recoil/kick on 2.5 in. vs. 4 in. .357 S& W 686

[martyg]

I have a 4 inch .357 686-4. Can someone who has shot both a 4 inch and a 2.5 inch .357 S&W 686 tell me how the recoil / kick compares between the two of them when using full house .357 mag loads?

 

[ab4ka]

I don't have a 4", but I can tell you that my 2-1/2" vs. my 6" is a definite difference. The recoil on the 2-1/2" isn't bad at all, but it's not as much of a pussycat as the longer barrelled one. The L frame gun is heavy and that works wonders agains the recoil. To be honest I like shooting the shorter one more than I do the longer one.

 

[bamabiker]

You'll know you're shooting magnums but it's not that bad with the L frame guns. I like shooting my M686 snubbie. MHO.

 

[hudsonvalley]

You'll know you're shooting magnums but it's not that bad with the L frame guns. I like shooting my M686 snubbie. MHO.

I concur...2 1/2" 686...38 specials for most of my range time...popping 8" plates at 25 yds...then, a couple of cylinders full of 357...just to keep me honest....

 

[OKFC05]

I notice two differences:
1. The longer gun is heavier, but more importantly, the added weight is out front and makes the upward torque less.
2. The muzzle blast from the short barrel increases kick perception.

 

[Sportsterguy]

I notice two differences:
1. The longer gun is heavier, but more importantly, the added weight is out front and makes the upward torque less.
2. The muzzle blast from the short barrel increases kick perception.

+1. The only S&W snub I have ever owned that was not VERY accurate was a 2.5" pre lock. Would not shoot less than a 5" group sandbagged at 25 yards. Tried many different hand loads and factory ammo. Just was not up to par with my other snubbies. Recoil was very tolerable though.

They are a great revolver but prefer the 3" barrel revolvers more as they eject even the hottest loads everytime due to their longer ejector rods.

JMO

 

[tacreload]

Marty
I have a 686-4 2-1/2" and 686-1 4".Both have the hogue rubber on them.While recoil is definitely more pronounced in the short one with magnum loads I still find find it very comfortable.Wood grips would probably change that a lot.That 4"dash 1 though is a real pleasure to shoot and I think it has a better DA trigger.

 

[fyimo]

Let's just say the felt and perceived recoil difference is noticeable. I say that in part because the snub nose has much more muzzle blast which can be perceived as recoil.

 

[Wayne M]

If you put the same grips on them the recoil will seem CLOSE to the same on both guns. With full size round to square Hogue conversion stocks on both either will be a pleasure to use. However if you use the K/L Bantam stocks or the slightly larger Hogue compacts on the snub and keep the full size grips on the 4", the recoil on the snub will seem much greater.

The 686 2 1/2" barrels are shooting machines. Mine is just as accurate as my longer barrels, just harder for me to make it work the same with that short sight radius.

 

[one eye joe]

You're right Wayne, they ARE shootin' machines. Grips make all the difference. I have Pachmayr Compacs on my 2 1/2'' and Ahrends RB to square grip smooth conversion grips on my 4'' Mountain Gun. The difference between the 2 is negligible, but muzzle blast is naturally greater out of the snubby.....

 

[Skeeziks]

GRIPS.....

 

[Casehardn]

I've owned both at one time...

Let's just say the felt and perceived recoil difference is noticeable. I say that in part because the snub nose has much more muzzle blast which can be perceived as recoil.

+1.
Not that much difference.
The 686 soaks up recoil nicely. 2-1/2 inch barrel or 4 inch.
You won't be disappointed.