I LOVE my 686 snub!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Min

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
915
Location
Houston, TX
I LOVE my 686 snub! (Pics added)

My latest buy is a SW 686 with a 2.5" barrel. I love the looks of this gun! It came with the Hogue rubber grips which I'm not a big fan of, but I plan to change it out with nice aftermarket wood grips (of which there are plenty).

It is heavy, though. But damn, I love it!
 
Last edited:
I like mine, too. :)

It came with the Hogue rubber grips which I'm not a big fan of, but I plan to change it out with nice aftermarket wood grips (of which there are plenty).
Here's what it'll look like with hardwood Hogues:
attachment.php
 
Tamara, that looks awesome. Improves the gun's looks by 100%!

However, I am looking for wood grips with no finger grooves. Anyone have recommendations?
 
Agreed on the pickagrip.com, for a look at fancy Ahrends wood :) I am no great fan of finger grooves either, but I put a set of his FG Tacticals on my short 686 and I'm beginning to change my mind. Besides looking good, they add just a smidge more control, for heavy loads, and, once you're used to them, thay are an aid for a more positive draw. GOOD stuff from Ahrends!
 
I've always been interested in getting the snubbie version of the 686 with wood grips too -- but how does it feel to fire it? I'd use .38 ammo through mine but still -- is the recoil a killer with the wooden grips?
 
I load a 1250 fps-rated, 125 gr. load for range use in my J frames. 40 to 50 rounds of this in a J frame leaves my shooting hand numb for as long as an hour afterward (I've had some nerve damage, and they are recoil sensitive, up to a point). With the Ahrends FG Tacticals, the 686 doesn't leave me in this shape after 100 rds. of the hot 1450 fps ammo. Not a comparison of how the two sizes of snubs shoot, but of the aftermath. The weight of the 686 makes it more comfortable than my 66, to a noticeable degree. That makes the extra weight much more comfortable for EDC.
 
Okay, now y'all have me curious. I've been thinking about getting a snubbie for a while. I have a 4" 686+. I really really like it. What inquiring minds what to know is, the 686 is so god-awful heavy so why choose it for a snubby? I mean, I'm sure it feels great to shoot but I thought the point of a snubby was concealment and the ability to lug it around all day. If the point is how comfortable it is to shoot, why didn't you get a longer barrel?
 
I don't care about the weight or concealing it. I plan to get a Ruger GP 100 3" if I want to go that route. I have the 686 4" and know what a great gun it is which is why I'd like to get the snubbie version....for carry or the home. I'm just curious if wooden grips would be a killer on the hands to use or if it's not an issue because of the weight of the gun.
 
At the risk of sounding overly Budhist, concealed carry is an attempt to achieve balance. As a group, we can't even seem to agree on the the major factors, let alone how they should apply, and no individual would apply them in the same order, anyhoo :p
My criteria are Concealment, Access and Comfort. Concealment is paramount. Access is the ability to get to it, and get it out in time, whatever, whenever. Comfort is the last consideration, but without it, you might choose to leave it at home on "that day". Comfort is also very mental. The higher your confidence in a given gun, the more forgiving you will tend to be of pokes from a longer barrel or bunions on your hip from a few extra ounces (or a lot of them). I have little confidence in handguns as stoppers, anyway. I remember wiry little guys who took multiple hits from a .30 carbine, and a couple from a Garand, who didn't go down until they took a head shot. The 686 snub is capable of delivering six rounds of very destructive ammo with good control. A 4" would not be significantly better. I wouldn't carry one of the less-than-a-pound snubs unless it was absoluly the only thing available to me. I carry a back-up, even with N frame snubs in which I have more confidence than the 686. That is my "balance". Yours will certainly vary, but we're just people. What else could you expect.

MG, as I said, my hands are recoil-sensitive. Ahrends are thinner grips than standard S&W wood (the older ones). Still, to me, the 686 is NOT a killer in the recoil department. I have learned over the years that a lot depends on how you position the grip in your hand, and whether you lock your wrist (as with a 1911) or leave just a bit of "pivot" in your wrist and elbow. Rapid fire has to be locked and rigid all the way to your shoulder, and everything tires faster and aches more afterward. Causal, slow fire plinking, with a good hand grip, slightly relaxed wrist, and relaxed elbows will keep you going for a full day at the range. Before the nerve damage, I had no problems with a range day that went 300-500 rounds through an assortment of .357s.
 
Don't you guys just love those 2 1/2 inch barrels?

Here is a model 19 in nickel.

Just a thought.

Bob
 
It's a SIGN!!!!

My gun shop calls up yesterday and tells me that there's a new 686 w/2.5 inch barrel in stock and today--there's THIS thread! It's a sign, I tell ya'!

KR
 
Min...

It looks like the rear sight extends plumb over the hammer. Is it just the photo or did you adjust it that way?
Just curious. This is one neat revolver!<slobber/drool> 'scuse me.

KR
 
Mastrogiacomo,

I'd use .38 ammo through mine but still -- is the recoil a killer with the wooden grips?

I'm just curious if wooden grips would be a killer on the hands to use or if it's not an issue because of the weight of the gun.

Recoil is a very subjective thing.

First: Recoil is not going to be moderated much, if at all, by rubber Hogue Monogrips, as they leave the hard metal backstrap exposed to smack you in the palm.

Second: I don't find recoil in a 2.5" L-frame to be prohibitive in any .357 Magnum loading with either wood or rubber grips, but then I don't find recoil in an Airweight J-frame with +P loads to be too terrible either. Recoil perception differs greatly from person to person...
 
My 686 no dash snubby from the '80s is on my short list of guns that I won't sell. Ever.
Matter of fact, I haven't worked up the courage to send it away for the 'fix' because it works so well now, and has the nicest DA pull of any of my smiths. I think it's a Lew Horton so I guess I can't replace it for what I bought it for.
I guess I believe that 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it.'
 
Hey, it weighs 35 ounces....

How bad could the recoil be?

What's the general opinion of the "Plus"? One more round~What do you think? You can still get the 2.5 inch barrel. Might be nice. Any cautions?

Min--"It's an aftermarket sight". Me--"DUH". Sorry, sometimes my ignorance just hangs out all OVER the place.:rolleyes:

KR
 
I can only speak of the plus. I have the 4" with seven shots. I like having an extra round myself and think the gun fires just fine. I'd like to actually pick up a snubbie in both the 6 and 7 shot if I have the funds....for now though, I want to pick up one snubbie and get a Ruger 3" in blue.
 
I think the appeal of the seventh-round in the "Plus" models depends on how much experience one has with the S&W six-shot medium-frames. First, I have all of the accessories for the six-shot medium frames, speed loaders, holsters, etc.

Second, muscle memory seems to be affected by the "Plus" models. For some reason, I cannot get used to the feel of the "Plus" action, but I have no problem with the regular action. Of course, I have almost thirty yeard of experience with the six-shot medium frames, and less than two years with the "Plus" models. The trigger also seems to be harder to "stage" with the "Plus" models.

Has anyone else noticed a difference in how the "Plus" action feels or shoots?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top