686 .. 2.5 or 3 inch?

[Boriqua]

Probably a stupid question but ?? I had a 586 L comp at 3 inches and loved it and sold it like a jerk. I have a 629 44 mag and love it and now want a 686 for carry and range fun. Besides concealability ..What if any other differences are there in muzzle velocity and so on. What are just your impressions if you have fired both?
Alex

 

[Boriqua]

Probably a stupid question but ?? I had a 586 L comp at 3 inches and loved it and sold it like a jerk. I have a 629 44 mag and love it and now want a 686 for carry and range fun. Besides concealability ..What if any other differences are there in muzzle velocity and so on. What are just your impressions if you have fired both?
Alex

 

[cometpx4]

I have owned and fired both and presently own a 5inch which is up at Smith having some custom work done. Get the 3inch. its better balanced, has the full size ejector rod and for firing magnum rounds its a better package for soaking up a little recoil. i think its the perfect size.

 

[bmcgilvray]

I'd want the full stroke of the 3-inch ejector rod. The extra half-inch matters but little for concealed purposes.

 

[Snapping Twig]

I had a 2.5" and the short rod was an issue to me. Should have kept it, but all the same I'd get the 3" if I had it to do over.

 

[shawn mccarver]

Originally posted by Boriqua:
Probably a stupid question but ?? I had a 586 L comp at 3 inches and loved it and sold it like a jerk. I have a 629 44 mag and love it and now want a 686 for carry and range fun. Besides concealability ..What if any other differences are there in muzzle velocity and so on. What are just your impressions if you have fired both?
Alex

Always get 3 inch instead of 2.5 when talking about 19/66 or 586/686. I also prefer the 3 inch in the 10/64 and 13/65.

 

[Top Sergeant]

My CCW revolver is a 4" 686 in a Forbus paddle. The additional 1 inch gives me that much more aiming comfort and the velocity also increases. The added weight absorbs recoil also. In the field I carry it in a Bianchi 5L holster.

 

[wjh2657]

I have a 2 1/2" 686 and love it. I recently qualified for TN HCP with it and scored 100/100. Instructors were amazed with accuracy at 25 yards! It has a really sweet trigger. My reason for short barrel is my 65 year old eyes and the fact that it is primarily a nightstand gun with .38 +P ammo. The short barrel makes it easier to see the front sight and makes weapon easier to store and draw from small drawer. If I was buying one to shoot at longer ranges or carry on belt, I'd want 4" or 5" if they make sich a critter.

 

[ladder13]

there were probably alot more 2.5 inchers made than 3 inchers.

 

[Gamer]

I've got a 2 1/2 with the finger groove grips and it shoots really smooth. I find the recoil low, compared to my 642 .38 special.

Guess it's due to the weight huh?.

As previously mentioned I'd say the 3" would be a touch more accurate and give you a little more velocity overall too.

 

[Centenniel]

I love L Frames, especially the 686. I have a 2.5" and it is a fine revolver, but I'd trade it in a heartbeat for a 3". My other 3" revolvers, a 13,60, 64, and a 65 are about perfection in my opinion.

 

[WaterburyBob]

I would go with a 3" over a 2.5 inch for the reasons already stated above, especially the longer ejector and the better balance.

 

[meh92]

I can't imagine there's a significant difference in velocity with 1/2" of barrel. However, the full-length ejector rod of the 3" version has real benefit, especially as the cylinder gets dirty and casings start to stick a little.

Of course, holsters might be a little difficult to come by as the 3" is not nearly as popular. There's nothing which says an open-bottom holster or a 4' version won't work, though.

I vote for the 3" version.

 

[Geronimo Jim]

Three inch only because of the ejector rod.

 

[sw357nm]

I prefer the 3-inch, but only you can decide what feels right to you. There is no correct answer, and don't worry about what other people carry. Both are truly great revolvers.
John

 

[ishootblanks]

3 inch for reasons already stated.

 

[Big Mike]

3 inch.

 

[Boriqua]

Thanks Boys ... I had the 586Lcomp .. which I sold like a fool so am looking at a new 686 in stainless to ease my pain

 

[Boriqua]

One last questions... Can the 686 take a steady diest of .357 or is it one of those "practice with 38 and load with .357.

I would probably be firing alot of .357 at the range.
Alex

 

[Stainz]

It is a real .357 Magnum - and should stand up to a diet of SAAMI spec'd ammo quite well - especially heftier rounds (I hate those nuclear 110-125gr .357 Magnums - bad experience with a friend's 340SC and some same weight range CorBons - big 'ouch'.).

As to 2.5" vs 3"... I am a gun-slut - either would be nice for me! As I shoot mainly .38s and similar loads in .357 brass, the short rod wouldn't be much of a problem here.

Stainz