PC 627 vs. PC 586 L-Comp vs. PC 686+

dwever · #1 10-18-2016, 03:09 PM

I answered a direct question from a forum member, and since I own all three I decided to further develop my answer in to a report ranked by preference.

I would confidently carry any one of these three weapons, but two I clearly prefer over the third. Having said that, I am not arguing that one weapon is better than another, I am simply reporting my own preferences and experience for which others' may be significantly different.

FIRST PLACE. The 627.

WEIGHT: 37 Ounces BARREL: 2.625” CAPACITY: 8 CUT FOR MOON CLIPS

GENERAL:
1. At 6'1" the N frame fits my largish hands, and the trigger distance is perfect the trigger resting in the middle of my first pad.
2. Very well made, has a feel of robustness and precision mechanically.
3. Highly accurate. Very nice sights.
4. Like the 586, it has been to TK Custom for a defensive action job taking a pretty good action to just about perfect. I also have a little chamfering in the chambers and moon clips just fall in.
5. Handles recoil exceedingly well, only hurting with game loads you wouldn't use in a defensive weapon anyway.
6. It is fine for OWB concealed carry, I carried it today under a black t-shirt.
7. Smaller grips contribute to ease of concealment while retaining a good grip.

NEGATIVES:
1. The N frame cylinder is too tubby for IWB carry, so for that I look to the L frame 586. As has been noted, there is only a 3/32 difference between the N and L frames cylinder diameters, but that little difference makes the difference for me, and I only carry L Frame IWB .
2. The sites are very complicated/expensive to switch to night sites requiring considerable machining in the front, so I am qualified with my agency with the 586 L-Comp.

LEATHER:
1. A Galco Combat Master (Pictured) for competition
2. Two Galco High Ride Silhouettes which conceal better than the Combat Master particularly with shirts that don't hang so low.
3. The High Ride is a thumb break and I highly recommend a level of retention unless competing.
4. The belt in the picture is also Galco.

AMMO: See 586 L-Comp review coming up next.

SECOND PLACE - 586 L-Comp, this was hard because this weapon is so close it could of been a coin toss for first place. Perhaps it would of been more accurate to have the 627 and 586 tied for first and the 686+ Second.

WEIGHT: Also 37 ounces. BARREL: 3.0” CAPACITY: 7 CUT FOR MOON CLIPS - COMPENSATED

GENERAL:
1. Just as good a shooter as the 627, barely second place only due to capacity and smaller size as my hands fit the N frame just a little better.
2. Incredibly well built, robust, very precise mechanically.
3. The L frame is just ever-so-slightly-too-small for me, but I carry it and shoot it with full confidence.
4. The L frame has an amazingly narrow profile for a 7 Shot, IWB carries easily.
5. Pinned front sights made going to better night sights simple, so I qualified with the 586 with my agency for off duty carry, and it lives between the seats unholstered in a patrol car if on duty in case engaged while seated in the driver's seat so I don't have to dig my retention level III holstered Glock.
6. At 37 oz. like the 627, the 586 handles recoil exceedingly well. .357 Magnum defensive loads at 400-500 ft. lbs. of energy is no problem double action, although the latter could over-penetrate.
7. This weapon is compensated for further recoil control.
8. While not enhancing performance, I nevertheless like that the trigger and hammer are drop forged steel instead of MIM;
9. While weapon is a tool and not a jewel, the 586 L-Comp is arguably among the best looking revolvers in the S&W catalogue in recent memory.

NEGATIVES:
1. The blued finish takes more TLC than stainless.
2. The stock front sight is Tritium, but the tritium dot is so tiny you'd have to be an owl to pick it up at night so I went aftermarket. However, the S&W approach was a good thought, embedding a tritium dot into their traditional excellent sight picture, it just failed in execution being too dim to matter.
3. The barrel is compensated but seems to be unnecessary on this weapon, I don’t perceive the benefit like I do on my compensated .44 Magnum 7.5” barrel where the compensation causes recoil to go straight back.

LEATHER:
1. Both a black and a tan Galco High Ride Silhouette pictured (the tan on the 686+).

AMMO:
1. For defensive carry, the moon clip in gun is .357 Magnum Speer Gold Dot Short Barrel (300ish ft. lbs.) - both the 627 and 586 are virtually unaffected by the recoil and over-penetration is unlikely with this load.
2. On the occasion I carry a moon clip reload, I do so in a Galco speed loader pouch, and inside are defensive .38+P for the shorter cartridge accelerating re-load.
3. For somewhat hotter short barrel .357 Magnum see Barnes VOR TX, Barnes TAC XPD, and Buffalo Bore Low Flash/Short Barrel (in both 125 and 140 Grain)Here are ballistic tests of the .357 Magnum Short Barrel Speer Gold Dot where ft. lbs. go North of 500.

THIRD PLACE. PC 686+
WEIGHT 34 ounces BARREL: 2.5” 7 SHOT
1. Acceptable shooter for sure, but just not in the league of either of the above guns.
2. Handles recoil acceptably well.
3. Slightly less weight.
4. Loading the 686+ with +P, this could be a great balance for someone with normal to smaller hands who wanted a little less recoil in a smaller lighter package, but still have a stout enough weapon to pack a real punch without punishing recoil and giving 7 shots.
5. This is a fine weapon, and I would feel perfectly adequately armed with it, just for me, the other two are better yet.
6. I was not a fan of the stock 3 finger grips, and as you can see, found a very nice set of grips matching the other two guns in shape.

NEGATIVES:
1. While only 3 oz. lighter than the 627 and 586 L-Comp, the 686+ is not as stable with hotter .38 +P or .357 Magnum.
2. My sample did not have the out-of-the-box smooth even action of the 627 or 586 L-Comp, and it was my choice out of three the dealer had in stock.
3. For me I just don't shoot as well as with the other two, but that could just be me.

LEATHER: My 586 L-Comp Leather of course is interchangeable with the 686+.

AMMO: I would say Speer Gold Dot Short Barrel .38 +P for someone really needing low recoil; or ideally, a +P just a little bit hotter than the Speer SB .38+P.

COMPARATIVE STATEMENTS:
1. The 627 or the 586 L-Comp could be used in the woods defensively. While .357 Magnum at 800 ft. lbs. would be uncomfortable, the guns could handle it accurately if necessary. I would think for the 686+ that would get past what should be loaded in that weapon.
2. The 686+ carries slightly better as you can just notice it is lighter.
3. The 686+ came out of the box with acceptable Perf Ctr action, but short of the 627 and 586.
4. Both 586 L-Comps feel the most precisely built mechanically, followed closely by the 627 and 686+. One of the three 627’s has an ever-so-slight tightness of the cylinder falling in to battery, but so slight as to be meaningless in practice.
5. No weapon had an issue with barrel canting, nor did I notice any finish imperfections, but I don't look hard for the latter.

Also informing my opinions are access to two other snub 627’s and yet another 627 in a 5” Barrel, one other 586 L-Comp, and the fact that Larry’s in Huntsville, Alabama had three PC 686+ in stock from which I made my single purchase. I handled a third 586 L-Comp in a store that slightly stacked at the end of it’s cycle. So in total 9 were handled, 8 extensively, but only five were shot. I own 4 which includes the three pictured. In the last seventeen months, I just finished my fourth case of American Eagle .38. Also, when Remington discontinued their Golden Saber, I picked up two cases of .25 count 357 Magnum and one case of .38+P for $14.99 a box. That is about gone. The only other load I have purchased in any quantity are Federal White Box for competition at only 190 Ft. LBs. and Speer Gold Dot Short Barrel in both .38+P and .357 Magnum. I have once again set up an automatic e-mail notification with Midway USA for when that comes back in stock. My other guns are a PC 629 7.5” Barrel, numerous Glocks in .40 (duty) and 9mm and two Wilson Combat 1911’s, a CQB Elite in .45 and an X-Tac in 9mm. I have sold off a 617 and two S&W 1911’s. Finally, I sold off a $1,500 Kimber last year, but didn’t get a lot for it because I disclosed the issues it had with reliability.

keithherrington · #2 10-18-2016, 05:34 PM

Your thinking and mine have paralleled very closely. I too like a revolver for
EDC and of all that I've owned and tried over time, the 586 L-Comp (pre-lock) and 686+ (also pre-lock) came out on top. Due to me being 64 and not as deeply invested in shooting as I once was, the 686+ got sold off. Close to the L-Comp, but just not as good on the follow-up shot. All my practice ammo is now 125 grain XTP at a velocity and POI that matches my carry load, Remington's 125 grain Golden Saber, which I have a lot of.

I've also moved away from speed loaders and gone to 8-shot speed strips, which I carry two of, one in each outer pocket of my cover garment. It allows me to reload only those shells I expended. Yes, they're slower, but more concealable. The holster for the this gun is a Milt Sparks PMK.

As a backup, or when concealability is not my primary concern, I'll carry my Model 28, this time in a Milt Sparks 200AW, also using Remington's Golden Saber 125 grain load.

dwever · #3 10-21-2016, 01:02 PM

I completely agree regarding the L-Comp, particularly when you get in to ammo above 400 ft. lbs. I shoot a LOT of Remington Golden Saber .357 Magnum, and both the 586 L-Comp and 627 handle it very well.