696 vs. 686 in 3"

Goblin · Sep 10, 2014

Does anyone know the weight difference between these two guns if both are 3"? I'm guessing it's pretty close, but with the bigger bore size I thought the 696 might be lighter. I don't have either but was thinking of getting one for carry. I have other 44s, so I can weigh the ammo, and the weight when loaded may be so close that it's not a factor. I'm a big fan of both cartridges for defense.

quinn · Sep 10, 2014

My 696 has a 3" barrel but my 686 has 2.5". I'm not sure I've seen a 686 with the 3". Love both of these guns dearly. I even found a "spare" 696 but my son soon relieved me of it.

Goblin · Sep 10, 2014

The 3" 686s are rare, and getting expensive. 696s are almost as bad. I've chosen a bad time to get this hankering.

onemanwolfpack · Sep 10, 2014

Can't answer the weight questions but here's some eye candy. Added a third option for you to consider in the 586 3".

586 3"

Neumann · Sep 10, 2014

I have a 3" 686+, which weighs 35.8 oz dry with Ahrends boot grips. It has a full underlug and a bull barrel with a flat crown. It also has a full length ejector rod, unlike the shortened 2.5" model.

I don't know about the 696 (.44 Spl), but a 3" 629 (.44 Mag) weighs 40.0 oz, and has a short ejector rod. The barrel is not tapered, but has a rounded crown. The cylinder is, of course, abut 3/16" larger than that of the 686, and has a larger grip and frame.

Both have a quick handling balance, ideal for SD. The relatively short barrel is much easier to clear a high ride holster than a 4", and works quite well carried IWB (VM2).

mc5aw · Sep 10, 2014

Though nearly identical in frame size, the 696 has thinner cylinder walls which shaves a bit off the weight.

Snapping Twig · Sep 10, 2014

All things being equal, the 696 is lighter with a larger bore size.

Add ammo and it probably weighs a bit more than a loaded 686 - not much.

The real question is 5 rounds vs 6.

I'd carry the 696 and never look back. For the purpose of SD, I believe the 44 is more effective if we consider a proper 250g bullet moving @ 850 ~ 900fps from a 3" barrel. 357 needs to go fast to be most effective and for that you might not get what you need from a 3" barrel.

Not saying 357 is wimpy, far from it. What I'm saying is for SD at close range I prefer something really big @ 850 ~ 900fps.

Shot placement is key one way or the other.

Goblin · Sep 10, 2014

Thanks for the photos, wolfpack, and thanks everyone for the responses.

BLUEDOT37 · Sep 11, 2014

396NG

As far as being rare, it always seems the gun you want is rare, or just plain hard to find. Talo had a new 3" 686 last year. I almost bought it but decided I wanted their 5" version better. They both have unfluted cylinders.

If you want lighter you can't beat a 396NG. (Only 24oz. empty. The 696-2 weighs 36oz empty.) But they're far & few between.

.

696 vs. 686 in 3"

Goblin

Member

quinn

Member

Goblin

Member

onemanwolfpack

Member

Neumann

Member

mc5aw

Member

Snapping Twig

Member

Goblin

Member

BLUEDOT37

Member

Similar threads

Latest posts