Skinny: N-Frame - vs - L-Frame

exfebee

exfebee

Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Messages
479
Reaction score
91
Location
North Florida
Have several 686 L-Frames in the 2.5, 4, & 6.5 inchers.
Been looking at the new 627 snubby. Its a N-Frame that i've never seen. Every local gun store around here do not have a single N-Frame in stock, and have told me they cannot get the 627 snubby from their distributors. "Its too new & if they ever did the Dealer Price was $917.00, They would need to add their 20% & would not accept any transfers from another FFL to them". But, i see them on GunBrokers.. etc where other Dealers are selling them. Don;t know why our Dealers can't get them.

For the guys/gals who do own N-Frames my question please. I know that the N is bigger than the L, but what is the real difference ? Is it the Cylinder, Barrel, or the Frame ? Is it "Chunkier", larger, heavier ?

For the folks who have the new 627-6 snubby how do you like it ?

Thanks for your help & suggestions.
Carl
 
Register to hide this ad
I own both and an N-frame is noticabley bigger than the L-frame. I have big hands so I don't notice it as bad some other people might, but with the (basically) same style skinny grips on them it's certainly a bigger grip to hold on to than a similarlly configured L-frame
 
The N frame is significantly larger than the L and K frames.

The barrel shank is larger diameter, the cylinder is larger, and the barrel axis-to-extractor axis is larger. All this extra weight on the longer barrels feels very different from the longer barrel K and L guns.

The L frame is larger than the K but does not feel much different because it uses K frame size stocks. The balance of an N frame is much different because it uses it's own size stocks, and the larger, heavier cylinder and barrel gives it more forward balance.
 
John, when you refer to "forward balance" on the N-Frame, please explain a little. With the larger grips does that offset the heavier barrel, frame, & cylinder ? I have no problems with the 4 inch nor 2.5 inch 686. Carried the 4 incher for my last 12 years as a LEO & had to qualify with it about every 6 weeks. Put around 30,000 rounds through it at the range & elsewhere. So the 686 is a good balance to me. I'm 6 feet & at 220 pounds. Fairly decent size hands, but right at 66 years young. Shoulder & arm muscles have deteriorated some since retiring. Comparison ?
Carl
 
Gary, read the article. Thanks for locating it. Quite informative as to measurements. Your opinion ... the 627 may or may not be too "bulky" for Concealed carry & OK for range target shooting or Home Defense ? When i carried the 686 along with 3 speed loaders, & cuffs, sometimes it felt like my pants were about to fall off. Add a portable radio clipped on & just had to pull them up a lot.
Carl
 
exfebee said:
Gary, read the article. Thanks for locating it. Quite informative as to measurements. Your opinion ... the 627 may or may not be too "bulky" for Concealed carry & OK for range target shooting or Home Defense ? When i carried the 686 along with 3 speed loaders, & cuffs, sometimes it felt like my pants were about to fall off. Add a portable radio clipped on & just had to pull them up a lot.
Carl
Click to expand...

I'm not familiar with the 627 so I can't comment on that particular model. However, I do own a 4" Model 28 and it's the last handgun I would choose for concealed carry. It's heavy and bulky, as are all N-Frames unless you're talking about some of the new scandium frame models--they're just bulky. For home defense, an N-Frame is perfect. My 28 is always on my bedside table.
 
L-frame cylinder diameter: 1.559"
3637946434_6bf09f950d.jpg


N-frame cylinder diameter: 1.710"
3637946476_41a147e1e8.jpg


The frame is enlargened in the appropriate dimensions to accomodate the larger cylinder. The N-frame barrel is also beefier than the L-frame barrel.
 
What I called "forward balance" is a reference to the way a revolver "hangs" in the hand.

The increased weight and bulk of the L and N frames put more of the weight in the middle of the hand, and more emphasis on the barrel length for handiness.

The snubby K frames (M10, M15, M19, M66) all share that handy center-of-mass feeling and is what makes them popular plainclothes guns.

To my notion, the 4" K frames (M15, M19, M66, M67) have the ideal balance for duty sidearms.

In N frames, the 3.5" and 4" have a nice balance too.

In longer barreled N frames, all bets are off. The longer barrels make for better stability for hunting and competition shooting, but are somewhat awkward for duty use.

Anyway, that is my opinion, and I am sticking to it.
 
I'm an N frame fanatic and, I suppose, I'm biased, but for me, the Ns just fit my hand and balance better than the Ls and Ks. Interestingly, it's not a question of weight. A 4" 686 weighs about as much as a 4" 27. The difference is where the weight is distributed. On an L-frame like the 686, much of the weight is in front of the forcing cone, a consequence of the fully underlugged barrel. By contrast, on an N-frame, like my 27, the weight is further back, in the area of the cylinder and the frame. I find that to be much more comfortable.
 
On the issue of balance, because of the size and weight of the N-Frame, my Model 27 with an 8-3/8" barrel actually balances as nicely as my 4" Model 19 K-Frame. It isn't "forward heavy" at all.

0002.jpg
 
Geee Gary. That's a Mudder and a half. Would be hard to tuck that into an IWB Holster.
Carl
 
I can only offer 1 side of this really.
I have carried N frame and N frame sized revolvers.
I have carried 4 and 2.5" N frames and love them.
I am also 6'4" and a biscuit away from 300 lbs.
I also have a Taurus 445 .44 special 5 shooter that I have carried OWB concealed... and it just about disappears. I do believe it is in between K and L frame size.
It takes some acclimation, but for me a 4" or shorter N fram is no trouble at all.


Jim
 
Last summer I spent a week in Mississippi. I carried a 627 Pro (N frame) all week in a very good belt and holster rig and I was plesantly surprised with how comfortable I was wearing it. I have carried my Colt Magnum Carry in years past. It is simular in size to a K frame. I left the Colt at home and made myself give that N frame an honest try and I was pleased.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
Korth .44 frame grip compared to L/N frame?
Replies
1
Views
237
VictorLouis
VictorLouis
R
Model 69 with 686 marked frame
Replies
7
Views
652
steelslaver
steelslaver
R
N frame rear sight
Replies
6
Views
179
rminer
R
M
K /L frame grips
Replies
2
Views
566
Green Frog
G
B
L Frame changes - sights, backstrap
Replies
4
Views
390
murphydog
murphydog

Latest posts

Back
Top