Besides HKS, 5 Star, Speed Beez and SL Variant make speedloaders in 7 shot versions. The SL Variants are made in Germany and importation is sort of an on again, off again thing.
Having looked at almost a dozen new and lightly used 686s (6 and 7 shot) last year, looking for just the right one, I can tell you quality control isn't what it once was.
I ended up with a 7 shot, because it had the best fit/finish and timing I could find. If I'd found a better 6 shot, I'd have bought that instead.
It seems logical that if you only have to move the cylinder 51 degrees rather than 60 degrees, less trigger effort would be required given the same trigger travel.Lonesome, I've had multiples of both and still have one 686 with both 6 and 7-shot cylinders. I'm not an engineer, but the 6-shot version, due to more steel, would seem the more robust to me. That being said, I have shot heavy 357 ammunition, like Buffalo Bore 180@1400 FPS, in both without any issues at all.
The 7-shot cylinder obviously locks up sooner, but the lockwork and trigger pull is the same, 6 or 7-shot.
View attachment 1143010
Why couldn't you load 5 in a 686+ while at the range and still with an empty under the hammer? It's still the same difference, e.i, 5 shots and then an audible click. Lol I don't get it.IF I was going to get a 686, I'd look for a six shot one. I have a weird reason for that. I'm one of those anal people who only loads five rounds at the range. A box of cartridges is 50 rounds. Ten rows of five. Nice, neat, and "just right" for my mild OCD. I can load 5, close up with an empty under the hammer, and I'm ready to go. Works with 100 round reload boxes too.
I did look at a 4" 686 "7 shooter" yesterday and must admit that I thought it was pretty nice, but there's that extra round.
I never said it made ANY sense did I?Why couldn't you load 5 in a 686+ while at the range and still with an empty under the hammer? It's still the same difference, e.i, 5 shots and then an audible click. Lol I don't get it.
Trust your gut instinct. Stick with six. You’re used to six shots.The local gun shops have some new S&W revolvers. Is there any reason, besides the extra shot, to prefer the 686 Plus seven-shot revolver over the regular 686 six-shot revolver?
I am kinda liking the six-shot a little better. There is a bit more meat between the chambers. Plus I am just used to my single actions which all have six chambers.
I like the added round, its just my brain is so wired for 6 rounds in revolvers, that, when shooting where Im shooting quickly and theres a reload and carry on involved, Im dumping them a lot of times at 6 without thinking about it and finding loaded rounds in the piles with my empties when I scrounge my brass. If I were carrying my 686, and shooting it and constantly practicing with it every week, like the gun I carry, Im sure it wouldn't be an issue.I prefer the extra round as I carry for self-defense purposes, and it would make zero sense to opt for less ammo in an already low capacity platform. Moon clips, speedstrip, and 3 or so IIRC companies offer speedloaders for 7 round cylinders.
It seems that no one has ever had an issue with the sandard 7 rounds in single stack 9mm's or 1911s or anything else for that matter. The Springfield Hellcat has an 11 round magazine, a lot of subcompacts have 13 round mags, the Glock 27 is a 9 rounder, it's 10+1 for 11 rounds total for all those who carry one in the chamber with a full 10 round mag, e.g., Sig P365, S&W Shield Plus, Glock 26.
I've never understood why no one ever has an issue or volunteers to have less capacity in anything else from rifles, shotguns, and semiautos because the capacity is an odd number. Their brain can handle shooting odd numbers and different capacities in different platforms and guns, but not when it comes to revolvers? I can fully understand and comprehend the logic behind wanting a 6 or 8 round cylinder if your revolver will be used for competitive shooting, or if you MUST have and only will use Safariland speed loaders. I can't wrap my brain around the other reason given though not that it matters.
No judgement, but I'm just generally curious lol.
You know there's a company named 5 Star Firearms who makes a more robust all aluminum speedloader for the 7 round L frames that has an action simular to Safariland's speedloader. They're only about $6 or so more.I like the added round, its just my brain is so wired for 6 rounds in revolvers, that, when shooting where Im shooting quickly and theres a reload and carry on involved, Im dumping them a lot of times at 6 without thinking about it and finding loaded rounds in the piles with my empties when I scrounge my brass. If I were carrying my 686, and shooting it and constantly practicing with it every week, like the gun I carry, Im sure it wouldn't be an issue.
The issue with the speed loaders, at least for me is, that some are definitely better than others. Those that hold the rounds tight, with no or little movement, work best, and the more rounds you put in them, the more important that seems to become.
I have 7 round HKS speed loaders for my 686, and they work, but they are "sloppy", and I always found it a lot easier to reload my 6 shot 686 with a Safariland loader, than trying to jiggle the 7 rounds into the cylinder with the HKS. That added charge hole changes things and requires more precision from you too.
While I do like moonclips, I dont have a lot of experience with 357 moonclips. I had a Chappa Rhino that took them, and wasn't real wild about them. I have more experience with them in my 625 ad Governor using 45acp, and they seem to work better there than the longer 357's.
Of course, as with anything, whatever you use and practice with the most, youre going to figure things out and tend to be more on top of your game with them.