Model 686 v. 1911

[C.S.63]

Philosophaster, OP Just my 2 cents worth
That 442 is a nice revolver and congratulations on it. The two firearms that you are considering are both great handguns. By the sounds of your original post it seems you also spend some time at the range which is great. get yourself the 686! but do not limit yourself to just the 4" look at all the configurations then I will suggest the 1911 Because.

Unless you reload the 1911 may wear you out trying to feed it. Then the aggravation of retrieving brass (if the range will let you keep it) is another pain, now if you are at an outdoor range you also have the issue picking brass up in the grass and dirt/sand.
If you are still determined on the 1911 keep reading quite a few really nice platforms have been mentioned. The most affordable if you can find one, that is not all buggered up is the Norinco tough as nails and very affordable!!! just needs a little tweaking if you can find one get it!! On the custom end Fusion Firearms great product but you will wait on it
there are so many 1911 models and configurations spend the time and shop for the right one, Years ago A colt Gold Cup was over the counter
desirability.

carl

 

[ral2ooo]

Wow 686 vs 1911. I'll try to keep it short. First by addressing some wrong thinking. $2000 to get a decent 1911!!!!! only if you have the Cadillac syndrome or you are uneducated on the subject. One of the most reliable AND accurate handguns I own is a colt Combat commander that I have less than $400 in. I could go on for pages here but trust me there are many fine 1911s that can be had without breaking the bank.
The 686 is one of the finest combat revolvers ever made and they can be bought used for some very cheap prices. The 357/38 platform is a more versatile hand gun for the non-reloader than a 45 ACP being able to fire from 38 SPL 148 wad cutters up to fire breathing rounds that will hit like the hammer of Thor.
One aspect that has not been touched on is recoil and muzzle blast. In full power combat loads the 45 ACP has a substantial advantage. Its loud but not even close to how brutal a full power 357 is outside let alone indoors.
Which gun is better neither and both. Not being smart but they both have great advantage over the other in different areas.( power, versatility, simplicity the 357 wheel gun gets the edge. Recoil/flash, recovery for multiple shots and reloads under stress the 45ACP has the edge. Accuracy it is a draw. Reliability goes to the revolver BUT that advantage is quite small compared to years gone by for the man that cares for the auto properly.) From what I can glean from your post I think you should buy a good used 686 AND a Ruger 22Auto. You likely will keep the 686 if you later decide to get a 1911 or some other pistol. That 22 Ruger is very accurate, reliable and 22 ammo is cheap enough that you can afford to practice. Everyone should have a 22 in their line up. That little Ruger will be the gun that allows you to become a proficient hand gun shot.

RAL

 

[Fat Old Guy]

Why limit yourself to just 15 or 16 rounds? Carry an AR-15 pistol with a Beta-C mag and 100 rounds.

I know guys who carry a Splock 17 and two spare mags every day. Grocery shopping, going to the pool with the kids, church, everywhere. Are they expecting to be assaulted by the Dalton Gang?

I've been carrying for over 30 years and I'm not a cop. I temper my paranoia with a bit of a reality check. I now routinely carry a five shot revolver. I've carried seven shot autos and 13 shot autos. I've never felt underarmed.

 

[64tinc]

If you like the .45 bullet then go with a Sig 220 can be found used for $550 reliability and accuracy are right out of the box and trigger gets better with use. The 686 plus is a good pistol and ammo interchangeability is a plus and you only have one kind of bullet in the house for pistols makes it easier and you can buy in bulk and save money and get more range time with the 686. Lots of money get the 220 if limited budget for ammo get the 686.

 

[surfcc]

I have 3" 686 Plus Talo and love it! I also have a 4.25" S&W 1911PD Gunsite model, which i carry and shoot often. Both guns are great shooters and completely different. I also have a 3.5" Colt Night Officer 1911....another good carry gun and shooter. I also love my 649 J-Frame. Get whichever gun suits you.

 

[KarmannGhia]

I love the 1911 and have two (Kimber and Springfield). That said, my first 1911 was my 10th gun purchase (not my 2nd). The 1911 is a fantastic platform, but I personally don't feel it is the best gun for novice shooters. I love my 686 and think you will love one too. My wife claims my 686 for herself.

 

[old doc]

I have a 686-plus, a Rock Island 1911, and my son has a Sprinfield Loaded. My 686 is the first S&W I've ever owned and I love it. My RIA is very accurate and reliable and in fact, I shoot it better than my son's SA which cost twice as much. As someone several posts ago stated, everyone should own at least one .357 and one 1911.

 

[rotty]

I have a 686-plus, a Rock Island 1911, and my son has a Sprinfield Loaded. My 686 is the first S&W I've ever owned and I love it. My RIA is very accurate and reliable and in fact, I shoot it better than my son's SA which cost twice as much. As someone several posts ago stated, everyone should own at least one .357 and one 1911.

But what if you can only have a 1911 in 9mm?

In Australia unless you have a high calibre licence, for which you need to be a member of a metallic silhouette club or a single action club, you are restricted to a maximum of .38 calibre.

In saying that, I have a very nice 357 magnum revolver, which I still owe the forum photos of, a browning hi power practical and a Norinco 1911 in 9mm. Which purist call an abomination, not only because it is Chinese, but because it is a 9mm.

So am I ok? Or does it have to be a .45?

 

[old doc]

But what if you can only have a 1911 in 9mm?

In Australia unless you have a high calibre licence, for which you need to be a member of a metallic silhouette club or a single action club, you are restricted to a maximum of .38 calibre.

In saying that, I have a very nice 357 magnum revolver, which I still owe the forum photos of, a browning hi power practical and a Norinco 1911 in 9mm. Which purist call an abomination, not only because it is Chinese, but because it is a 9mm.

So am I ok? Or does it have to be a .45?

No, a 1911 should be a .45 with one exception. I like the Springfield EMP in 9mm. I prefer though my 9mm to be plastic and of high capacity. My XDm with 19 round magazine fits the bill. Come on up to Virginia and enjoy some freedom.

 

[rotty]

Next time I am in the USA I may come and visit.

No high capacity magazines here either. Like in California we have a maximum of 10 rounds, which h in turn hurts our IPSC shooters who have a massive handicap when they go abroad and have to carry too many mags and have to reload more than the rest of the competitors.

When I was in Atlanta last year I had a ball shooting a Kalashnikov, a glock in 45 and all sort of guns.

I guess we are not allowed high capacity mags because our government doesn't trust us with big bad guns. Like there is no such thing as CCW here or even home defense as a valid reason. Those big bad guns have to be locked in a safe, unloaded and separated from the ammo which in turn has to be locked in a separated container.

If we are attacked our government prefers that we and our families are killed, than god forbid, we hurt one criminal.

I was going to get an XD-m but its size puts it out of the production guns in IPSC and into open, where you would have to compete against highly customised 1911 and 2011 with sights, compensators, etc.

What about those 1911s in .38super? Not good still?

EDIT: sorry for the massive thread hijack.

 

[Badkarma 1]

My 2 cents worth.

For what it's worth, I'd go with the one YOU like best! If you can try a rent them at a local range and see how they perform.
With that said my own experience with the 1911 in general has been positive. And while the only Smith I owned was an early one with the billboard markings and a faulty grip safety(you had too practically CRUSH the thing to get it to go BOOM!) it **** rather well!
On the notion that you have to spend four figures to get a good one is nonsense! I too once had a Norinco clone and the only thing I did was trash the mags that came with it and bought Wilson mags! The thing ran like clockwork and I never once experienced a hiccup with it. And I never used the 8 round mags either. But I've had $800 Colts that wouodn't even feed ball ammo!
1911s can be fastedious and temperamental at times, 90% of the problem is either magazine related or extractor tension. The first you can fix, the second calls for a gunsmith.
As for the 686; it's a wonderful beast that is more accurate and powerful than ANY .45 ever concocted! Sure you can beat your 1911 with +P ammo, but why? Didn't the .45 get its rep from standard 230gr. ammo?
As your already using a revolver and getting into the double action trigger pull, the 686 would be a nice addition and poses one of the nicest triggers there is! Second you can use .38 Special in it too.
Either or will serve you well, but the revolver has an edge in reliability, can use magnum ammunition without a problem, doesn't require a yearly changeing of the recoil spring, or a monthly maintance schedule such as oiling or cleaning. About every 3 months you should take the sixgun out and give it a good going over, oil the areas that need it and put it back.
Dale

 

[Fat Old Guy]

No, a 1911 should be a .45 with one exception.

Actually, two exceptions. .22 LR or .38 Super.

 

[C Broad Arrow]

All of my esteemed collegues have made good points on whether to purchase 1911 or a 686. But the argument is now moot since you have made your choice. The challenge now is to become porficient with the 686 by getting out and shooting thousands of rounds a year through it. Spend your money on ammo and range time. Your next move might be to invest in a reloading rig. A variety of hardware is nice to have as you can see from the above comments...everyone has more than one of each. But as was best said by Jeff Cooper:
"Owning a handgun doesn't make you armed any more than owning a guitar makes you a musician."
Becoming proficient should be your next goal, and the decision on which hardware to purchase next will flow from that experience.
Best of luck and welcome to one of the world's greatest communities!

 

[Mike7.62]

JMHO, but having five 1911's of various makes, primarily Colt and Springfield, and having used them in competition and carried one to protect my butt during ACDU, I'd have to give points to the revolver for utility use, and the 1911 for "social" work.

That being said, the .357 is great cartridge, able to take game up to whitetail deer and hogs with aplomb, and engage human adversaries with devastating results. You may also load snake shot for, well, snakes, and also use it for close in bird shooting. I have killed sage hens and grouse with snake shot while elk/mule deer hunting, with tasty results. It also makes a good small game cartridge when used with reduced loads, where legal.

The 686 is an outstanding platform for the .357, large enough to handle a steady diet of magnum loads, but small enough, especially in the 4" barrel length, to pack easily. Stainless construction is a plus for utility and corrosion resistance.

If I had to choose just one, and weren't going into harms way routinely, I'd choose with the 686. It has greater utility, versatility, and power than the 1911 .45 ACP, and the only downside is capacity, and that is only two rounds. YMMV. Good luck with your decision.

 

[Fishslayer]

Personally I dispise sweeping, stepping on, searching for, and picking up brass trown all over the place.

The only problem I have with the 1911 platform is that I am a reloader. I hate trying to find brass off the ground.

4-ish gr of Green Dot under a 200gr LSWC. You won't need to search far. Just make sure any female shooters are wearing shirts with a high neckline.

 

[bwelch47]

I agree.Buy both. I have both but my 357 is a Model 28 with 4" barrel.

 

[M2MikeGolf]

Congratulations, I think you made a good choice, but you really could not have gone wrong either way. Since this is a S&W revolver area of the forum, I must applaud your choice.

However, the comments about 1911s by many here baffle me. For what it was designed to do by John Browning, not much has been able to out perform the 1911 and A1 variant. It has long been known that by trying to alter something past it's original design that you don't often improve it. The 1911 in it's original issue form was one of the most reliable, powerful and accurate semi autos of it's day and often more reliable than revolvers. Try reading about the trials that the 1911 was subjected to and you will understand a little better, not sure what modern day handgun would pass those same tasks. You can get into brand names and customization all day long, there was nothing finicky or difficult to use about the early 1911s, nothing. They field strip easily, function well and require virtually no maintenance other than the norm. They were so simple, that when I was a young Infantryman and company armorer, it was the only weapon that could be torn down to it's frame completely at the organizational maintenance level and all parts were easily replaced, something that few revovlers back then or today can match. It was designed to be "loose" so that the elements would have little effect on it, to include complete immersion in mud and water; a test which it passed flawlessly. I will not nor do I care to compare what modern day manufacturers have done to "improve" the "platform" of the 1911; it stands alone on it's reputation and performance before the silly little tweakers got hold of it. In the hands of soldiers, it was unmatched as a military weapon, and required little care to function well. Three generations of Infantry soldiers, including myself, can attest to it.

I applaud the 686 series revolvers; I have a L-frame 619 that I will never sell, but you can bet I will keep my grandfather's 1933 built Government model (and yes, he carried it in WWII) forever, and it will eat up anything you try to feed it, like it did in his day and still does in mine. They are simply two different weapons that excel in what they do. Pick the one that fits your requirements for a handgun and you will doubltess be satisfied.

 

[dawggy2]

686 vs 1911

As stated many times prior both are excellent guns. I have a 686+ 4" and a Colt model 70 in the gun safe. I actually prefer shooting the 686 with a heavy 158 grain 38 special load more than the hotter .357. A very nice trigger and much more accurate than I am. There is another nice option for the 1911 that isn't a 1911 at all, but was made for that .45 acp niche. That is a Smith and Wesson 4506-1 all stainless with a decocker, 8 round mag.This is a sweet looking pistol on top of being a nice shooter as well. I hear this third gen. model can be upgraded to shoot .45 super if you wish with a spring kit and 1911 mags can be used on the range after a little dremel work, but I haven't done either on mine. This would not be my choice for a carry gun since it weighs in at about 3 lbs loaded. An old school Miami Vice Don Johnson gun. There is probably a 4506 thread here on the forum. An interesting gun with barrel length and frame metallurgy variants.

686+ or 1911. For me the 686 +. (but I carry a 642 most of the time or SW 6906) Love a revolver. Good choice on the 442.

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

This is just my opinion and experience.

Unless you are willing to fork out BIG BUCKS ($2000+) for a custom 1911 I would go with the 686. The 1911 platform just does not lend itself well to mass production. Now when a 1911 is built by a skilled craftsman you can get no better. You do pay for it though.

Or just buy one made by Colt in 1961 that's never been messed with, apart from a trigger job, like I did.

 

[shouldazagged]

In view of the fact you stated above that this will be a home-defense gun, I think your choice of the 686 is a very sound one. It is as near 100% reliable as a handgun can be, and that's what you want when the castle is being invaded.

I've never bought a new revolver. That's mostly because I was in a severely underpaid profession and had little to spend; but a good used one--solid lockup, minimal end shake, good timing--can be had very reasonably by today's insane standards and is often very, very smooth. I've had some exceptionally fine used revolvers that I literally have trusted with my life (and still do). You might save a ton of money toward your eventual 1911 on a clean used 686 that a capable gunsmith says is good to go.

I like your choice of a carry gun.