Need Your Help with First Revolver Purchase

[RevolverJim]

I have "many" S&W revolvers of various sizes as well as 1911s of various configurations. These are all fun to shoot and have their place in my inventory.

My bedside (and duty) weapon is a G21 with a TLR 1. When considering all the possibilities related to home defense that's where the curves cross for me.

 

[41 mag Dave]

I will not address what would be the "best" in a defensive situation. From a training and marksmanship standpoint, a double action revolver is a great tool to have.

Shooting a revolver double action forces you to concentrate on maintaining a good grip and sight alignment during the double action trigger stroke. A common problem I see with shooters of all levels is the loosening of the grip and "stabbing" at the trigger. This is more common after the first couple of shots.

Regularly shooting and/or dryfiring a double action revolver will help improve your shooting with a striker fired pistol or SA revolver or pistol.

 

[first-model]

The "best" gun is going to be the one that you have the most practice with. Arguments about 9mm versus .357 magnum versus any other caliber are fine, but they're largely academic in a self-defense situation where the adrenalin is pumping and milliseconds of reaction time will seem like a lifetime.

I love my 686—it'd be one of the last revolvers I'd ever part with. But I have tens of thousands of rounds through my Glocks, and that's what I'd be reaching for in a self-defense situation.

If you want to get a wheel gun, then cool ... but don't look to the gun to give you some sort of tactical advantage in a life-and-death situation. What is between your ears is the alpha and the omega there.

Mike

 

[shawn mccarver]

I have learned after 50 years that it is pointless to try and talk someone out of their choice of gun for a particular purpose. I typically find that when people ask about a particular gun, they are looking for all the reasons they should buy that gun, and none of the reasons why they should not.

So, I will not try to talk to you out of your decision to use a revolver for self-defense instead of sticking with your Glock 17.

That said, if you are stuck on the 686, I would try to find one of the "mountain revolvers" rather than the standard heavy barrel version.

Better yet is the factory new model 19 or 66, both of which have solved the problem of the 6 o'clock crack in the barrel shank, which is the reason the L frame 586 and 686, and the fixed sight versions, the 581 and 681, were invented in the first place. Unless you are going to shoot a continuous diet of magnums, which you can now do with the 19 or 66, I find the 686 too heavy. If you intend to use 38 special, I can see no reason why you should not just simply get the classic model 10 or 67.

Either way, you are handicapping yourself with a heavy double action trigger, 1/3 the amount of ammunition available without reload, and the slow reloading process, even with speed loaders, when compared to insertion of a spare magazine.

I do not mean to sound negative, but you did ask for opinions, so I hope you will take my remarks in the spirit in which they are intended.

 

[Bumpus13]

Ain't a damn thing wrong with a revolver for home defense. Don't ever let anybody tell you different. The 686 is a fine weapon that I'd recommend for just about anyone. I've got both bottom stuffers and wheel guns, and I enjoy shooting/carrying each depending on how the mood strikes me.

Capacity is nice, but it's accuracy that matters.

Find out what YOU shoot best, and go with that. Everything else is just background noise.

 

[otis24]

Thanks.

1. About round capacity, I'm in Commiefornia, so my G17 is limited to 10 round mags. I'm thinking that 7 rounds of .38/.357 in the #686 are better than 10+1 rounds of 9 mm.

3 and 4. If I'm going to shoot with .38 SPL ammo, why don't I just buy a .38 SPL revolver at a lower price than the 686?

6. What is a "loading platform?"

I always thought that the .38 Special was equal to or superior to the 9mm. But a simple Google search shows that the 9mm is ballisticly superior to the .38 Special.

 

[Univibe]

I always thought that the .38 Special was equal to or superior to the 9mm. But a simple Google search shows that the 9mm is ballisticly superior to the .38 Special.

Both will put a .356 inch hole all the way through the bad guy. So they're the same.

 

[Univibe]

Ain't a damn thing wrong with a revolver for home defense. Don't ever let anybody tell you different. The 686 is a fine weapon that I'd recommend for just about anyone. I've got both bottom stuffers and wheel guns, and I enjoy shooting/carrying each depending on how the mood strikes me.

Capacity is nice, but it's accuracy that matters.

Find out what YOU shoot best, and go with that. Everything else is just background noise.

Yes and no. Revolvers are fine for home defense, as long as you don't need more than six rounds.

This is overlooked by so many shooters -- all the talent, training, practice and skill in the world cannot substitute for ammunition when ammunition is what you need.

 

[RevolverJim]

Don't bet your life that only one or two "invaders" will be present.

 

[otis24]

Both will put a .356 inch hole all the way through the bad guy. So they're the same.

Yes, but the .355 9mm cartridge is a shorter round that generates more feet per second.

 

[DGNY]

As an owner of "several" semis, I still stick with a few six-round 38 and 357 Smiths, stashed strategically in home. No racking of slides, no safeties, no wondering about mags, or which "condition" (no kids BTW) .... just pure performance if needed. 12 Ga not far....

My ears ring all the time anyway. YMMV.

Wishing the OP all the best.

 

[Sistema1927]

Not much more to add, except for this:

I cut my teeth on double action revolvers when I started shooting many years ago as a young pup. IMHO, being able to master the DA revolver trigger goes a long way towards making one able to shoot other action types well.

 

[JDBoardman]

For all of the proselytizing about the extra rounds in the G17 over a 636, it is HITS that count, not rounds in the gun. The answer to the question is to practice, practice, practice! Too many people assume that having more rounds is a good thing... only if you intend to miss a lot.

 

[Univibe]

For all of the proselytizing about the extra rounds in the G17 over a 636, it is HITS that count, not rounds in the gun. The answer to the question is to practice, practice, practice! Too many people assume that having more rounds is a good thing... only if you intend to miss a lot.

Not really. You can't always predict or control how much ammo you will need. You can be as good wityh G17 or M&P9 as with 686, at least.
So more rounds on tap = more hits. And as I pointed up earlier, all the practice in the world won't substitute for ammunition.

 

[riverrat38]

The 686 would make a fine "New York reload" for the Glock.
Especially if the Glock malfunctions. Gun diversity! I like to have a backup, and that would be a good combination. Could have magnums in the revolver, incase the 9mm don't get it done. Body armor?

73,
Rick

 

[giants1]

Thanks...

I have learned after 50 years that it is pointless to try and talk someone out of their choice of gun for a particular purpose. I typically find that when people ask about a particular gun, they are looking for all the reasons they should buy that gun, and none of the reasons why they should not.

So, I will not try to talk to you out of your decision to use a revolver for self-defense instead of sticking with your Glock 17.

That said, if you are stuck on the 686, I would try to find one of the "mountain revolvers" rather than the standard heavy barrel version.

Better yet is the factory new model 19 or 66, both of which have solved the problem of the 6 o'clock crack in the barrel shank, which is the reason the L frame 586 and 686, and the fixed sight versions, the 581 and 681, were invented in the first place. Unless you are going to shoot a continuous diet of magnums, which you can now do with the 19 or 66, I find the 686 too heavy. If you intend to use 38 special, I can see no reason why you should not just simply get the classic model 10 or 67.

Either way, you are handicapping yourself with a heavy double action trigger, 1/3 the amount of ammunition available without reload, and the slow reloading process, even with speed loaders, when compared to insertion of a spare magazine.

I do not mean to sound negative, but you did ask for opinions, so I hope you will take my remarks in the spirit in which they are intended.

Based upon the feedback, my comfort level and experience with the Glock 17, I'm leaning toward sticking with the Glock 17 short-term and long-term.

At the range last week, I got to borrow and shoot 6 rounds from a S&W .357 with 38 SPL ammo. I didn't think to get further details on the gun and ammo, but I'm pretty sure it was a 4" barrel and maybe a 686 (or K-frame). It felt comfortable, I enjoyed shooting it (honestly, the Glock isn't fun for me to shoot), and I liked the .357 revolver/.38 ammo combo's mild recoil (similar to my Glock 17).

I'm not stuck on a 686, but am still curious about it and know I have a lot to learn with that manual of arms before I would consider putting it into home defense service. You implied that the "Mountain Revolvers" are better than the 686 due to weight difference. If so, are there any other advantages?

There's still a supply shortage as to model variety and numbers of revolver, some selling out the same day that they show up as for sale on-line. The S&W .38SPLs at my LGS are priced at only a slight discount (of $100 or so) to the .357, so that's why I thought that a .357, especially the 686 would be a good deal and give me the option to shoot both calibers.

 

[Darkenfast]

Based upon the feedback, my comfort level and experience with the Glock 17, I'm leaning toward sticking with the Glock 17 short-term and long-term.

At the range last week, I got to borrow and shoot 6 rounds from a S&W .357 with 38 SPL ammo. I didn't think to get further details on the gun and ammo, but I'm pretty sure it was a 4" barrel and maybe a 686 (or K-frame). It felt comfortable, I enjoyed shooting it (honestly, the Glock isn't fun for me to shoot), and I liked the .357 revolver/.38 ammo combo's mild recoil (similar to my Glock 17).

I'm not stuck on a 686, but am still curious about it and know I have a lot to learn with that manual of arms before I would consider putting it into home defense service. You implied that the "Mountain Revolvers" are better than the 686 due to weight difference. If so, are there any other advantages?

There's still a supply shortage as to model variety and numbers of revolver, some selling out the same day that they show up as for sale on-line. The S&W .38SPLs at my LGS are priced at only a slight discount (of $100 or so) to the .357, so that's why I thought that a .357, especially the 686 would be a good deal and give me the option to shoot both calibers.

The "Mountain Revolvers" were a sub-set of S&Ws with lighter barrels. Some prefer them, but the fact is that the company sells the heavier barreled models at a higher rate. I don't think they've made any in a while. It's a personal thing, but most people seem to find that the heavier barrel of the standard L-frame is steadier on target and helps soak up apparent recoil. A four-inch (actually a 4 1/8" currently), seven-shot L-frame is an excellent choice for the one-revolver-for-anything-niche. The current examples I've seen lately have in the stores seem to be very good, the recoil-absorbing grips are very comfortable, and the gun takes a wide variety of ammunition. There are good reasons why you don't see revolvers in many police holsters any more (been years since I've seen any), but the wheelgun can still work for the individual owner who works to learn the double-action trigger stroke.

That said, I love my Glock! Mine's a cheater though, it has a six-inch barrel and slide and points like a dueling pistol!

 

[giants1]

Thanks; Massad Ayoob's "Stressfire Reload"

...A four-inch (actually a 4 1/8" currently), seven-shot L-frame is an excellent choice for the one-revolver-for-anything-niche. The current examples I've seen lately have in the stores seem to be very good, the recoil-absorbing grips are very comfortable, and the gun takes a wide variety of ammunition. There are good reasons why you don't see revolvers in many police holsters any more (been years since I've seen any), but the wheelgun can still work for the individual owner who works to learn the double-action trigger stroke.

That said, I love my Glock! Mine's a cheater though, it has a six-inch barrel and slide and points like a dueling pistol!

The only S&W .357 revolvers at the LGS are 2" and 6". I saw some Paul Harrell and hickok45 Youtube videos where they shot .357 ammo from 4" and 6" S&W .357s. Their muzzle climb was noticably lower in the 6" revolvers, though they didn't shoot in rapid succession.

I can go to the LGS and hold the 6" to check balance, but, if I get a .38/.357 revolver, I would only use it at the range and in a stationary location at home (albeit in a holster for safety sake), so to me the 6" barrel length is an advantage and the extra weight wouldn't be an issue. Never say never, but I don't anticipate doing room clearing in a burglary/home invasion scenario at my house, though I don't think that a 2" extra long barrel on a .357 would be problem if I did.

Separately, no one mentioned Massad Ayoob's stressfire reload drill* to mitigate revolvers' limited ammo capacity. It *looks* doable with practice, but he's been shooting revolvers longer than I've been alive

I would also be reluctant to slap the extractor with an open palm. Knowing my luck and in a stressful situation, I'd bend it all out of shape and be unable to reinstall the cylinder. While I've read that 2" revolvers have trouble with stuck .357 shells due to the small ejector length, I wonder if that's a problem with the 4" and 6" revolvers. Anyone have real-world experience doing this drill?

I also wonder if one hit from a .357 round would tend to be as effective a fight-stopper as #00 buckshot has a reputation for doing?

By the way, I've got my sights (pun intended) on a Glock 34, which is a 5.3" barrel. Which model of Glock do you have with a 6" barrel?

* [ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXUwI_d8JlA[/ame]

 

[Darkenfast]

My Glock is a very early Gen 1 G17L. It (and its cousin - the .40 caliber Model 24), predated the 34/35 models. A change to rules for various shooting games caused the new introduction of the Practical/Tactical line that just fit the "box" for production pistols. Glock has made short runs of the 17L over the years. If I was getting a new one, it would probably be the Gen 5 Model 34. I hear good things about them.

Your points about the six-inch barrel are quite right. My last revolver was an early 586 in that length. Advantages are: longer sight radius, less flash, less recoil, and better velocity (especially with magnums). Disadvantages are: that heavy barrel is sluggish for some, harder to holster (not a problem at the range or in home defense), and slightly easier for an attacker to grab. S&W probably sells more of the shorter versions, but there's a significant minority that prefers the longer tube. No right or wrong, just what's right for you! FYI, when the L-frame was introduced, it was called the "Distinguished Combat Magnum". This name tied into both the famous Combat Magnum (K-frame Model 19), and a particular PPC police match that was for production guns with six-inch barrels and adjustable sights. I think they were still shooting out to 60 yards at that time (might have changed to 50 by then)!

Edit to add: I gave up on (most) of the "stopping power" debate a long time ago. If I were considering inside-home defense with a revolver, I would just get whatever major brand +p .38 Special was available and call it done. Just my opinion.

 

[BAM-BAM]

For practice with your Glock "G-sight" make a miniature laser "bullet" that fits in the chamber and projects a red dot to show the hit. About $40 on Amazon.

For defense work in urban areas I prefer a +P .38 special 125gr hollow-point and a quick double tap. Rural/woodlands in Pa. a .158 gr .357 soft point