686 2-1/2, 3, or 4"?

[sonofthebeach]

I'm going to get just one more new revolver (honestly), and I've settled on a 2-1/2" , 3" or a 4" S&W.

I'll be using it as a house gun, and take it out concealed once-in a while. I know some of the advantages/disadvantages of the barrel lengths I'm considering, but would like to hear some of your ideas.

I've never carried an L frame revolver before, and when I do, it'll be really important to conceal it well, and with some degree of comfort. I'm trying basically to decide on the barrel length.

Thanks.

---Andy

 

[Wisent]

Hello Andy,

I've had small, medium and large frame S&W with 2 1/2, 3 and 4inch tubes, used it as a house gun and as a finisher when hunting here in Germany - and I carried them -all - concealed.
I would opt for the three inch tube because the balance of the gun is nearly the same as the 4 incher; the latter is ballistically quite unbeatable - and the 2.5" gun ist best in CC.
Three inches are the best compromise - BUT: Please spend some time when choosing the riggt grip panels, they do have great influence when carrying a gun - as well as it is important to get the right holster.
I know very well that well made holsters and combats are not cheap at all. To choose the right one - and taking time in doing this - is worth every dime.
Best regards from Germany

Wisent

 

[sonofthebeach]

Wisent, thanks for your reply.

When you mention the importance of grips and holsters, which grips do you prefer, and which type of holster?

I know those questions probably should be posted in the concealed carry part of this forum, but are also important in this thread to help me in my decision-making.

Thanks again.

---Andy

 

[cjcutter1]

I have the 3" 686+ like it alot and beside the 3" is right in the middle of your options, good luck in your search and go for what feels right for ya.

 

[AZ Desertrat]

I have a 3" and a 4".....house gun or carry in the "boonies" is always the 4".....concealed....the 3" gets the nod....3" is a very good compromise and you still get the advantage of a tad bit better ballistics, FPS-wise.

 

[Raspy]

My favorite gun is my 3" 686+. It's handy and it matches the size of my 696, which is also a 3".

For home use and possible carry, the shorter 3" barrel makes sense without being a snubbie. I can strap mine on while out hiking and know I've got seven powerful rounds in a reasonable size and in a reliable and ready to go revolver.

 

[rollin_hot]

686

I am partial to the 686 in 2.5" for carry and a dedicated house gun. The 2.5" conceals well and anything going down inside your house would be close qaurters anyway so the advantage of the extra length of a 3" or 4" barrel would be a moot point.

 

[AZ Desertrat]

I agree Raspy.....Semper Paratus!

 

[66SLOWDRAW686]

686

I have 686+p 2 1/2 ported barrel. that how it came. i did not like the muzzle blast, you shoot with out ear plugs you will hate life for a while. so i put a 4'' barrel & love it. i do have a 66 3'' that is way lighter.i can shoot both, hit what i want out to 50 plus yards. i pack both with same hip holster i got from GALCO the holster designed for a S&W 66 but will fit both.

 

[WoodsCustom]

Get one of each and then see which one you like the best. Throw the other two in a drawer for later use.


WC

 

[girvin02]

I have 686+p 2 1/2 ported barrel. that how it came. i did not like the muzzle blast, you shoot with out ear plugs you will hate life for a while. so i put a 4'' barrel & love it. i do have a 66 3'' that is way lighter.i can shoot both, hit what i want out to 50 plus yards. i pack both with same hip holster i got from GALCO the holster designed for a S&W 66 but will fit both.

I hope you don't shoot your 4" w\out ear plugs. I once shot my 6" 686 (loaded with .357 Mag's) without hearing protection and my ears were ringing for the next hour!

I would go with a 3" model for a house gun that will see some carry time.

 

[Revolver King]

3" 686+ for me, It has the longer extractor

 

[SaberOne]

I opted for the 2.5 because I wanted a range gun that more closely matched my primary carry. Besides, I also like the looks of the 2.5 configuration. As for the extractor, I'll have a black powder chamfer applied as I did with my 640.

 

[jt1]

How does the black powder chamfer affect the extractor?

John

 

[Casehardn]

Andy,
I own several Smiths of various barrel lengths and I do carry my 686-1 Lew Horton model, but sparingly. Just not as concealable and as light as my 637.

I've practiced at 7 to 10 yards with my 2-1/2 686, and have no problem keeping all the rounds in a 5 inch circle using double-action fire. It's really the cylinder that I feel makes the gun a little hard to conceal for someone with a slight build. Barrel length between a 2-1/2, 3 or 4 is really not as big an issue for concealment considering there really isn't much of a weight difference. For home protection, a smaller barrel leaves a lot less for someone to try and grab onto to take from you and other than a slightly different sight plane, accuracy is about the same.
Velocity does drop a bit from a 4 inch to a 2-1/2 inch barrel.

 

[Wisent]

Wisent, thanks for your reply.

When you mention the importance of grips and holsters, which grips do you prefer, and which type of holster?

I know those questions probably should be posted in the concealed carry part of this forum, but are also important in this thread to help me in my decision-making.

Thanks again.

---Andy

Hello Andy,

since here in Germany one mostly wears a jacket or a vest, I am very fond of cross draw holsters by Bianchi, the "111 Cyclone" and - when it comes to "FBI or strong draw I use "Sickinger" Holsters (Austrian Company).
I much prefer the "111 Cyclone" because of its possibility to be used in cross draw or strong draw manner.
For my hands the best combats are made by "Nill" - they just have one disadvantage: They are rather expensive but worth every Euro-cent, very tight fit, you can choose between checkered and smooth surfaces, several kinds of wood.
I had Pachmyr rubbers on my guns too - but I do not like the look - thoug they soak up well very much recoil, no doubt.
But rubber grips often hang on to the clothes and so I prefer the nice wood items by Nill.
In case of emergency you can carry a three incher L-frame in a pocket of a trouser or a jacket - it is not quite comfortable - but it works - when chips tend to go down.

Best regards and best wishes for the weekend

Wisent

 

[shootmeselfinfoot]

wow the 686 is pretty heavy if you lug it about all day long.
that's why cops carry glocks.
don't get me wrong. I love the 686.
if you must look in the 60 pro. it's sweet.

 

[Cdnbacon]

All good info....I have not carried a 686 but regularly carry Ruger GP100s, which are pretty close in size and weight to the 686. I have carried 3, 4 and six inch versions for IPSC, concealed carry both on and off duty and casual type carry, such as woods walking. As one would expect, the longer barrels are a little more controllable with heavy loads, shoot a little better (for my eye sight anyway) and point well. The shorter barrel is lighter, a little quicker moving from target to target and a little faster out of a strong side holster. My vote is for the three or four inch barrel, whichever you find more comfortable to swing around and point. Both give decent ballistics and sight radius and full length extraction. I don't think you gain any advantage with the 2.5 inch barrel. If you are not as limber/flexible as you once were (I am not), the 3 inch may be noticeably easier to draw from strong side than the four. If you are carrying in a shoulder rig it won't make a difference. I like IWB and vertical shoulder rigs with smaller grips. With IWB, the barrel length won't matter as much.