686 or 627

[jcephl]

I thought I had my decision made on my next gun but now I'm not sure. I wanted a 686+ 4". I've shot it before and thought it was great. I have a 617 which is the same frame and they would complement each other. But then I read about the 627 which is a little bigger and 8 shot. The standard 627 not the PC version. I like the higher capacity. I've seen it listed for a little more money. Most of the posts and reviews are about the higher end 627 PC. Is the 627 standard hard to find and how would it compare to the 686+?

 

[tlr16]

I just had a 627-0 and sold it I didnt care for the Nframe 357. I have a 617-0, 66-2, 686-0, 686-3, 686-5 which I love the feel and balance of them. But this is my opinion go a range or shop and try both to see how they feel but if you love the 617 then 686+ is the best bet for you.

 

[colt_saa]

Myself, I always loved the 27/327/627 family of revolvers. They are just built like tanks. They last and last.

A 6" model 27 is the first revovler I ever bought NEW. That was more than 30 years ago. It still takes regular trips to the range with me.

The new 8 shot design is GREAT. I bought the first one in June or July of 1997. I probably have more than a dozen of them by now. Blue steel, Nickel, Scandium and Stainless, I love them all.

For me the decision is a no brainer........627

 

[Wayne M]

The 627's are great, however the standard is not cut for moon clips and there are no really GOOD speedloaders for it. The Pro and PC guns are moon clip ready if speedloading is important to you and while the moons are great fun to use and FAST they are a pain to actually put the individual rounds into and take out even with the proper tools. I use moons with the 45ACP but don't care for the time it takes to clip up my ammo. I usually spend the winter clipping and unclipping so I don't have to bother with it during shooting season. The 686 in either standard or + is less money, good loaders are available and the revolver is easier to hide and less money. I just really don't see a downside to the 686. Your intention to buy a + 4" is the best way to go.

 

[roaddog28]

I have a 686-3 and a 28-2. These are not large capability revolver but between the two the 28-2 has less felt recoil than the 686-3. You can't go wrong with either L or N frame for shooting magnum rounds. Go to the range and shoot both. Then decide on which one fits you best.

Good luck,
roaddog28

 

[Revolver King]

I have 7 L frames and 7 N frames I don't know what to tell you. OOPS, mis-counted its 9 to7 in favor of the L frames. Go with the 7 shooter.

 

[rbert0005]

I don't want to pop your baloon, but the 617 is a K frame the 686 is an L frame, and the 627 is an N frame.

Three different animals.

Bob

 

[Revolver King]

I don't want to pop your baloon, but the 617 is a K frame the 686 is an L frame, and the 627 is an N frame.

Three different animals.

Bob

I don't want to pop your ballon either, but the 617 is a L frame.

 

[tjhennin]

Just got my 627 Pro...in my mind it's the way to go. I had a 686 7 shot, but got rid of in to go with the 8 shot 627. I didn't like the 5 inch barrel so I decided against the 627PC. I think the 627 pro is the perfect mix between the standard 627 and the 627PC. I love the matte finish and the moon clip ready, chamfered cylinder. Also, the quick change sights are great. This is by far my favorite revolver.

 

[colt_saa]

rbert0005 is correct, the 17/617 family of revolvers are built on the K frame, not the L frame

 

[Revolver King]

rbert0005 is correct, the 17/617 family of revolvers are built on the K frame, not the L frame

He did not say 17, the 17 is a K frame, But the full lug 617 which is the most common found is an L frame. They did make a very few 617s that were not full lug. But most of them are and they are L frames.

 

[colt_saa]

He did not say 17, the 17 is a K frame, But the full lug 617 which is the most common found is an L frame. They did make a very few 617s that were not full lug. But most of them are and they are L frames.

Sorry Revolver_King,
You are wrong here.

The 17 and 617 revolvers have always been built on K frames. The difference between the two is the material used for construction (carbon vs. stainless). Just because the barrel profile changed to a full lug does not mean that the frame was ever changed.

Would it also be your contention that the blued steel model 17s which are manufactured with full lug barrels are also built on L-frames?

 

[Revolver King]

Sorry Revolver_King,
You are wrong here.

The 17 and 617 revolvers have always been built on K frames. The difference between the two is the material used for construction (carbon vs. stainless). Just because the barrel profile changed to a full lug does not mean that the frame was ever changed.

Would it also be your contention that the blued steel model 17s which are manufactured with full lug barrels are also built on L-frames?

OK, upon further research I find that it is referred to as a K frame. That being said there is absolutely no difference between the 617 and the 686 other then cal. So I do apologize for my error. I have learned something, but I am not sure I agree with it.

 

[SW357Addict]

I would go with the 627Pro. I have had one for a while and it is awesome. It has a 4" barrel, a great trigger, 8 shots, and is cut for moonclips. It also has a quick change front sight.

 

[rbert0005]

There is a lot different between a 617 and a 686. The frame of the 686 is an L Frame where the 617 is a K Frame.

You can use the same grips, but that's it.

Bob

 

[Neal]

OK, upon further research I find that it is referred to as a K frame. That being said there is absolutely no difference between the 617 and the 686 other then cal. So I do apologize for my error. I have learned something, but I am not sure I agree with it.

The L frame has a larger diameter cylinder, and the frame is larger to accomodate the larger cylinder. They are definitely not the same.

 

[Neal]

I would go with the 627Pro. I have had one for a while and it is awesome. It has a 4" barrel, a great trigger, 8 shots, and is cut for moonclips. It also has a quick change front sight.

That Pro sure looks sweet. Any trouble with it fitting in holsters made for standard 4" N frames?

 

[jcephl]

I like the look of the 627 pro. It's only a little more than the standard so I'd probably go with the pro if I do decide on the 627. Would anyone have a size comparison picture between the 686(or similar) and 627? I'm just wondering about the size and how well it would fit my hand. My gunshop didn't have a 627 last I checked. I'll try a couple other stores but I think it may be hard to find here locally. This gun would be for home defense and range use. I'm not too concerned about speed loading.

 

[HEADKNOCKER]

The easiest way to tell a K Frame from an L Frame is the flat bottom of the forcing cone area of the K Frame..
You'll notice the L Frame is Round there..
I'd go with the 686 if I had a choice..
There just so sweet..
K frames carry a bit better but the extra heft & oversized cylinder & beefed up barrel make the L Frame a better shooter for prolonged use of Magnum Rounds..
Then of course there's the N Frames, I don't even wanna go there YET!!

 

[RV4driver]

Mmmmm, 686!
-Homer Simpson