Want another trail gun in .357 Magnum

[David LaPell]

I am thinking about getting another trail gun in .357 Magnum again. I don't have any big bears here in the east except for the occasional large black bear. I am down to three choices in .357. A Model 28, a Model 686 and a Model 19. Each would be 4 inches for ease of carrying. I used to pack my Model 27 all the time so the Model 28 would be no problem, but since I plan on spending lots of time out, maybe something a little lighter is in order. The only issue I have is I want something that can handle the heavier loads, not all the time, but I want it to handle my 170 grain #358429's if and when need them. The 686 I know is probably the best compromise between the two. I haven't priced any of them in a year so I am not sure which of the three is the cheapest. Money is definitely an issue.

 

[H Richard]

The 27 or the 28 for what you want to do.

 

[nawilson]

Just my 2 cents... I would go for the 686. Yes, it is the least classy of the three, but it is easier to maintain because of the stainless steel construction, and it is still in production. You can also buff out any scratches that appear on it.

 

[Ranger514]

686. Stainless because of maintenance in wet weather, along with what nawilson said.

 

[semperfi71]

I own at least two or more variations of all of S&Ws .357 Magnum offerings except the J-Frame models.

I would suggest a 3 inch M65 or M65 Ladysmith.

They will handle any safe 158 to 180 grain .357 load in moderation. Cast being better than jacketed.

They should shoot to point of aim at 25 yards with 158 grain loads. They may shoot high with your 170 grain load, but not too high.

They will carry easily in any type of holster. With round-butt grips of a good fit to your hands they will point like your finger.

I have never handled the 4 inch versions but they should also carry and handle well.

Most of my .357s get one load only and once they are sighted in they stay that way. As such fixed sight guns appeal to me if they print well because the sights will NEVER move.

If not I would go with the adjustable sighted 2 1/2 K-Frame .357s. I have a M66-1 2 1/2 inch that I load 158 grain hard-cast semi-wadcutters with Vihta Vouri N105 to a measured 1200 fps.

Thirdly a 4 inch adjustable sighted K-Frame .357.

BUT, since I like ALL S&W .357 Magnums I just carried a 3 1/2 inch M27-2 in the rough mountains of Coues deer country of New Mexico for six days. On a high ride, Tom Threepersons holster attached to my trouser belt I hardly knew it was there.

You make me realize that I have some 190 grain, hard-cast Hunter brand bullets in .357 that I have considered making into a full load .357 that should penetrate very well. And we do have black bears here that would make the load useful, although I do not worry about four legged animals in the woods.

Good luck with your choice.

 

[loc n load]

Trail gun

I own both the M28 & 686.....my trail/woods gun of 40 years has been a 28-2 with the 6" barrel.....I also own 4 incher's, but the 6" has served me well over the decades and has been with me in virtually every corner of this country....I have taken several white tail deer with the M-28...with my hunting load of 15 gr's of 2400 driving a 158 gr JHP.....I would not hesitate to shoot black bears with this load if necessary ( having taken several with a bow)....my normal "go to" load for the 357 is the 13.5 gr's of 2400 driving my cast 160 gr SWC. Either the 28 or the 686 will serve you well.....I was a devotee to the "highway patrolman" long before the L frames came on the scene....and still am.

 

[beagleye]

I would hesitate to take a 27 on the trail, I like both your other choices.

 

[geraldo]

trail gun

I would most definitely go with the model 65 with a 3 inch, great gun and easy to carry, if I had to choose only one gun in my collection that I could keep, it would be the 65.

 

[ColbyBruce]

I like the 3" heavy barrel K frames myself. This S&W 65-5 goes to the mountains with me and is worn around the house. If we go hiking I wear my S&W 1006.

 

[05CarbonDRZ]

Let me know if you want a nice 3" Model 65

 

[alwslate]

I would vote for the 28. I like the heft and balance of the 4" N frames.
The 686 would be a bit easier to maintain...if you did your hiking in
a rain forest. With proper care the 28 will still look good when you
reach the point where you no longer need it. If getting it wet worries
you just use a full flap holster.

 

[Dump1567]

I use the 386 NG for hiking. Lightweight and 7 shots. Not sure how it would handle your loads. You may want to look into a 3" 686.

 

[thebeamanater107]

I'd vote 686. Still in production so it has no antique value for one in perfect condition. I don't know if that's an issue for a model 19 though

the original point and click interface, by Smith and Wesson

 

[BAM-BAM]

Yours are all good choices... but let me suggest one of my favorite trail guns a Model 60-10 .357,..3inch, adjustable sights.... a mini 5 shot 686!

Not sure about the 170gr load.......but its an "always there" gun.

 

[SAFireman]

686+ Mountain Gun. 4" taper barrel. 7 shots of 357 goodness on a L frame.

 

[geoff40]

Not sure I'd agree that the early (at least) 686s are less classy than a 28 or 27. Those early to mid 1980s 686s are, IMO, among the top-best all around revolvers ever made. Period.

 

[Doug M.]

686+ Mountain Gun. 4" taper barrel. 7 shots of 357 goodness on a L frame.

*
I concur. This is the "A" answer, except for the fact that you state that cost is an issue. You would not want to attempt to buy mine. Since you are not going to use that heavier load much, I would not be afraid to have a K frame. A 3" has a lot of appeal except that the ones that are priced decently have fixed sights, which if you are old and decrepit like me, have real drawbacks.

 

[WPWarhawk]

686+ Mountain Gun. 4" taper barrel. 7 shots of 357 goodness on a L frame.

This would be my choice as well. Will be hard to find one though.

A four inch 66 would be my next choice.

 

[model70hunter]

I am thinking about getting another trail gun in .357 Magnum again. I don't have any big bears here in the east except for the occasional large black bear. I am down to three choices in .357. A Model 28, a Model 686 and a Model 19. Each would be 4 inches for ease of carrying. I used to pack my Model 27 all the time so the Model 28 would be no problem, but since I plan on spending lots of time out, maybe something a little lighter is in order. The only issue I have is I want something that can handle the heavier loads, not all the time, but I want it to handle my 170 grain #358429's if and when need them. The 686 I know is probably the best compromise between the two. I haven't priced any of them in a year so I am not sure which of the three is the cheapest. Money is definitely an issue.

I hear you on money being a concern. I recently retired. I will have to be very selective on future purchases.

I think you probably can find a Model 19 a couple of hundred less than a 686, Model 28's are probably higher too.

I would like to have a 686 but it would be redundant to my 19, model 27's and Model of 1950 in 357 Mag. I do enjoy shooting my N frames over the K frame. I personally carry a 27-2 in 3.5".

Hope you find a good one reasonable.

 

[Nightowl]

I have not personally loaded 170 gr or heavier bullets in .357s, but I have read from several sources that they have to be seated deeper in the case for the N frames due to the shorter cylinder. Thus limited powder space. The 686 and 19 have the longer cylinders that would allow the bullets to be seated normally. That may be a consideration.