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?
386 vs 686
- Thread starter grandcru
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 27,669
- Reaction score
- 21,359
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.
ab4ka
Member
The 386 is a neat gun but the 686 is definitely easier to shoot with the additonal weight.
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.
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:
