Anyone here have a 586/686 and a 629 (.44 magnum)? What’s the recoil difference between the .357 and .44?
In the mid-Eighties, I owned both a 686 and a 629, both 4”. Weight was similar, within an ounce or two, if I recall correctly The recoil is VERY much different. Not only is the .44 a very-noticeably more-powerful cartridge, on paper, but the larger frame of 629 means that the barrel is mounted higher, in relation to the gripping area, so the “bore axis” is higher above the hand, which means there is more leverage, to increase muzzle flip. I had the additional problem of my index finger being just a but too short to properly reach the face of the trigger of the larger weapon, in DA mode, unless I shifted my hand a bit, around the right side of the weapon, to get more finger on the trigger, but that meant my thumb received MUCH more of a hit, from the recoil. A shooter with a longer trigger finger would be able to hold the 629 properly, and offer a more-direct, apples-to-apples comparison.
I believe that much of the arthritis in my left thumb, hand, and wrist, that started bothering me in the Nineties, and got much worse in 2011, by age fifty, was due to my shooting .44 and .41 Magnums, during the Eighties, using N-Frame revolvers, with my K-/L-Frame-sized hands. I learned DA shooting with the 686, and the similar, but fixed-sight Model 581, in late 1983 and early 1984, while attending a police academy. This was when S&W was owned by Bangor Punta, a sad era for S&W quality control. My 686 had a gritty trigger action. The 581 and 629 were much better.
Well, anyway, I was dumb enough, at the time*, to buy into the idea that “stopping power” meant that the bore had to start with “four,” so carried the 629 during my first year of sworn service, and was masochistic enough to practice, diligently. I switched to a 9mm duty/carry pistol, for a few months, to let my hand heal, then returned to using a big bore, a .41 Magnum Model 58, for five years. By 1990, I had a better understanding of the importance of holding a handgun properly in line with the forearm bones. I retired my Model 58, and started three years of using .45 duty/carry auto-pistols that fit my hands. I returned to using revolvers for duty and personal carry, in 1993. This time, it was a 4” GP100, with the fully-lugged barrel, and adjustable sights. (Each of the .45 autos had presented me with problems.)
On a young street cop’s salary, I could not afford to accumulate many handguns, unless I sold or traded, so the 686 and 581 went away, first, in the mid-Eighties, soon followed by the 629. A Model 657, a stainless steel .41 Mag, and. Ruger Redhawk, also .41 Mag, came and went, by 1990. I kept the one Model 58, for sentimental reasons, as it served as my duty revolver during very interesting times. I do not really miss the 686, with its rough action, and barrel that was threaded so that the front sight leaned, at an angle, but I would pay a thousand-plus dollars to have that same smooth Model 581 back in my hands, assuming it has not been abused. (They are quite collectible, so, asking prices are high.)
Which is better; 686 or GP100? Well, a properly-built 686 is wonderful. My first 686 was not a shining example of S&W quality control, but it was ordered, sight unseen, during the police academy, from an LE distributor, to be my duty sixgun. I have very nearly bought a properly-selected “replacement” 686, or a blued Model 586, several times. A good sample of GP100 is also a thing of beauty, and, the original-pattern factory grip is an absolutely perfect fit, in my hand, whereas I have to use an aftermarket grip on S&W revolvers, an added expense, to get a best fit.
*I later learned to appreciate that .357 Magnum is quite effective for human adversaries.
