686, 6 rd or 7 rd?
- Thread starter Joe_Cool
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Depends on your purpose. For example, I shoot IDPA Revolver, and the rules specify 6 shot max loaded in gun. You can see what a hassle a 7-shot would be in IDPA.
If you want it for house protection, you might prefer an extra round loaded.
If you want it for house protection, you might prefer an extra round loaded.
AveragEd
Member
I don't know - to me, a six-shooter should be just that.
Ed
Ed
RV4driver
US Veteran
As has been said many times before, "I never met anyone that in an emergency, said, "I wish I had fewer rounds or a smaller caliber".
But the IDPA argument is a good one. The "six-shooter" one, not so much. After all, the single-action guns were commonly carried with only 5 rounds, so that the hammer was down on an empty chamber.
But the IDPA argument is a good one. The "six-shooter" one, not so much. After all, the single-action guns were commonly carried with only 5 rounds, so that the hammer was down on an empty chamber.
kbm6893
Member
.357 Mag revolvers just seem right with 6 rounds. I'd go with 7 if the 7 shot versions didn't have the lock or the black MIM hammer and trigger. Just can't get by that.
I sold my 686-1 4" like 4 years ago. Got way less for it than I would get now. I regret selling it.
I'd buy a used 686 before I bought a new one.
I sold my 686-1 4" like 4 years ago. Got way less for it than I would get now. I regret selling it.
I'd buy a used 686 before I bought a new one.
blues7
Member
I always harbored a secret fear that the 7 round version was not as strong as the 6 round version.
And then I read somewhere (on the internet!) that the timing is harder to maintain on the 7 round version -- that there are more problems with the cylinders on these guns.
But I bought the 7 round version anyway! And it seems like its built like a tank. Would like to hear more from someone with deep S&W knowledge whether one is "better" than the other.
And then I read somewhere (on the internet!) that the timing is harder to maintain on the 7 round version -- that there are more problems with the cylinders on these guns.
But I bought the 7 round version anyway! And it seems like its built like a tank. Would like to hear more from someone with deep S&W knowledge whether one is "better" than the other.
Mehutch
Member
I have both 6 and 7 shooters 686+ and 586. Love all 7 of them, 5 are pre-lock. I prefer the 7 shooters. Good luck, you wont be disappointed.
silentflyer
Member
I have both, no problems from either one, the 7 round speed loaders are a bit hard to find, but other than that no big difference.
TAC
Member
I own two 7-shot 686 Plus revolvers, one is 2.5", the other is 4" I really like them, no problems. Some like the look of the 6-shot cylinder, but some people drive 4-cylinder cars. 
Why not buy the 8-shot N-frame!
Why not buy the 8-shot N-frame!
Smithpride
Member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2014
- Messages
- 257
- Reaction score
- 320
I'm all for one extra round. Buy the 7 shot, by all means.
Good times and happy shooting once you procure.
Good times and happy shooting once you procure.
fclef
Member
I have a 3" Plus , and Love the gun. However , if I was involved in IDPA I`d go with the 4" 6-shooter.
They`re both great guns.
Regards , Pete
They`re both great guns.
Regards , Pete
rsrha454lv
Member
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2014
- Messages
- 41
- Reaction score
- 28
I have the 686+ and 586 L Comp 7 shooters. I feel slightly sacrilegious but comforted by the extra round.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
Ashlander
Member
In terms of strength, the cylinder notches on the 6 shooter are over the chambers, while on the 7 shooter the notches are between cylinders. Does that make any difference applied to "real world" pressures? Most likely not, but it is stronger.
BTW, I am biased -- I own a 686-6 Plus.
BTW, I am biased -- I own a 686-6 Plus.
I've been shooting 6 shot K and L frames for so long I just imagine myself .....shooting 6 and dumping the 7th.
Plus my supply of speedloaders...... are all 6 round....... OK OK there are a couple of 5rounders for the J-frames.
Plus my supply of speedloaders...... are all 6 round....... OK OK there are a couple of 5rounders for the J-frames.
Mulebuk Sam
Member
- Joined
- May 11, 2016
- Messages
- 225
- Reaction score
- 174
I've thought about the same thing, how do you cram 7 rounds into a 6 round cylinder ?
I wonder if anyone has ever mic the cylinder to see if they are the same size because if it is that means they had to shave off thickness on the chambers.
No one can deny that an extra round is almost a 15% advantage, but I tend to favor even numbers.
Now when you look at the pug nose 8 rounder, that is one big cylinder. But the question still begs for an answer as to how thick that cylinder is compared to a traditional 6 rounder. My guess is it's an optical illusion in either case and those chamber walls are indeed thinner.
Boudiepitbull
Member
I've thought about the same thing, how do you cram 7 rounds into a 6 round cylinder ?
I wonder if anyone has ever mic the cylinder to see if they are the same size because if it is that means they had to shave off thickness on the chambers.
No one can deny that an extra round is almost a 15% advantage, but I tend to favor even numbers.
Now when you look at the pug nose 8 rounder, that is one big cylinder. But the question still begs for an answer as to how thick that cylinder is compared to a traditional 6 rounder. My guess is it's an optical illusion in either case and those chamber walls are indeed thinner.
I pondered much the same thing and went with the 6 round model 686.
ultratec00
Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2011
- Messages
- 764
- Reaction score
- 348
I own a older 6 round 586 6" and recently picked up a 686 5" Talo in 7 round. The 586 is butter smooth and has had quite a bit of use. Talo turned out great. Very smooth, locks up solid, and cycles extremely fast. I'd take it over my 586 any day.
I had the thoughts that there could be differences in the strength
of the cylinders, and I would like to shoot some real heavy loads.
No doubt about the cylinder of the 7 has to be weaker in the area
BETWEEN each cylinder, but the notch being right on the chambers
of the 6 shot, make that the weakest part of the cylinder, and it
is right there about even with the chamber area where maximum chamber
pressure is generated, when guns fail it is often at a weak place.
I like the idea of the thick heavy chambers of the N frame, so
I thought maybe a model 27 or 28 would be nice, but I found
that the cylinder is shorter and you can't really load long bullets
like some of the heavy 180 thru 210 ones, and I like heavy
bullets, so that ruled the 27 and 28 out. Maybe I am just
over thinking this. Will probably go with the 7, probably the
7 inch barrel Talo, that ought to handle 200 grain semi wad cutters
pretty well. I have a 6 inch 22 cal, model 617 like this, and I like
it really well:
smith and wesson model 617 - Google Search
So if I do buy, probably the 7 rd model 686 Talo is what I will
go with:
https://www.gunsamerica.com/UserImages/110228/922046744/wm_3620323.jpg
Thanks for the comments.
Joe
of the cylinders, and I would like to shoot some real heavy loads.
No doubt about the cylinder of the 7 has to be weaker in the area
BETWEEN each cylinder, but the notch being right on the chambers
of the 6 shot, make that the weakest part of the cylinder, and it
is right there about even with the chamber area where maximum chamber
pressure is generated, when guns fail it is often at a weak place.
I like the idea of the thick heavy chambers of the N frame, so
I thought maybe a model 27 or 28 would be nice, but I found
that the cylinder is shorter and you can't really load long bullets
like some of the heavy 180 thru 210 ones, and I like heavy
bullets, so that ruled the 27 and 28 out. Maybe I am just
over thinking this. Will probably go with the 7, probably the
7 inch barrel Talo, that ought to handle 200 grain semi wad cutters
pretty well. I have a 6 inch 22 cal, model 617 like this, and I like
it really well:
smith and wesson model 617 - Google Search
So if I do buy, probably the 7 rd model 686 Talo is what I will
go with:
https://www.gunsamerica.com/UserImages/110228/922046744/wm_3620323.jpg
Thanks for the comments.
Joe
Last edited:
Mr. Blenderson
Member
I got the 7-shot because I couldn't think of a reason not to have the extra round (for HD).
You're already accepting a lower capacity by choosing a revolver for SD over an auto loader, so why not get the least compromise
Possible in the size gun you shoot well?
You're already accepting a lower capacity by choosing a revolver for SD over an auto loader, so why not get the least compromise
Possible in the size gun you shoot well?
Jim Watson
Member
This is actually a relatively modern safety precaution.
I had a book with reprint of a 19th century Colt SAA pamphlet. It recommended use of the safety notch after loading six chambers.
TAC
Member
With advances, and improvements in metallurgy, alloys, and new high quality steel, it's likely the cylinder walls of a 7-shot 686, are not weaker than yesterday's 6-shot, but likely stronger.
In any event, I'm sure the 7-shot design has been well pressure tested by S&W, prior to introducing it to the consumer. Consider the 5-shot cylinder, which is smaller, and definitely a strong, and proven design.
In any event, I'm sure the 7-shot design has been well pressure tested by S&W, prior to introducing it to the consumer. Consider the 5-shot cylinder, which is smaller, and definitely a strong, and proven design.
Yes, I always carried my single action loaded all 6 with
the hammer backed off to the safety notch. That is
actually what the notch is for. If you leave the hammer
resting on the primer and hit the hammer or drop
the gun on the hammer, then it will go off.
Somehow people still manage to shoot themselves in
the leg with SA guns even with the notch there, so
Ruger redesigned the action entirely. I have not
heard of anyone shooting themselves with the redesign,
but would not be surprised if someone has. People
are pretty creative at figuring out how to screw up.
Redlegvzv
Member
Aw jeez not this stuff again.
There is absolutely nothing inferior about modern MIM parts. Nothing, nada.
Further, not liking the lock is a subjective call, OK I get that. But it has nothing to do with the functioning of the gun. Nothing.
Last edited:
I noted this on my order form under features:
FEATURES: Square Butt, Forged Hammer & Trigger, Unfluted Cyl
So it looks like the talo does not have the MIM hammer
and trigger, it says Forged hammer & trigger. Does
that give you a warm and fuzzy feeling?
Back to our roots! The S&W model one first issue was a seven shot 22 revolver so a seven shooter certainly isn't a new innovation.
I like the idea of an "extra" shot but the main reason I got a 686 Pro plus is because I wanted the features of the Pro series. If it had been a six shooter, I would bought it that way.
I like the idea of an "extra" shot but the main reason I got a 686 Pro plus is because I wanted the features of the Pro series. If it had been a six shooter, I would bought it that way.
Redlegvzv
Member
I shoot my 686 6" six-shooter more than I do my 627PC 8-shooter. Go figger.
I am pretty psyched up about this 686 Talo and I also thought
it should have a laser sight, so I just ordered this Crimson Trace:
[ame="https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=crimson+trace++686+square+"]Amazon.com: crimson trace 686 square[/ame]
You would not think a laser sight is the thing for this gun,
it being pretty much a hunter not a personal protection
type gun, but what the hell, you never know what need
may arise. The lasers work good in low light but are pretty
much useless in bright sun light, but they also are good
training tools. You take your laser gun, unloaded, of course
and point it at a target on the furthest away wall, and then
you turn on your laser to see if your instinct point is on or
off. After you do that a little while, you become pretty good
at just pointing. I don't know if the situation will ever come
up, especially with a hunting gun, when you will need to
be able to just point and shoot, but it never hurts to be able
to do it. I guess that is just my boy scout training, you know,
Be Prepared.
it should have a laser sight, so I just ordered this Crimson Trace:
[ame="https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=crimson+trace++686+square+"]Amazon.com: crimson trace 686 square[/ame]
You would not think a laser sight is the thing for this gun,
it being pretty much a hunter not a personal protection
type gun, but what the hell, you never know what need
may arise. The lasers work good in low light but are pretty
much useless in bright sun light, but they also are good
training tools. You take your laser gun, unloaded, of course
and point it at a target on the furthest away wall, and then
you turn on your laser to see if your instinct point is on or
off. After you do that a little while, you become pretty good
at just pointing. I don't know if the situation will ever come
up, especially with a hunting gun, when you will need to
be able to just point and shoot, but it never hurts to be able
to do it. I guess that is just my boy scout training, you know,
Be Prepared.
Last edited:
kbm6893
Member
I didn't say the MIM parts were inferior. I hate the look of them unless they're in a blued gun where they aren't so obvious. As for the lock, there have been reports of some activating when they shouldn't, but I know that is a teeny tiny fraction. Like the MIM, I hate the look of it.
I buy guns for a lot of reasons. One of them is beauty and pride in ownership. Two toned parts on a stainless revolver and a hole in the frame don't give me that. Plus, I prefer the look of a hammer mounted firing pin.
Do the newer guns work? I'm sure they do. But I'll never own one. Not when there's a bazillion older ones that I prefer out there. S&W revolvers aren't cheap. If I'm gonna plunk down 800 bucks for a revolver I am gonna be happy with what I get.
Last edited:
