I wonder if a seven shot .44mag X-frame is possible? I'd surely buy one if they ever made one. 5" barrel would make it perfect. dear s&w, plz make this happen
L frame .357 vs N frame .357?
- Thread starter otis24
- Start date
at_liberty
Member
The topic is 357, but your hand cannon idea is interesting to contemplate.
If limited to only one, it would be N.
As a serious 44spl fan, I was really happy to get a new L frame model 69. The pleasant surprise was the perceived reduction in recoil shooting 44mags compared to my N frame 629. I understand it is because the weight of the two guns are relatively close but the center of where the gun pushes back on the hand is lower with the L frame. For me, the recoil in a model 686 from 357s is similar in feel compared to the N frame model 28.
I am a big fan of the L frame for casual shooting and carry.
That said, for heavy bullets/loads and serious carry, I use 3" N frames in 44mag and 45 Colt. Better suited for the purpose.
Nothing beats a J frame for CC. Fits in any pocket in a flash.
I am a big fan of the L frame for casual shooting and carry.
That said, for heavy bullets/loads and serious carry, I use 3" N frames in 44mag and 45 Colt. Better suited for the purpose.
Nothing beats a J frame for CC. Fits in any pocket in a flash.
L or N frame
I first purchased a 686 Plus Pro Series 7 shot .357 magnum which is an L frame gun. I liked this gun but because I have large hands, I thought I would get a Model 27 with the square butt grips. So I bought a 4" nickel 27-3. I know, it doesn't have the collectability of a 27-2 but I like the ramp with the red insert for the front sight and white outlined rear sight and I didn't pay an arm and leg for it. I thought I would sell the L frame but after shooting both side by side this weekend, I decided I can't part with either of them. Both handled recoil about the same and both were accurate. The trigger on the 686 7 shot is better in double action than the 27 but that's because is from the Pro Series and has some of the Performance shop work done on it. If I had to carry one, it would be the 686 because it less bulky with the slab barrel and just as accurate. But I really like the craftmanship in the 27 and wouldn't get rid of it either. You can't go wrong with either one. Hope some of this helps. Regards, Jim
I first purchased a 686 Plus Pro Series 7 shot .357 magnum which is an L frame gun. I liked this gun but because I have large hands, I thought I would get a Model 27 with the square butt grips. So I bought a 4" nickel 27-3. I know, it doesn't have the collectability of a 27-2 but I like the ramp with the red insert for the front sight and white outlined rear sight and I didn't pay an arm and leg for it. I thought I would sell the L frame but after shooting both side by side this weekend, I decided I can't part with either of them. Both handled recoil about the same and both were accurate. The trigger on the 686 7 shot is better in double action than the 27 but that's because is from the Pro Series and has some of the Performance shop work done on it. If I had to carry one, it would be the 686 because it less bulky with the slab barrel and just as accurate. But I really like the craftmanship in the 27 and wouldn't get rid of it either. You can't go wrong with either one. Hope some of this helps. Regards, Jim
Last edited:
Texas Star
US Veteran
L-frame M-686's are made in stainless, a major advantage.
Secondly, the lighter cylinder goes out of time less easily. The hand has less weight to shove around.
I had a M-686, but it was too nose heavy, so I got a Ruger GP-100, which feels less barrel heavy, despite also having a full lugged bbl.
My M-66 is an ideal all-round revolver for someone who won't fire enormous amounts of .357 ammo, and is handier than heavier .357's.
I have never seen one of the limited production M-686 Mountain Guns. Those have S&W's normal half lug barrel and may be a delight to carry and shoot. They look at a glance like a Model 66 with four-inch barrel. You have to look close to realize that you're seeing the larger L-frame.
Secondly, the lighter cylinder goes out of time less easily. The hand has less weight to shove around.
I had a M-686, but it was too nose heavy, so I got a Ruger GP-100, which feels less barrel heavy, despite also having a full lugged bbl.
My M-66 is an ideal all-round revolver for someone who won't fire enormous amounts of .357 ammo, and is handier than heavier .357's.
I have never seen one of the limited production M-686 Mountain Guns. Those have S&W's normal half lug barrel and may be a delight to carry and shoot. They look at a glance like a Model 66 with four-inch barrel. You have to look close to realize that you're seeing the larger L-frame.
TurboDieselTorque
Member
I Wanted a 357 and bought the first S&W I could find a model 19 for $150 ( you can read about it in my post " would you do this to a gun) It was nice and once I " got over " my 357 craze I took my time to research other revolvers it came down to taurus but I wanted a gp100 for a few bucks more. Once I rented the GP100 I was not too impress so I settled between a 27 and 586. I shot both and the 586 felt balance and well proportioned, as opposed to the 27 feeling light in the barrel and heavy in the cylinder.
long story short I chose the 586 and could not be happier.
btw the N frame in 44 mag feels much better than the 357.
long story short I chose the 586 and could not be happier.
btw the N frame in 44 mag feels much better than the 357.
Attachments
WaMike
Member
Interesting that this thread was resurrected some 7 years later.....and it contains at least 2 posts from a couple of now-banned writers (how did that happen?).
Anyway, I have both. Like to shoot both, but wouldn't carry either everyday. If I did, it would probably be a 681.
Anyway, I have both. Like to shoot both, but wouldn't carry either everyday. If I did, it would probably be a 681.
I have a use for them....
I like the j frame in .357 mag because I load low end .357s for defense purposes. Hotter than a .38 +P but hopefully won't blow our ears out if fired indoors.
I like the j frame in .357 mag because I load low end .357s for defense purposes. Hotter than a .38 +P but hopefully won't blow our ears out if fired indoors.
With the hottest loads...
I really like my 'L' frame but with the hottest loads I wouldn't mind having the .357 in an 'N' frame. In the 'L' frame even with the 6" barrel and full lug the hottest loads hurt just a mite.
I really like my 'L' frame but with the hottest loads I wouldn't mind having the .357 in an 'N' frame. In the 'L' frame even with the 6" barrel and full lug the hottest loads hurt just a mite.
MasterTech1960
Member
I would like to know when the 1st L frames came out. I would like to know when they were available to the public in quantity over the counter.
The time it takes....
Lock time is how long it takes from the trigger break until the round actually fires. Old muskets had a long 'lock time' because the slow hammer lighting the primer powder which then lit the main charge. Lock times have improved, but some designs are faster than others.
Lock time is how long it takes from the trigger break until the round actually fires. Old muskets had a long 'lock time' because the slow hammer lighting the primer powder which then lit the main charge. Lock times have improved, but some designs are faster than others.
Similar threads
- Locked
