Hi friends, first post!

I own one S&W, a 4" 629. Love it. I'd like a 357 and want a 2.5 or 3" barrel for wilderness carry and packing. I've settled on a 357 caliber but need advice on the performance center (2.5" barrel, unfluted cylinder, you know the one) vs the standard 686 plus in the 2.5 or 3" variety. Is there any practical difference for my wilderness needs to pay $150 more for the PC? I read of the differences but not sure what !at be better for me. Packability, weight, and wilderness reliability and toughness are my needs! Thanks

-Timmy

Assuming you will use it as an outdoors gun, with all the stress & "abuse" that entails, I'd go with the standard 686+ model.

__________________
Guns + Dogs= Bliss

I didn't vote, as I would choose neither. Instead my choice would be a pre-lock 4" 686+. The extra barrel length, with it's longer sight radius & faster velocity, would be an advantage for me, & just as easy to carry.

Get the one that holds more rounds when carrying in the woods. Looks are not going to make a difference if something decides to charge you.

James

Trying to figure out why you would carry a 686 into the woods when you have a 629. Makes no sense to me.

Depends on where he is. Maybe in his area their are no bears. A 357 will take down a coyote or some type of wild cat.

James

I've carried a 4" 686, I had round butted,w/ Spegel Extended Boot Grips in a Bianchi 111 cross draw for years in Pa.

If you are not old school; and think a revolver should only hold 5-6 rounds......look for a "686 Mountain Gun" 7shot L-frame with a 4" Model 19 barrel profile.

'Cause he wants one! Maybe he'll like it so much that he'll sell his .44. And then maybe you'll walk into the store where he traded it in, and walk out with it as your own. This is all a good thing!

__________________
Because of the metric system?

I own a 4" 629 and a 4" 686. When I'm in the woods, I carry the 629. If my wife is with me, I still carry the 629, and she carries the 686.

__________________
-Roger

I would carry the 629 also.

Or, if I didn't want to carry it, I'd go for something significantly lighter.

I have a M60 3" which shoots 357 magnum just fine and weights a lot less than the 629. It's my "woods gun".

But then I would really like to have a 686 PC, and would be looking for an excuse to buy it, and wilderness carry is as good an excuse as any.

Just bought a 66-8, 4.25", 357. Dead on accurate out of the box and has a thicker barrel that helps with recoil. I would say if the reason for having it is potential predator conflicts a solid cast 44 round is best but a 357 would also do well in a pinch. The extra .25 in the barrel may improve, albeit, slightly the velocity or the round, but the new model 66-8 is a really sweet gun.

I do a lot of hiking and fishing in the Pecos Wilderness area in N. New Mexico. I have a cabin there. We have bears and lions and I've seen bears often, but no encounters where I have had to draw my gun. My "woods" gun of choice is my 4" 681. Seems perfect to me. Anyway, regarding your question, I'd choose the 686 as I would not pay an extra $150 for a PC gun. Many would, I would not. When you speak of pack-ability, What's an inch and a half difference (from 2.5 to 4) gonna make. Heck, I'm 66 years old and packing a 2 inch, 2.5 inch or 4 inch doesn't make a damn bit of difference to me. Give me the longer barrel and if you need more than six shots, you are probably doomed anyway.

I agree with the gent that said neither. Get a pre-lock. They made a 2.5" back in the day. You don't see'em very often, but they're out there. A M66 is another option, and more common. Also, you might consider a Mountain Gun - they're more expensive but if you sold the M629 and used the money set aside for the M686 you could buy a nice MG.

__________________
~ S&W aficionado in training ~

In all the times I’ve walked through the woods, all manner of animals have seemed to avoid me. I’m more concerned with the two legged types that didn’t.

__________________
"Non sibi, sed patriae"

I've had both and would opt for the 3" 686+. Either standard or Talo 3.5.7. model.

__________________
Dave

WELCOME TO THE FORUM, Timmy ! ! !

FOR YOUR PURPOSES, I WOULD GO WITH THE STANDARD 3" M686+. THERES NO ADVANTAGE TO BE HAD, BY SPENDING THE EXTRA MONEY ON A PC GUN.....

I'VE BEEN AROUND THIS FORUM FOR A MINUTE, AND IMHO, PC GUNS HAVE JUST AS MANY PROBLEMS AS THE GUNS FROM THE STANDARD LINE. IT APPEARS THAT THE QC FUNCTION HAS GRADUALLY BEEN SHIFTED TO THE END USER BY S&W.....

PUT THE MONEY THAT YOU SAVED, TOWARD A GOOD BELT AND HOLSTER, OR A QUALITY SHOULDER RIG. FYI--- THE 6 SHOT AND THE 7 SHOT CYLINDERS SHARE THE SAME DIMENSIONS, THEY ARE JUST DRILLED DIFFERENTLY. THERE IS NO NEED FOR YOU TO SEARCH FOR A M686+ HOLSTER. YOUR GUN WILL FIT PERFECTLY IN ANY HOLSTER MADE FOR A M686.....

__________________
'Nam 1968-69.DAV,VFW,NRA Inst.

Why the 686 PC? I'm SMH trying to figure out what it has to offer over a 3" or 4" 686 Plus...if we're talking woods carry.

Here's what I'd recommend: Model 686 Plus 3-5-7 Magnum Series | Smith & Wesson

__________________
Smith. And Wesson. And Me!

One for each hand!

__________________
Bob P.

For some reason, people seem to overlook the Taurus Judge or S&W Governor...I think you can get a 6 round version nowadays...Depending on what type of woods you are in, the .410 shot is great for snakes...and the .45 LC is not bad for most larger stuff...if we are talking lions, tigers and bears (oh, my! c'mon, you all chimed in...don't lie), then maybe you need something else...but for most woods, why not the Gov?

I'm guessing that since Timmy's last "log in" was Sept of 2016, and the OP was in 2014, he has already decided what to do/get........

Just sayin'........