1 oz and the L-Frame model 69 is 34.19 oz. An only 1.09 ounce difference when the grips, barrel lenth and geometry, etc are the same.

1713876257623.png

The 3" K-frame model 19 Carry Comp is 34.5 oz., and the 7 round L-Frame model 586 L-Comp is 36.2 oz. A difference of only 1.7 oz.
1713884077421.png
 
Last edited:
Let me preface my comments with the fact that I like guns. I especially like revolvers. Unlike many who are diehard fanboys of one brand or another to the point that they're defend their platform preference until they're blue in the face, I like all brands. I am highly fond of the Ruger LCR and GP100, love the Colt King Cobra and Python and think they're beautiful, Kimber knocked it out the park with their rendition, Taurus are the best bang for the buck if you get a good one. I just like them all for different reasons, whether budget priced or overpriced. That said, I still believe S&W is to revolvers what Glock is to poly striker-fired pistols. It's what all others we be compared to and judge on. Their J-frame and the 686 seem to be their greatest hit.

I own a 3" Colt King Cobra, but I choose to carry a 2.5" 686+. They're both great revolvers, but the 686+ is easier to shoot, has more aftermarket support, and it just feels more robust and like a heavy-duty quality professional tool in hand. The King Cobra feels more like it's the next teir down. As of the 686 is the M&P 2.0, and the King Cobra is the SD9.

6wzTaa3.jpg


I'm most likely a smaller man compared to others on the forum with a smaller frame. I EDC a 686+ on the belt regularly without issues. It's no easier or harder to carry vs. a King Cobra or some of these duty size semiautos on the market. Yes, I've carried it for 12 hours a day several times over and even longer on some occasions.

r12TKzd.jpg

1ZjoW6O.jpg
 
I would dearly love to have a Smith & Wesson 4 or five inch 686, (not the +). I can afford any of them but don't have any need for it.
I've already got a Smith & Wesson model
66-2, 4-in which is excellent and I've got a Ruger GP100 Match Champion in 10 mm and a Smith & Wesson model 610 in 10 mm.
So I just can't justify purchasing one. But if I were to run across the deal I couldn't refuse I probably would buy it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
  • Locked
S&W 686 Plus-Same Size Frame and Cylinder as the 686?
Replies
10
Views
3K
Zaydok Allen
Zaydok Allen
P
  • Locked
Did early SW 686's come with 2.5-inch barrels?
Replies
4
Views
533
Tacoma
Tacoma
357smallbore
Original 686 or original King Cobra
2 3
Replies
52
Views
1K
dfariswheel
D
N
  • Locked
3" 686+?
Replies
3
Views
587
Mossyrock
M
R
  • Locked
S&W Model 67 vs 686
Replies
15
Views
4K
Shear_stress
S
Back
Top