I passed up a chance to one with the 1/2 lug for $500. Been mad at myself ever since. I have shot both and like the 1/2 lug on the 5 inch barrel. I don't like my guns to be muzzle heavy. That is one of the reasons I sold my Pythons.

I love the partial lug look. My 5" h-l 686+ was bought locally new nearly five years ago - $489.99 - some $10 less than standard 4" 686+. It was that year's 'Stocking Dealer Exclusive', SKU #164284, and came with a HiViz front and V-notch rear sight as well as Ahrends cocobolo finger-grooved square conversion grips... a bargain then, for sure.

Stainz

I agree, the half lug has a classic, traditional look that harkens back to the old days. That element is missing in the current 686 line.

First... love the L frame have the 21/2 inch 4 inch full lug 6 inch full lug Mountain gun and the five inch half lug. The half lug 5inch comes out of the holster as good as the 4inch full lug for me and the extra inch is great for fast target acquisition also for moving from target to target and the 7 shot is a nice fast shooter. You should take the time to shoot them if you have the opportunity. The L frame is a great gun and comes in an array of combinations. Good shooting.

I have a theory. The moment the bullet starts moving forward, a rearward reaction force is acting on the gun. During the milliseconds the bullet is traveling down the barrel, its trajectory is affected by the guns reactive movement. The heavier the barrel, especially towards the muzzle end since reactive movement pivots about the shooter's wrist, the more mass is opposing that movement. It's a matter of rotational inertia: the more mass, the less acceleration and less movement.

I believe this is why 686s with 4 or 6 inch barrels are consistently rated as some of the most accurate revolvers. When I shot my m29 with 8-3/8" barrel and partial lug, I always got a vertical spread on my group. I believe this is because the gun recoils enough during bullet-in-barrel transit time that it affects the trajectory. Longer barrel and slower bullet also play into this.

Therefore, my vote, at least as far as accuracy is concerned, goes to the full lug version.

I am very partial to L-Frame guns, of ALL barrel lengths--witness my "Screen Name".

I find as I get older--and MAYBE "Wiser"--that I prefer a little LESS weight in the FRONT of my guns. Therefore, I prefer the FEEL of the four-inch L's to that of the six-inch guns--but rue the loss of the additional SIGHT RADIUS when shooting much past 50 feet or so.

This is why I think that the five-inch, HALF-LUG barrel configuration may be the BEST of the lot--enough weight to keep it STEADY, but not so much as to feel "Front Heavy", yet with enough SIGHT RADIUS that I can shoot it better than the four-inch barreled guns. YMMV, of course. Paulie686.

One of the best 'pointing' .357's of all times was the 4" 19 or 66. Just a delight to shoot - especially with lighter loads - like my wimpy .357's. You can still get a partially lugged 4" new .357M - more like a 686+ as it is built on an L-frame and has a 7-shot cylinder. Of course, it's the 620. Interestingly, the 4" 66 weighs 37.0 oz (S&W 2004 catalog) while the 620 weighs 37.9 oz (2005 & later catalogs). As they take the same grips, little difference would be noted. So, with 4" models, you have had a new choice for some time.

Stainz

Well the full lug guns I would think are more accurate with less barrel flex. I have only one 686 and it's still NIB because of weather, sick, etc. But I do know my full N frames are accurate, but have no partial lug S&W's to compare. I do however have a DW with partial lug barrel 4" and full lug 6" and the 6" full is easily more accurate. But that's an apples & orange comparison I guess.

I wish S&W made tensioned barrel L & N frame guns in 357, 44, and 10mm like Dan Wesson did, but that's not likely. Makes for an expensive, but far more accurate pistol then fixed barrel models.

__________________
Cranky Old Retired Guy

I like the 5" length guns although I have more 6" ones. The SD 5" half-lug does balance about the same, as it uses a slightly beefier barrel than the full lug, so the weight remains the same.

Actually, they do make some tensioned barrel models. The model 620 uses a tensioned barrel assembly and it's a real tack driver. The latest release of the model 67 also uses a tensioned barrel.

Personally, I don't like the looks of a full lug barrel and have also discovered that it can cause accuracy issues in some types of shooting. In rapid fire DA shooting the revolver that I am most accurate with is my old pencil barreled model 67. My least accurate revolver for rapid fire DA shooting is my 6 1/2 inch model 610 and I shoot it pretty miserably in this mode.

The problem is the Swing weight. Picture trying to swing a 24 ounce hammer and bringing it to a stop very quickly. Now picture swinging a very light tack hammer and trying to bring it to a stop quickly. All guns firing a moderately powerful caliber will exhibit some muzzle rise. This means that the gun has to be brought back to the point of aim after each shot. When you have a gun with a lot of muzzle mass, trying to bring it back to the point of aim quickly will result in the barrel swinging past that point of aim due to the inertia of that heavy muzzle. So, you either have to slow down your rate of fire or try and "time" the shot with the gun still moving.

Many equate a heavy muzzle with less muzzle rise and this is true. However, they do not consider the level of power required to move that muzzle quickly back to the point of aim quickly and that is the flip side of the equation. Oddly enough, many those who think that reduced muzzle rise is the only factor that matters, will report that they shoot their short barreled 686's more accurately than their longer guns and never think about why.

Frankly, I wish that the Python had never been invented. Then perhaps S&W wouldn't be driven by marketing forces to pythonize a fine gun like the 686 with a full length lug. I like almost everything about my 610. The long sight radius make it easy to shoot well and the moon clips are a joy for range use. However, I just hate that full length underlug and many times have contemplated cutting it down. IMO it's a useless appendage done purely for styling reasons and it impedes rapid fire shooting.