Smith & Wesson Forum

Advertise With Us Search
Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > Smith & Wesson Revolvers > S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present

Notices

S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present All NON-PINNED Barrels, the L-Frames, and the New Era Revolvers


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-04-2010, 03:25 PM
grandcru grandcru is offline
Member
386 vs 686 386 vs 686 386 vs 686 386 vs 686 386 vs 686  
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Bowling Green, Ohio
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default 386 vs 686

Hello to everyone--I just recently joined the forum and have a question. I'm looking to buy a 686, probably a 2.5" barrel or whatever is close to that. In looking around on Gunbroker.com and I see there is a 386 that looks interesting. What is the difference between these two models?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-04-2010, 03:32 PM
murphydog's Avatar
murphydog murphydog is offline
Moderator
386 vs 686 386 vs 686 386 vs 686 386 vs 686 386 vs 686  
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 26,911
Likes: 993
Liked 19,048 Times in 9,316 Posts
Default

The 386 is a lightweight (alloy frame, lighter barrel) .357 built on the same L frame as the 686. In my opinion, a nice gun but made more for carrying than shooting full power loads frequently.
__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-04-2010, 04:59 PM
ab4ka's Avatar
ab4ka ab4ka is offline
Member
386 vs 686 386 vs 686 386 vs 686 386 vs 686 386 vs 686  
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Lakeland, Florida
Posts: 1,594
Likes: 8
Liked 64 Times in 40 Posts
Default

The 386 is a neat gun but the 686 is definitely easier to shoot with the additonal weight.
__________________
"I'm your huckleberry."
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-04-2010, 05:09 PM
Wayne M Wayne M is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 847
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 11 Posts
Default

If you shoot a lot the 386 will need more factory maintenance than a 686. Its alloy frame just won't take the continued pounding and heat that the stainless frame will. A 2 1/2" or 3" 686 in a seven shot cylinder is just as easy to carry in a proper holster and belt setup. Box size is the same as the 386, only the weight differs.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-05-2010, 10:30 AM
Flat Tire Flat Tire is offline
Member
386 vs 686 386 vs 686 386 vs 686 386 vs 686 386 vs 686  
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I have the 386 Sc/S, scandian frame, 2.5" barrel, 7 shot, this gun shoots great. And packs even better. It is not a target pistol you take to the range to punch paper, it sits in my pocket and weighs as much as my key chain. It is awesome for what I want it for. And when I want to go punch paper I use something else. One pistol will not do everything but the 386 Sc/S does it's job very well. I consider the 2.5" barrel to be a pocket pistol and why would anyone want a heavy pistol in their pocket ? You really never shoot them. I take my 1911 to the range. People need to understand guns are designed for different purposes and if you can go lighter with a 2.5" barrel do it.

Last edited by Flat Tire; 09-05-2010 at 10:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
1911, 686, l frame


Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:51 PM.


Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)