686+ 2.5" vs. 3" barrel

[BarkSlayer]

I'm trying to decide between a 686 with 2.5" or a 686 w/3" barrel for primary carry duties. Does anyone have ballistics on the two? Simply interested in the difference in muzzle velocity w/same load, as all other things would be essentially equal (save for the minor difference in weight).

 

[mike from st pete]

Biggest and best reason to pick a three inch gun. Longer ejection to better dump 357MAG empties. The one half inch will not make much difference in velocity or sight radius.

 

[murphydog]

You would probably see more velocity variation within a single box of ammo than between a 2.5 and 3" barrel. The 3" has a full-length ejector rod, so if you have no preference between the two personally I would choose that one. Let us know what you decide.

 

[cometpx4]

686+ 2" v. 3"

I am going thru the same consideration right now. I think tommorrow i will get the 2.5 inch. I figure that people have been defending themselves with .38 snubbies for 50 years so the 2.5 inch barrel with 7 .38 + P's for carry and .357 if i really want to torque it up should be enough.
The points regarding the ejector are all right on except i have found that smiths are smooth and stout so a good poke on the ejector usually knocks everything free.

 

[SWP357]

I bought a 686+, 3" several months back and love it, I have thought it will look real good between a 2½" & 4"!

 

[9399NOLES]

How well does a 686 3" or 2 1/2" work for conceal carry? Too big?

 

[dentkimterry]

I was looking for a 2 1/2" model but came across a 3" at a good price. Haven't regretted it a bit. The 3" is a real nice, accurate shooter. A half inch doesn't make any difference in concealed carry for me.

Terry

 

[9399NOLES]

I was looking for a 2 1/2" model but came across a 3" at a good price. Haven't regretted it a bit. The 3" is a real nice, accurate shooter. A half inch doesn't make any difference in concealed carry for me.

Terry

So you conceal carry your 686? Thats what I was wondering if many people bother with it. I have a 642 currently, but would like something a little bigger

 

[Maximumbob54]

The 686 isn't that much bigger than the K frame. The three inch will be harder to conceal but will sport the full length ejector while the two and a half will be a little easier to conceal and that ounce less mass. My personal choice is the three inch tube for the full length ejector especially if you plan on using magnums. If you plan on almost exclusively using .38's in standard or +P then the shorty should be fine. With .38's I would throw on the smallest boot grip I could find. With .357's I would think real hard about finding an Uncle Mikes three finger rubber combat or maybe Ahrends Retro Combat either one for a full hand hold. I don't like magnums with a two finger grasp on the stock. I would also look real hard and save up for some D&L sights:
Smith and Wesson K, L, and N Frame Sights

 

[Dave T]

Over the years I've learned most people dis-agree with me on this but if you intend to shoot 38 Specials (+P or otherwise) a K-frame is a more appropriate choice. The same logic still applies for the full ejector stroke so I would be after a 3" round butt, either M10 or M64 to suite your personal taste.

If you want to carry and shoot Magnums S&W had the idea, and I agree, that the L-frame was better suited to a steady diet of those and for the Magnum case length I think the 3" ejector would be mandatory.

As always, YMMV!
Dave

 

[wx7b]

My friend has the 3 in and I looked at a 2.5 today. For me the 3 in balances better. If not shooting 357's a lot look into the 3 in M60-15 with adj sights. More compact on the J frame.

 

[hd28cw]

in order for a true comparison....one must own both....sounds like a good excuse to go to the gun store...

 

[lhump1961]

Over the years I've learned most people dis-agree with me on this but if you intend to shoot 38 Specials (+P or otherwise) a K-frame is a more appropriate choice. The same logic still applies for the full ejector stroke so I would be after a 3" round butt, either M10 or M64 to suite your personal taste.

If you want to carry and shoot Magnums S&W had the idea, and I agree, that the L-frame was better suited to a steady diet of those and for the Magnum case length I think the 3" ejector would be mandatory.

As always, YMMV!
Dave

+1 for this evaluation! Here are my carry revolvers, 66-3 3", 66-1 2 1/2" and 686-1 2 1/2". I like them all but for carry I choose the K-frame. What I try to remember is that although the L-frame will shoot high pressure 125 gr. all day and I should limit the K-frame to 158 gr. loads or 38+P, the shorter barrels do not take full advantage of the hotter loads. The higher muzzle velocity is achieved starting at 4" barrels and goes up from there. My K-frame delivers the same punch as my L-frame in a lighter more concealable package...looks great, too!

Now some with more ballistic knowledge can be more accurate with the numbers and details but I believe my basic assumptions are sound. I'm not suggesting you should not consider the 686...great gun...but IMHO you should not dismiss the 66 based on performance. The 686 carries noticeably bigger and heavier and, for me, offers no real advantages for CC. Both are wonderful which is why I have at least one of each! Just my .02!

 

[JWNathan]

I'm really wanting one of these. After handling both I found the 2.5" to fit/balance better for me, tho I didn't shoot the 3". I'm saving up my nickels and dimes for one. Sure look and shot nice for being a big lil' guy.
-Jesse

 

[BarkSlayer]

in order for a true comparison....one must own both....sounds like a good excuse to go to the gun store...

Probably the most sound advice of all. That's exactly how I wound up with both a 4" and a 6" model 686! Thanks for the insights, guys. I'm leaning toward the 3" at this point.

 

[M3Stuart]

Over the years I've learned most people dis-agree with me on this but if you intend to shoot 38 Specials (+P or otherwise) a K-frame is a more appropriate choice. The same logic still applies for the full ejector stroke so I would be after a 3" round butt, either M10 or M64 to suite your personal taste.

If you want to carry and shoot Magnums S&W had the idea, and I agree, that the L-frame was better suited to a steady diet of those and for the Magnum case length I think the 3" ejector would be mandatory.

As always, YMMV!
Dave

I just went through this exercise and was about to buy a 3" 686+ but ran across a 3" model 10 instead. I'm really happy with my 3" model 10 (at about 40% of the price of the new 686). I have a 6" 686 for shooting .357. FWIW, I shot a 3" 686+ repeatedly and found it to be just as accurate (for me anyway) as a 4" out to 50'.

 

[SWP357]

A 686 in any barrel length is really a lot of gun to cc. That said, they are a great shooters.