5" 627 length vs 686

heiney5 · Dec 13, 2011

So I have been digging around the net looking for information on S&W wheelguns and this seems to be the place to go.

preface:
I am going to be purchasing my first handgun, general use, in the next few weeks and have decided to make it a S&W. I was initially looking at the 4" 686 .357, but after some research I'm beginning to lean towards a 627PC .357......

Question:
1. Are the overall lengths of different frame sizes similar? IE a 4" L frame vs a 4" N frame... should they approximately be the same size?

The links in questions showing overall length of a 4" 686 and 5" 627:

4" 686 showing Overall length = 9.56"
5" 627PC showing overall length = 9.5"

So according to above a 5" 627PC is about the length of a 4" 686? Its hard to find a 5" N frame to compare further....But I kinda assume this is a typo.

I do welcome someone to clarify.

dwever · Dec 13, 2011

The 5" 627 PC was my second revolver. If you can afford the extra lettuce, the 8 shot capacity, moon clip compatibility, and particularly the action make it well worth it.

old bear · Dec 13, 2011

The 686 is an "L" frame, Smith's current mid sized frame the 627 is an N frame, which is Smiths second largest frame. So the 627 will weigh more. For shooting full charge .357 Magnum ammo I prefer the N frame revolvers, yet for carrying the L frame is the best bet, and the recoil is not to bad with full charge ammo.

Bearcat · Dec 13, 2011

Round butt on the 627 makes up for most of the extra inch of barrel length.

fyimo · Dec 13, 2011

I have a Model 27-2 in 5 inch barrel and to me it's the perfectly balanced N frame. That said a 4 inch Model 686 is really hard to beat. I could go either way depending on each felt in my hand and the balance and I'd buy the one I liked the best.

gr7070 · Dec 13, 2011

I would assume S&W has their facts straight. I am surprised by the slight difference. I own both and just general perception is the 627 is noticably a bigger overall gun.

They're both fantastic guns. However, with your reason for buying I have a strong inclination toward one over the other.

heiney5 said:
preface:
I am going to be purchasing my first handgun, general use

There is no question in my mind that a 4", 6-shot, L-frame is a much better all-around gun than a 5", 8-shot N-frame.

Plinking: I see very little difference between the two. Sure the N-frame would reload a little less and moonclips speed that up. However, if you're going to shoot one or two boxes you will regardless. In addition, shooting a cylinder of six or eight really doesn't have much perceived difference while doing so. One just pulls the trigger.

Conceal: neither is great, but I'll definitely the less bulk of the L-frame.

Games: there is zero question the 4", 6-shot is far more versatile. It'll play in almost any game, where the 8-shot won't play well in IDPA or USPSA.

Woods: the added capaciy doesn't matter in hunting. The added weight isn't good to carry. The added velocity of the 5" is better, but not sure how much better it really is. I'm guessing not significantly better.

The 4, 6-shot is the best all-purpose revolver out there.

dwever · Dec 14, 2011

gr7070 said:
There is no question in my mind that a 4", 6-shot, L-frame is a much better all-around gun than a 5", 8-shot N-frame. The 4, 6-shot is the best all-purpose revolver out there.

I'm going to say that unless games are a major reason you're shopping, the above assertion is dubious to be kind (BTW, your 627 is fine as is with all 8 rounds in moon clips in the production division of USPSA).

While not the whole argument, it is probably worth knowing that the Performance Center is Smith & Wesson's premium (and most expensive) line of weapons, where S&W states the "best of the best" of their gun smiths work on weapons of, "uncompromising quality." In the Performance Center line, they offer six .357's. It is worth considering that while these PC .357's come in stainless steel, scandium alloy, even one with a titanium cylinder, each and every one of these .357's on the Perf. Ctr. web site are 8 shot N frames only, nothing else (and it is probably worth asking why that is). Four of the PC .357's have 5" barrels and two are snubbies; the 2.625" barreled version of the PC 627 Smith and Wesson has referred to with good reason as, "The Ultimate Defensive Revolver."

As far as carry, the PC 627 w/2.625" barrel is only one of two revolvers I would carry in place of my Glock. The other is the S&W 7 Shot 586 L Comp (also cut for moon clips), which, again if you're not concerned about games, this would be a credible candidate for best all purpose revolver, particularly if the compensator, full lug barrel, superior PC action, and tritium night site scratch you where you itch; and, the 586 L Comp is an L Frame if that is important.

I'm just saying, there's a lot to consider, and it's a fun education.

Stainz · Dec 14, 2011

A better comparison - 4" N-frame 627 Pro vs 5" JM PC627 V-Comp:

The nose heavy V-Comp was not fun to shoot and it's dovetail front sight mount limited sight choices. Both are moonclip ready - and the 627 Pro quickly hogged the range bag, even though the PC Shop's trigger work made the V-Comp the best trigger I ever owned. Still, I sold it and ultimately bought a second PC627 UDR with the funds. I love that 'little' (2.625" barrel) PC627!

And... the 4" 627 Pro also displaced the 5" half lug 'Stocking Dealer Exclusive 686P' from '04, which had never been replaced by the V-Comp. The 5" 686P languishes in my safe... the newer 627's are hard acts to follow.

Finally, the big guy is gone - another little guy arrived - much happier. The V-Comp was my finest firearm - but just too big - and either the comp or the cap was just something else to clean. For me, the 4" 627 Pro and the PC627 UDR are 'enough'... actually, two of the UDR's is more better and much gooder - er...

The 5starfirearms.com 8x speedloader and 2 x 8 loading plate, both machined Al, work with any cases - .38 or .357 Magnum - great value.

Stainz

heiney5 · Dec 14, 2011

Thanks for the responses guys, I appreciate all recommendations and information. Ultimately I dont think I can make a wrong decision. Maybe to help clarify these were my thoughts/expectations.

My expectations

A good balanced over all gun, probably keep for life
May carry, may not, probably under truck seat if so
Dont want a long and huge gun, or a short and stubby, thought 4" was a good compromise.
Plan to casually target practice often. Doubt I compete.

When I saw the stats on the 5" 627 being same overall length and less then 6oz heavier, I thought why not get a longer barrel.....I think the website is in error though, after finally looking at similar frame 5" 327 I'm pretty sure the length should be 10.5". Someone is welcome to correct me.

I guess I need to go store shopping, and put my hands on these things and see how they feel. I have a feeling a 686 will be generally easy to find on the shelf, is the 627 harder to find? Are all 627 pro series?

dwever · Dec 14, 2011

heiney5 said:
My expectations

A good balanced over all gun, probably keep for life

May carry, may not, probably under truck seat if so

Dont want a long and huge gun, or a short and stubby, thought 4" was a good compromise.

Plan to casually target practice often. Doubt I compete.

I guess I need to go store shopping, and put my hands on these things and see how they feel. I have a feeling a 686 will be generally easy to find on the shelf, is the 627 harder to find? Are all 627 pro series?

I have purchased both the 5" 627 and the 2.625" barreled version. Like so many on this site, the 2.625" PC 627 is my favorite, balanced, accurate, and a great trigger. Will live under your seat fine, but needs to be in leather under there (I use a Galco Combat Master pictured at Doug Wever's Photo Galleries at pbase.com). To see a PC 627 on the shelf, generally that's going to be the bigger dealers - while 686's are everywhere. Good luck

gr7070 · Dec 14, 2011

heiney5 said:
My expectations

A good balanced over all gun, probably keep for life

May carry, may not, probably under truck seat if so

Dont want a long and huge gun, or a short and stubby, thought 4" was a good compromise.

Plan to casually target practice often. Doubt I compete.

All that sounds like a 4" 686 to me.

However, do understand the L-frame is *not* a small gun. It's bigger than a 1911. It's not at all unwieldy, but not small, by any means.

heiney5 said:
When I saw the stats on the 5" 627 being same overall length and less then 6oz heavier, I thought why not get a longer barrel.....I think the website is in error though, after finally looking at similar frame 5" 327 I'm pretty sure the length should be 10.5". Someone is welcome to correct me.

I'd guess the difference in length is the round butt grips??? The length of the 4" Pro 627 is 9.75" the 5" PC is 9.5". Certinly seems odd. If the site is wrong, how do you know which dimension is wrong. Could be either gun is wrong.

If it's correct, and you do not like the grips - I definitely do not like the wood grips my older model came with - you've now got a much longer gun.

Stainz · Dec 14, 2011

A common thread in my pictures above may just hold the answer for you - the 4" 627 Pro. Not a PC product - but pretty darn close. For me, it needed wood grips, the original Hogues never finding favor here. I liked the Ahrends square conversion/retro target non-fg style in cocobolo - until I tried the J. Miculek style I had. As on my 625JM, they afford a fast/non-fidgety grab - and grow on you. Heck, the boot-like OEM grips on the 2 5/8" PC627 UDR weren't large enough - the PC Shop N-frame grips shown were 'just right'. Grips - size of revolver - is very personal. I wanted a 'Blood Work' revolver before they had earned that name - in 1999 - from an ad for an "Ultimate Defense Revolver". I am still enamored by it! The 4" 627 Pro has great balance - and is a very close second. YMMV.

Stainz

heiney5 · Dec 14, 2011

gr7070 said:
...
I'd guess the difference in length is the round butt grips??? The length of the 4" Pro 627 is 9.75" the 5" PC is 9.5". Certinly seems odd. If the site is wrong, how do you know which dimension is wrong. Could be either gun is wrong.
...

Yeah I guess I got to watch what I assume. I agree though the comparison of the length seem odd. Maybe it is grip

Stainz said:
...
A common thread in my pictures above may just hold the answer for you - the 4" 627 Pro.
...

I've been looking at the picture and it is hard to see, but I think the grip adds some. Atleast it appears to.

Some questions for reference:

The compensator isn't part of the "5 inch" measurement? Correct?
Also how about if we strip the grips, will a 4" L frame be the same length as the 4" N frame?
Is the N frame "wider" to accommodate the bigger cylinder?

gr7070 · Dec 14, 2011

A few points for you.

I personally couldn't are less about the PC. My 627 PC didn't seem much if any different than my basic 686.

I looked and called for a 627 Pro all over for many months. Never found a single one. Finally stumbled on a steal of a used 627-PC.

If games aren't a remote option, which appears they aren't, I'd pick up whichever good deal of either 686 or 627 you find first. The positives of a 627 aren't that great over a 7-shot 686. So they're pretty much equal if games aren't a factor.

If games are a remote option get a 6-shot, 4" 686.

dwever · Dec 14, 2011

gr7070 said:
My 627 PC didn't seem much if any different than my basic 686. So they're pretty much equal if games aren't a factor.

I'm going to have to call BS on that post. The 686 is a fine weapon, particularly when well tuned. Our agency used to issue the 686, 4" barrel six shot, but to say they're not much if any different from an N frame 627 is frankly just untenable. But without me and gr7070 getting into a debate, the fact is you plan on checking both weapons out, and you can decide for yourself.

I'm not saying the PC 627 is even a better weapon, but saying the 686 and PC 627 are essentially not any different is like saying an LX Accord and an Acura TL are basically the same car (if you don't drive that much, I can see where you might think that). Heiny5, you decide.

heiney5 · Dec 16, 2011

My hunt to purchase a wheelgun

I really do value everyone's input. And I know we all probably have preferences...and I'm sure experience and use can factor in also.

I was able to get some time this week and hit some local spots....Like expected the 686 is readily available pretty much everywhere...and the 627 was nowhere. But I was able to handle a 625jm, which I guess is at the least the same "frame" as a 627.

From some recommendations in this thread, I decided to open myself to a smaller, say 3" barrel for comparison. I've also been calling friends and family in hopes I can round up someone local with another N frame ~3-4" for feel.

My first impressions:

The 4" 686 seemed nose heavy. But felt fair. At this point, I'm pretty sure the 5" is out of the running.
A 3" 686 seems more balanced. And to me felt pretty good. Kinda leaning this barrel length if I go 686
The 4" 625jm was dang near perfect and seemed to feel better then the 4" 686. Balance and of coarse grip.

So without doing research....is there benefits to a "heavy nose"? Are my impressions just due to being new to revolvers? Would maybe different grips do a 4" 686 justice and make it more balanced? Or does the heavier frame just offset this better? I've always thought a better balanced gun feels better.

Further suggestions or experiences are welcome.

Nick B · Dec 16, 2011

dwever said:
I'm going to have to call BS on that post. The 686 is a fine weapon, particularly when well tuned. Our agency used to issue the 686, 4" barrel six shot, but to say they're not much if any different from an N frame 627 is frankly just untenable. But without me and gr7070 getting into a debate, the fact is you plan on checking both weapons out, and you can decide for yourself.

I'm not saying the PC 627 is even a better weapon, but saying the 686 and PC 627 are essentially not any different is like saying an LX Accord and an Acura TL are basically the same car (if you don't drive that much, I can see where you might think that). Heiny5, you decide.

I think he was talking about the supposedly PC action work on the 627 compared to a regular action on a 686, not the guns themselves .

gr7070 · Dec 16, 2011

Nick B said:
I think he was talking about the supposedly PC action work on the 627 compared to a regular action on a 686, not the guns themselves .

Yes, exactly.

To me the PC doesn't bring much value to the user. Now the 8-shots might, or the interchangeable sight might, etc. But the mere fact it has PC on the side doesn't mean much to me.

5" 627 length vs 686

heiney5

dwever

Member

old bear

US Veteran

Bearcat

Member

fyimo

Member

gr7070

Member

dwever

Member

Stainz

Member

heiney5

dwever

Member

gr7070

Member

Stainz

Member

heiney5

gr7070

Member

dwever

Member

heiney5

Nick B

US Veteran

gr7070

Member

Similar threads

Latest posts