686 vs. 27 vs. 66 vs. 19 - How do they compare and what's S&W's best 357?

[Texas Star]

One point that many miss is that N-frames wear timing sooner. More mass for the hand to move.
Never thought of that, but read it in an article by, I think, Massad Ayoob.

I've owned all frame sizes, never had a timing problem except on new guns with QC problems.

 

[Jason Demond]

It's not really a fair assessment.

The 686, 66, and the 19 will all feel about the same, shoot the same, and generally have the same feel in action. If you are used to a 66 or 19, you may find the 686 to feel heavier, or be front heavy.

A N frame is a different beast. The heft will feel close, but the actions on them feel way smoother. Their weight tends to lessen felt recoil, and some of them are just perfectly balanced. A 5" N frame is just about the most perfect revolver you could shoot.

 

[JP@AK]

A 5" N frame is just about the most perfect revolver you could shoot.

Like this Model 27-2? I agree!

 

[insider]

So we decided to resurrect a thread from October, 2015? Strange . . .

Amazing what people do when they're in quarantine.

 

[OLDSTER]

I own, or have owned, more than one of each. All superb revolvers; but IMO, this 686-4 is the finest revolver ( of any brand ) I've ever owned. I just noticed the date of this thread.

 

[rubiranch]

I'll start with the 1963 4" M19-2 that I sold. I never did warm up to it for some reason. For some reason it wasn't a very good shooter for me. I never did shoot my 6" M19-2 before selling it.

I enjoy shooting my 6" M66-1. Maybe because it was my brothers service revolver and he had S&W do some trigger work and install a smooth target trigger.

I also sold my LNIB 4" 686 and my 5" 686-6+ and kept my 6" 686 which is the best shooting and IMO the most accurate handgun that I own.



Not long ago I had seven pre, 27 and 27-2s from 3.5" to 8 3/8". Sold all of them except my 5" 27-2 due to sentimental reasons and kept this 6.5" 1960 M27. My most favorite of them all.

The rear sight blade was damaged when I got it so I had a good friend replace it with a w/o blade.

The I asked George Dye of Salt Lake Collectibles if he could find me a nice set of Coke Bottle grips for it. He far exceeded my expectations with what I consider the perfect set. They are like band new.

 

[Hair Trigger]

What 27 Man said.

In addition, I'd add that "best" is a very subjective assessment.

You really don't have a reasonably complete collection of N frame Smiths if you don't have a .357 Magnum/Model 27 of some sort.

The others are all good guns, but the .357 Magnum/Model 27 is the standout.

I wouldn't argue with that at all, and would love to add a M27 to my "herd". But, I do have a M28-2 which is close enough I suppose. Like the difference between the base model car with roll-up windows and no a/c versus the LTD version with all the bells and whistles. They both have the 427 up front, though.

So we decided to resurrect a thread from October, 2015? Strange . . .

Didn't notice, but what the hey, it's not a bad subject to rehash.

One point that many miss is that N-frames wear timing sooner. More mass for the hand to move.
Never thought of that, but read it in an article by, I think, Massad Ayoob.

I've owned all frame sizes, never had a timing problem except on new guns with QC problems.

How many rounds would one have to put through a gun before it started wearing enough to affect the timing? How much difference in this issue than a K-frame with the same round count?

I should live long enough to shoot my S&W's enough to wear them out. I can't speak for the newer stuff, none of mine are newer than 1979.

I've never warmed up to the idea of the L-frame. I don't like the look of the full barrel underlug, for one thing. Looks too front heavy, and too much like a Colt. I also don't want any of S&W's stuff made after 1980. Maybe I'm missing a few good models to own, but I have plenty of other types past that date.

 

[Bumpus13]

All this time and nobody brought up either the 13 or 65?

... A couple of my favorite "working" .357's


featured: (13-4, 19-4, 65-3, 66-5, 686-6+)

 

[rubiranch]

I've never warmed up to the idea of the L-frame. I don't like the look of the full barrel underlug, for one thing.

My 5" 686-6 came from the factory with a 1/2 lug.
I think its a very nice looking L frame.

 

[ISCS Yoda]

I love this!

686
Model 27
Model 66
Model 19

That's like asking guys which is better, blondes or brunettes!

Jokes aside, they're so different you have to ask yourself what, exactly, are you going to do with them.

I have never owned a M66 but I have owned 3 or 4 M19s, 4" and 2.5". They're wonderful guns, will handle any .357 load I ever tried, but they're not necessarily the strongest tool in the shed. But for an easy shooting, packing pistol, K frame .357s are hard to beat. Since the main difference between a M19 and a M66 is blued steel versus stainless that's more a matter of taste as far as I am concerned, unless you're on a boat, in which case stainless is the better choice.

A M27 is a tank. Omitting the obvious with respect to the checkering, and other luxury items, it's an N frame tank. If you're any kind of recoil sensitive this is the gun that tames all of the .357 Magnum recoil you can find. But if you're thinking about carrying it, well, just remember it's tank, and damned hard to conceal.

So, that leaves the M686. Barrel length is always a factor and you don't say what your purpose is but the M686 will handle every .357 Magnum you feed it and in almost any barrel size except 6" it's not impossible to conceal and certainly not too difficult to carry.

When you just love revolvers it's always hard to say which is best or your favorite but until my twin brother gets his hands on my 3" M 686+ I think it's the winner here.

He does want it soooooo badly!!!

This M19 is no longer with me but it's a stunning gun:

This M27 Classic, as modified, is so wonderful it's hard to describe but it IS a tank!

These M686+s are way up on my favorite list:

2.5"

3"

4"

That full underlug, I dunno, it's just so racy looking to me!

The best? VERY personal, very, very personal!

 

[rubiranch]

That's like asking guys which is better, blondes or brunettes!

Redheads

 

[BAM-BAM]

IMO the 4" 686 is the best all around utility/duty/general purpose .357 one can own.

For concealed carry..... aka carry all day every day ...... but shot rarely if ever ( outside the range/qualification) I prefer a 2 1/2 or 3 inch 19/66/65/13.

I have a couple of 4" N-frames 27/28s..... great guns.... but I prefer the grip frame/trigger reach of the K and L frames ...... which are the same.

 

[CH4]

686-4+
27
686
66/19

 

[M29since14]

The fatal flaw (IMO) of the 27 is the short cylinder. I guess really it's not a huge deal, still a very nice gun, but...

The point about what you will use the gun for is the central issue, as far as I'm concerned. In my own case, the Model 19 is always going to be at the top of the list. I normally shoot .357s. They are a long way from full-charge .357s, but they are nothing to sneeze at, either. (Usually 160 gr. lead bullets and 13.0 grs. #2400.) "I think" they are easy enough on the gun that I don't fret about shooting them. Sometimes I will load the same bullets a bit lighter, in the 1000 FPS range, but still in .357 brass.

The 19 seems to handle both cartridges without overstressing the gun. I was always told, "Keep it clean!" I think doing that saves a lot of wear and tear on any revolver, but particularly the Combat Magnum.

The point about the difference in the double-action pulls of K- and N-frame gun's is another good one. I have never seen an N-frame in the same class with a really well-tuned K-frame. As to the L-frame, I do like the 586 (or 686) a lot, and they are undeniably more pleasant to fire than the K-frame guns, but if I could only have one S&W .357 it would always be a Model 19.

 

[BB57]

Obviously by now the OP has figured out there are a lot of opinions and biases when it comes to K versus L versus N frame .357s. Here's my $0.02:

I own both 4" and 6" Model 19s, as well as a 3" Model 13, a 2 1/2" Model 66 and a 6" Model 66. They are all wonderful shooting revolvers, along with my 4" Model 15 and 6" Model 14.

I also own 2 1/2" and 3" Model 686+ revolvers. They are also very nice shooting revolvers.

Someone early in the thread said the L frame as a ******* that combined the grip of the K frame with the N frame. He's wrong on that. The K and L frame do share the same grip frame, however the N frame is considerably larger than the L frame. In fact, the L frame is only slightly larger than the K frame and only slightly heavier.

With the same barrel length the weight difference is around 3 oz. and the dimensions are close enough that an L frame will fit (snugly) in most leather K frame holsters.

Not the very minor size difference between the 2 1/2" Model 66 and the 2 1/2" Model 686+:

That extra weight does make them slightly more comfortable with full power .357 Magnum loads, but the major advantage is that it was designed for a steady diet of .357 Magnum where the Model 19, Model 13 and Model 66 were not. It was in essence S&W's response to the frame cracking issues in the Model 19 and a response to the Ruger Speed, Service/Police and Security Six revolvers which were more durable and not much larger than the K frame.

Note the similarity in size for the Security Six and Speed Six on the left and the K and L frames on the right:

I don't currently own any N frame revolvers and the reason for that is pretty simple. The trigger reach on the N frame is long and in my case just a bit too long for a good DA trigger pull.

In contrast, the Ruger Red Hawk has a slightly shorter trigger reach than the N frame and with proper grip selection it's short enough to work for me. Thus no N frames in my safe as if it's in my safe, it's a working gun that gets shot.

As an aside, in the K/L frame category the Ruger GP-100 uses a peg style grip frame which means the trigger reach isn't an issue for women, teens, etc with really small hands as it will accommodate a much smaller grip. I'm not a GP-100 fan, as I prefer both the K and L frame and the previous Speed/Service/Security Six pistols to the GP-100, but it's an option.

 

[OLDSTER]

I know this post doesn't address OP question directly. But I had to ask; who here doesn't agree that the Model K38/15 is one of the finest revolvers ever made. ??

 

[.357magger]

I've owned all the listed models, in either 2.5" (66, 686), 3" (686), 3.5" (27-1), 4" (66, 686, 27-2), 5" (27-2) and 6" in the Model 66.

For all around use, my absolute favorite is the 4" Model 66. A tuned K frame trigger is like no other size and this size gun, if I could only have one, would be it. It can do it all, easily.

Just my $.02. YMMV.

My 4" 66 No Dash, with trigger work the same as by my Dept Armorer back in the day.

 

[saemetric]

I agree with the Model 66 but to me the 6" balances better. Especially with VZ grips.

 

[StrawHat]

...Someone early in the thread said the L frame as a ******* that combined the grip of the K frame with the N frame. He's wrong on that. The K and L frame do share the same grip frame, however the N frame is considerably larger than the L frame. In fact, the L frame is only slightly larger than the K frame and only slightly heavier.

With the same barrel length the weight difference is around 3 oz. and the dimensions are close enough that an L frame will fit (snugly) in most leather K frame holsters...

I said the L was the illegitimate child of the K and N frame combining the grip frame of the K with the weight of an N frame. Working from memory, the Model 19 weighed about 35 ounces, the 686 about 45 ounces and the 27 about 46 ounces. All with 4" barrels and unloaded.

If anyone can scale their revolvers, unloaded, same length, please correct me if I am wrong. I no longer have any 357 Magnum revolvers.

I can not comment on holsters as mine are formed to the revolver and not buckets that accept whatever is about the same size.

Kevin

 

[mike from st pete]

686 all the way. 'L' frame is the best size for 357MAG.