Hey all,

I am really debating between these two revolvers, and could perhaps use some help or thoughts on both.

Note: Yes I know that the PC guns may not be that much more special than production guns, but I will admit I do like the aesthetics.

I have a 357, specifically a 640 Pro currently. I've had numerous revolvers in the past. Also considering adding a 340 M&P for ultra light carry... but that aside, that's my main caliber starting point is 38/357. I'm experienced with revolvers and the caliber.

I'm attracted to the 629 because of 44 Mag/44 Special, but have no particular use for it, other then, well, it's cool.

I am a big fan of snub nose revolvers, I have had a 686 4-in SSR but I ultimately did not care for the size and barrel length. I just prefer them at about 2 to 3 inches. It also makes it more carryable, and for me I find they balance better.

It would partly be for taking to the range, partly being in my patrol bag when I am doing my work (i.e. vehicle surveillance, investigator), get some carry time in the cooler months when I want something a little bigger just because...

My understanding is they're not monstrously different in size. Comparable capacity 6 vs 7, and both venerable rounds.

Obviously 38/357 is also cheaper, so that is somewhat of a consideration, as well as less recoil (compared to a stout 44), but I would not carry massive hunting loads, and probably defer to specials generally, as I sometimes do with my 357 and carry 38.

What do you guys think? Is it good to diversify calibers a little bit or should I just stick to what I know which is 38 and 357? Or who cares, it's just money, and we only live once?

Attached Images

	smith_and_wesson_686_performance_center_2_3.jpg (39.5 KB, 39 views)
	smith_and_wesson_629_performance_center_2_1_1.jpg (47.5 KB, 32 views)

__________________
Go ahead... make my day.

I would pass on both of those. They have a Hillary hole. New ones are available without that feature if you care to look.

__________________
S&WHF #946
S&WCA #3824

I'm a big fan of the 686 and have a couple - standard and the 7-shot Plus version - so my vote goes with the 686.

When carrying all day, the L frame is noticeably smaller, and probably lighter. An extra shot is a good thing, as well. I would pick the 686.

__________________
protocalldesign.com

What do you recommend sans the lock? You mean new model Smiths? I just haven't seen any without lock besides some J Frames. Either case, "lock delete" would be done.

I'm all ears.

I have previously owned a SP101 WC 2.25, as well, so, open to suggestions.

Thanks everyone for the responses so far!

__________________
Go ahead... make my day.

What I am currently looking to add to the herd. The PERFORMANCE CENTER® 586 L-COMP

The IL doesn't offend me; I don't like it but I don't care about it sufficiently to influence any purchase. I had a 3" M629 and with .44 Magnum loads it was basically just loud and useless in light of the recoil. With .44 Special loads it was delightful but, still, I sold it to a friend. I have had a 2.5" M686+ for years and years and I would certainly choose it over a M629 except if you are interested in the novelty of it for your collection. It's bad juju around here to say that one has no use for the .44 Magnum so I won't say it but, well, you understand.....

__________________
Come and take it!!

It depends on if you are a reloader or plan on becoming a reloader. That is why I bought a variety of calibers. But eventually you will have favorites that you shoot often and others that will just be Safe Queens.

I was at the LGS this morning and all the factory revolver ammunition for .44 and .45 caliber are $1 a shot.

That one has caught my attention as well, although I typically prefer stainless for ease, but this one could be of interest. I wish they would have went with a more "rust resistant" finish. I like the look of blued guns, but never owned one.

I'm in a dry environment, but it gets hot and I sweat.

__________________
Go ahead... make my day.

Thank you!

Yes, part novelty would be the interest. I've always heard good things on the 44 special especially.

__________________
Go ahead... make my day.

Also, not currently reloading, but it is of interest to begin when money is available to do so...

__________________
Go ahead... make my day.

Both are fantastic guns so you really cannot go wrong with either, but I voted for the 629 PC because that's the one that got away for me...

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

Go big or go home. I shoot my 629 classic hunter 3” with magnum loads all the time. No big deal.

Please, for the love of God, ignore the insufferable people who cry and whine ad nauseam about the internal lock. Please be a free thinker instead of a follower who spews canned responses. They are mostly virtue signalers and followers.

As to your question, I vote for the 2.5" 686 Performance. It's just more versatile. The 629 only has one extra round and novelty and kool* factor going for it. The L frame 2.5" 686 Pro will be the weight of a 66 K-frame, smalller, easier to conceal OWB, and will still have 7 rounds of 357. It will make an good EDC and woods gun whereas the 629 pro will just be a cool novelty and/or woods gun only.

I own and have carried a 686+ both IWB and OWB when I can get away with it without a problem. I'm a small guy with a small frame FYI.

I prefer stainless too. I own 6 stainless S&W's so far.

While the 586 is beautiful, it's not as rust resistant, it will show more finish and holster wear, scratches and small nicks cannot be buffed out, and resale value will be affected because of all of the above. I can put a like new or mirror finish on my stainless S&W revolvers, and get more $$$ for them if I ever plan on trading or selling in the future. Most importantly, I don't have to obsessed over or worry about my new stainless revolver getting messed up like I know I would with blued S&W.

Thank you for the response!

I don't mind the lock as much as some, since it *can* be remedied.

I think I am leaning toward the 686 for commonality and price of ammo...

I don't think I could go "wrong" with either, but I can imagine it's a little easier to carry the 686 (as others have).

__________________
Go ahead... make my day.

That is my thoughts as well when it comes to stainless!

__________________
Go ahead... make my day.

I just realized you were comparing the the 686 to the 629 and not the 627. I personally don't see the purpose of a 2.5" 44 magnum outside of the novelty. The novelty will wear off quickly because you'll won't shoot it as much as you would a 357 mag. I see 44mag as a hunting* round that is not shot* much, and 38spc/357mag as rounds that are shot regularly.

That said, I got the 44 mag itch AFTER I picked up my 686 revolvers first. I ended up with a Model 69 Combat Magnum, but I rarely ever shoot it because of ammo cost. I've been thinking about trading/selling my M69 for a 629 Pro

I thought about a 627 but for the form factor, I figured I'd just go with a 686 instead. If I'm going to go bigger, I'd rather just be a bigger bullet.

But I do agree, that would be my concern at the end of the day, cost of rounds. I do like to shoot.

__________________
Go ahead... make my day.

M629 snub nose: load 6 rounds, fire 1, unload gun, and return to gun safe.

M686 snub nose: load 6 rounds, fire 6, reload gun, and continue to shoot until out of ammo.

I have owned both guns, and shot much lighter loads in M629 because of the pain and smashing recoil.

__________________
S&WHF 366

I will suggest the 44 magnum. Unless I missed it you don't have one. It may not be the most logical choice but 44 mag is just plain cool.

I have both and also the 627 version, I had the 629 cut for moonclips by TK Customs and that is what I've been carrying this winter with .44 Spl equivalent loads for what it's worth! I really like all 3.

Having shot a 629 snub with .44 Magnum loads before, I have no desire to do so again.

Sure, you could shoot .44 Special through it, but I don't think you'd be gaining any objective performance over .357 Magnum or maybe even.38 Special +P, and be using a less available, more expensive round on top of that.

That is a really good SALE PRICE.. around my woods, the CHEAPEST of the cheap ammunition, price and quality is a 50 round box of Blazer 44 magnum TMC for 62 or 68$ a box.

I have the 629-10 PC with the 2 5/8" barrel since 2017 and really enjoy it!

My current ammo is 44 mag brass with a cast 240 grain Kieth Tip over 11 grains of Unique. Very accurate and very manageable in my post Covid weakness.

I like DeSantis' 3" N-Frame holster so much I bought one in Black and one in Tan. I use a 6 round speed strip in a belt carrier (only have black). I have heavy 1 1/2" leather belts, and no issues with "Belt Roll" and the revolver stays tight against my side.

I SOLD my 4" 686 no dash soon after I got the PC, and still have a 4" 28-2, I just prefer the N-Frames.

In my opinion, 357 will do, but 44 will do it much better!

Ivan

I used to own the 686PC you're interested in and it's a sharp looking gun. However, I don't see any value in the slabbed barrel in a magnum revolver. It makes the gun difficult to control in follow up shots. I sold mine very fast after shooting it next to a 19 Carry Comp that I purchased afterwards.

If you go the 357 route, I would recommend you look at the 586 L-comp over the 686PC. The comped barrel makes a noticeable difference when shooting hot magnum loads, you get the 7-shot cylinder, and a non-sleeved barrel (the 19 carry comp has a sleeved barrel, as well as the 686PC and the 629PC, I believe).

If it were me and I was set on getting a 44 magnum snub, which I may do now that I've started reloading, I would hold out for a 3" 629-4 or 629-5, which is pre-lock and has endurance package.

Hope this helps.

Cheers,
686PC

Attached Images

8174a90f5863e560bcccf7f3dab1e762.jpg (85.9 KB, 7 views)

S&W only makes them - now - with the Hillary hole. You can still buy brand new ones on GI, GB etc that do not have that feature. You will have to work harder but in the end it will be worth it to not have that ridiculous feature.

__________________
S&WHF #946
S&WCA #3824

Love this cloud of snubs!

That is a nice collection right there!

I guess let me muddy the waters a little more. Haha.

Between the 627 and 686, which do you enjoy more?

__________________
Go ahead... make my day.

Thanks everyone for the replies, thus far!

It's giving me a lot to ponder.

Due to not currently reloading and already stocking 38/357, the caliber would be the logical choice. 44 is cool and certainly no slouch and would be fun, but I have no "practical need" at the moment, and the ammo cost gives me a little pause there, until I reload.

Also on my want radar is a 340 M&P, also 38/357, or maybe even a 442 UC... see the trend here on caliber? Haha.

So, I'm pondering even just forgoing looks and getting a "standard production" 686 because let's face it, they'll both do the same, and trying to slip a 2nd gun into the mix with the money saved.

__________________
Go ahead... make my day.

The Logic of logistics! That should take the cake every time>

Ivan

I would be hard pressed to pick between the two. They both have their benefits. The 627 holds one more round but the 686 is a touch smaller.

So I guess it's a toss up. I know, pretty noncommittal on my part!

Lol the barrel is 2.5". The make up of the barrel isn't going to make much of a difference.