686 plus 3 inch or 627 pro?

D

Dodobird1589

Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2011
Messages
36
Reaction score
2
Location
Connecticut
So as some of you may have seen me asking i have been planning on buying a model 627 pro 4 inch when my cc permit comes in, but would really prefer a 3 inch barrel. Howver i have a couple questions. Would the 3 inch 686 plus really make cc any easier over the 4 inch 627? Will the 686 plus stand up to the punishment of 357 magnum rounds as well as the 627? how do they compare in weight?i really want the 8 shots but 7 certainly isnt bad and correct my thinking if im wrong but i figure the 3 inch barrel could make cc a whole lot easier without really sacrificing accuracy. your thoughts in general comparing the two would be greatly appreciated as you guys are always very friendly and knowledgeable. thanks for the help
 
It is not so much the barrel length that will make the difference but the overall size. The 686 has a smaller frame/cylinder and for CC that is what you want.
 
i read on another forum from someone who was obviously a 3 inch barrel fan that the 3 inch shoots like a 4 inch but carries like a 2.5 inch, thoughts? how is the durability of the 686 plus 3 inch when shooting magnum rounds
 
For strictly CC the 686 will be more concealable. L frame smaller overall than the N frame. Depending on how you carry, the barrel length may make a difference. If you carry IWB not much difference, because the barrel is inside your pants. If you plan on carrying OWB then the 3" barrel may be the difference between concealed and some barrel/holster showing below your shirt. Also the 3" 686 will be lighter because of 1" less barrel. The 3" will have more muzzle blast, and a little less velocity than the 4". And of course 1" less sighting distance. The 586/686 was designed for the 357 cartridge, due to a reported lack of durability in the K frames. It will hold up just fine to lots of 357 shooting.
 
Last edited:
The locking notches in a 686 Plus are located between cartridge holes, whereas they are located directly over the holes in cylinders with even numbered capacity. The metal is very thin in the latter case, and it's not uncommon for a really hot load to bulge the cylinder in that location, making future extraction difficult. S&W will not sell magnum cylinders - replacement is a Mr. Goodwrench job only.

The 686 is basically a (near) N frame with a K handle - no problem with durability there. Neither require the forcing cone to be cut away to clear the gas ring (crane). The 627 is a BIG pistol due to the cylinder size, which is as large as for a .44 Magnum.

A 3" barrel is somewhat more concealable than a 4" barrel. Neither is well suited to IWB carry, because the cylinder adds too much tension, restricting the draw. A good pancake holster will keep the grip in tight without excessive retention, but needs longer shirtails for concealment.

I went with an Alessi CQB holster for my 4" 686 Plus, which rides a little lower than most others. It's hard to draw a revolver from a high ride holster unless you wear it way to the back. Look also at Kramer and Safariland for thumb snap retention (if you really need it).
 
Last edited:
The 686+3" would be ideal. Don't listen to those saying you will bulge chambers. Don't shoot over-loaded rounds in any gun and you have nothing to worry about.

I personally would not try and conceal a big L frame, N frame is certainly too big. Largest I would go would be a 3" Ruger SP101 for CC...or a similar sized K-frame gun.
 
I was looking at a snubbie 627 pro or PC vs a snubbie 686 plus. I went with the 686. Was less expensive (bought used) and is to me easier to carry.
 
For what it's worth,

Both revolvers should do fine. You didn't mention a medical issue, or something similar, so the couple ounces difference will not matter - unless you personally think it does. For myself, I simply decided that losing five pounds from my gut makes more sense than worrying about the couple of ounces that the N frame weighs (compared to the L frame). Losing five pounds more than makes up for carrying any 4" revolver.

I got this idea from all the old timers who carried 4" wheelguns back in the day, and from what Jack O'Connor wrote about rifles back then too.

I may change my mind some day, and if I do then fine. Like I already posted, each person has to decide for themself.

Just my opinion.

Here is a snub K frame and its' sidekick. Sparks SS2, Kramer pocket holster, Mernickle belt.

4774173a.jpg



Here is an eight shot M27, with a J frame. Conceals fine in a Sparks VM2 & Renegade, Mernickle belt. Eight rounds of 357 should work about as well as eight rounds of 45ACP.

e7a36a5d.jpg
 
Dodobird1589 said:
will the regular 6 shot 686 3 inch have thicker chamber walls and thus be stronger?
Click to expand...

S&W stance on it is that they are just as strong. Don't over-load any gun beyond the max loads in the manuals and you have nothing to worry about.

Why so many questions about chamber strength...are you planning on hot-rodding some handloads? If not then you have nothing to worry about. Pick the one you like best and it will last a lifetime.
 
+1 on shooting loads the gun was designed to shoot. I have K frames and L frames...love 'em both. I carry my K frame 66's in 2 1/2 and 3 inch for the exact reasons stated...little lighter and not as thick as the L frame. A 158gr .357 round will solve most problems...although it is mostly .38 and .38+p for range work 'cause a 66 snubbie really barks with mag loads. If I want to change it up and must shoot the hotter 125gr loads then I can use the 686 2 1/2 inch. But with the full underlug and slightly thicker cylinder it carries a little heavier...not really noticeable in snubbies...but a little.

My wife thinks I'm nuts because the 66 2 1/2" and the 686 2 1/2" are " the same thing" in her mind. That's when I start asking about her purses being "the same thing"! I have my guns and she has her purses...life is good.
 
Last edited:
The 627 Pro Series would be my choice

I have a 627 Pro Series with a pair of 8 round speedloaders and moonclips. It is superbly accurate and I have used it to shoot watermelons at 100 yards lol. The 686 plus is marginally smaller and not nearly as much gun in terms of build, aesthetics, or uniqueness (8 shots versus 7). I had the same choice between a 686 Plus with a 4 inch barrel versus the 627 Pro 4 inch. The forcing cone on the 627 pro is huge and it is just thicker in the top strap and other areas than the 686 plus. Stronger and better.
 
Last edited:
I purchased a 2 5/8" 627 last winter and it is my preferred carry gun OWB in a Galco Silhouette holster when I have a cover garment. The silhouette holster is far more comfortable than the combat master.

I would go with the gun that is most comfortable for you to shoot and fit to your hand and then select a holster that allows you to comfortably carry it. The holster is very important, if not more so than the gun, when it comes to comfort, accessability and ability to conceal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

3
N frame cartridge length 357 magnum
Replies
5
Views
257
Alk8944
Alk8944
F
Korth .44 frame grip compared to L/N frame?
Replies
1
Views
218
VictorLouis
VictorLouis
S
L- Frame 41 Magnum?
2
Replies
20
Views
1K
ko41
ko41
R
Model 69 with 686 marked frame
Replies
7
Views
599
steelslaver
steelslaver
M
K /L frame grips
Replies
2
Views
519
Green Frog
G

Latest posts

Back
Top