I am going to be purchasing a .357 (686) next month when I get back home from the holidays and I'm at a loss about what barrel length to buy first (yes I will end up with 4" and 6"). I currently have a 4" 629 which I love so I lean towards a 6" 686 for a little variety right now. Will be using this gun a lot as a sidearm during predator hunting (in the rotation of sidearms anyways) target shooting etc...not a defense weapon or a carry weapon.

If it will not be used for ccw or defense, hands down go 6". No reason to "short" yourself.

Six inch has a very nice balance for shooting and looks sharp.

Wisconsin requires 5.5" barrel length for hunting deer, so I went with 6". And 6" just looks plain sexy

That's a good law. Many States stipulate a 4-inch minimum, which allows the use of crunch-n-clickers that aren't really suited for deer hunting (IMO).

__________________
~ S&W aficionado in training ~

To me the 6" is a tad nose heavy, but you don't notice it when you tighten your grip to make a shot. Great range gun and if I had to knock off a predator that'd be my choice too.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

What does that mean?

That's nonsense. A lousy and unethical hunter with a six inch barrel will wound and lose game as much as he/she would with a four inch gun. In my own small arsenal are all three barrel lengths of Model 57 .41 Magnums. I can't see a difference between the four and six inch guns, and only slightly better groups with the 8 3/8". Similarly, a five inch Model 27-2 that's been an old friend for 35 years is scary accurate.

I think many of the state's game laws with regard to handgun restrictions are misguided, such as Missouri's prohibition on non-expanding bullets for hunting deer. Very true that FMJ bullets are poor big game bullets, but to rule out hard cast semi wadcutters in big calibers is silly.

While my libertarian leanings push me away from additional restrictions, there are some good arguments for mandatory handgun qualification tests before allowing a person to hunt with a handgun. These make more sense to me that barrel length restrictions. Barrel length will take care of itself - hunters with choose guns they can hit and qualify with.

To clarify, Wisconsin deer hunting regs require use of a hand gun with a barrel length of at least 5.5 inches, measured from the firing pin to the muzzle.

On a revolver this would include length of the cylinder in the calculation. My 4" M686 for instance measures 5 5/8" from firing pin hole to muzzle.

If I hunted deer with a handgun I would prefer a longer barrel myself just for the added velocity and sight radius. Mount a scope or dot sight and the sight radius argument is moot.

As as aside, lots of deer around here are wounded and lost by poorly aimed shots from rifles and bows...

Personally, I find it easier to shoot well with a shorter barrel because they aren't as sensitive to Recoil Management. I also find revolvers with a full length barrel lug to be distinctly barrel heavy. So I would get the 4 inch 686 and if you can find one would suggest the 3 inch version.

I have a 6" 686-1 that I use pretty much as you intend to use one. I use it as a "sportsmen's" gun. It goes with me out to the barn at night and I'll carry it around our property for varmit control. I purchased it new in 1988.

My experience is that I shoot a longer barrel revolver more accurately because of the increased sight radius and the increased mass of the barrel. Plus the extra barrel length helps develop higher velocities and reduces blast with heavier loads.

I carry my 686 in an old nylon Uncle Mike's belt holster with a full flap. I added a second stud to the holster for a retaining strap. For my use, which includes bending, twisting, crouching in wooded areas or while working outside, positive retention and protection of the trigger far overrides fast draw. I haven't seen a UM full flap holster for sale in many years. With a good belt you don't notice the weight.

I have several 4" revolvers, but keep going back to my 6" 686 for a sportsmens gun.

I seem to lean toward variety like the OP. I have 3" 4" & 5" barrels in 45acp revolvers so when I happened to see a 686 no dash 6" barrel for sale at my range I bought it.

Try to handle, or preferably fire, both a 4 and 6" 686. You may find the 6" just right or too muzzle (and overall) heavy, or not.

Also, a little research/pre-shopping would be wise - there seem to be many shorter barrel 686s available at retail right now (local to me) but fewer longer ones, so searching online or calling shops local to where you will be to check availability is a good idea. You may not find what you want when and where you'll be, if that makes sense.

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

I had first shot my friend's GP100 6" bbl and thought it was nose heavy. I think it was b/c it was my first time handling a pistol thats 40+ oz. So I bought a 686+ 5" bbl . Now that I'm putting a scope on it, I wish I had just gotten a 6" bbl.

Same here, mostly target shooting and maybe one day I'll get to use it to hunt.

I luv the 4's!

Attached Images

S&W 4 Inch Trio.jpg (73.4 KB, 81 views)

By this logic, the OP should get a 2 inch J frame, right?

I have 3 inch, 4inch, and 5 inch barreled 686's and enjoy shooting them all very much. While I sometimes shoot the 3 inch at 25 yards, it is what I would describe as accurate for me at 10 to 15 yards maximum. I can shoot the 4 and 5 inch barrel 686's just fine at 25 yards. I have other models with 6 inch and one with 8 3/8 inch barrels. For a hunting application, my recommendation is go with the longest barrel practical for the added sight radius and velocity.

To maximize accuracy you do have to train yourself to keep the barrel steady during the shot but the extra time in the barrel is extremely short when the Muzzle Velocity is 1200 fps when comparing a 4 to 6 inch barrel for example.

__________________
Accuracy supercedes Speed

Go and handle them and see what you think. If you decide to get a 6 inch, or 4 for that matter, get a decent holster and it'll make a huge difference in the field. The 686 is a sweet revolver.

I think - and I'm sure most share this opinion - that a 4" barrel is the most adaptable of all. My first handgun was a 4" Model 19 with target hammer and trigger that I bought new back in 1974. I used it for just about everything but it was shot the most at 25-yard NRA bullseye targets. I was much younger and a much better shot than I now am and I went to my club's indoor range three nights each week with a 50-round box of .38 Special wadcutter handloads and a goal of putting all 50 into the bull.

I had lots of 47, 48 and 49x50s but did have a 50x50 twice (boy, that last cylinder was shot c-a-r-e-f-u-l-l-y). Obviously, I found the gun accurate in spite of it having the "wrong" barrel length for target work. That length is also handy for holstering, was the mainstay of duty guns back then and with the right holster was very concealable. I also used it in two PPC matches as a substitute shooter, scoring 297x300 both times.

Today, I own Model 66s in 2-1/2", 4" and 6" as well as Model 686s in 4", 5" and 6". Five-inch is sweet barrel length but a bit hard to find. Mine is in a -3 National Match and a fine shooter it is!

Ed

I have a personal prejudice for 6" N frame revolvers. They are highly accurate in my hands. Good luck enjoying whatever you get.

[QUOTE=Monsters;138847325]I currently have a 4" 629 which I love so I lean towards a 6" 686 for a little variety right now. Will be using this gun a lot as a sidearm during predator hunting (in the rotation of sidearms anyways) target shooting etc...not a defense weapon or a carry weapon./QUOTE]

I'd have went with a 6" 629 and 4" 686 But for a pure hunting and target gun, a 6" barrel is hard to beat.

Lots of good arguments here pro and con, but in the end it comes down to what makes you the most comfortable.

In my case, I already had a custom 4" K-frame (my 327 Fed Mag) with full under lug barrel, so I went with the 6" L-frame, knowing I would be unlikely to carry it much in the field, but wanting to be able to wring as much accuracy out of it as possible for longer shots (with iron sights and old eyes.) That was my take on the question, but as I said, YMMV!

Froggie