S&W 686 vs. 686 Plus

L

LonesomePigeon

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2015
Messages
497
The local gun shops have some new S&W revolvers. Is there any reason, besides the extra shot, to prefer the 686 Plus seven-shot revolver over the regular 686 six-shot revolver?

I am kinda liking the six-shot a little better. There is a bit more meat between the chambers. Plus I am just used to my single actions which all have six chambers.
 
Hmmm, didn't think they still offered a 6 shot version in current production.....

If the six-shooter is actually an older, pre-lock gun, many folks consider them to have superior fit and finish. Really, thats about the only practical difference. Except for the very earliest examples, Plus models will all have the internal lock and MIM small parts- these annoy traditionalists, but have no bearing on the guns performance. Get the Plus if you plan on carrying it at all.
 
S&W still does offer both the 6 and 7 shot L frame 686 series, kind of weird but there must be a call for it.

I have had a 7-shot 686+ 4” version for about 20 years. I shoot stout loads in this gun that I would not shoot in my .357 K frames. It did have a funky crane fit early on so it did go back to S&W several years ago for a repair, but outside of this oddity it has been a great gun.

B1A79FF3-CA96-4BCD-883D-EC146CA6ED59.jpeg 5E4C4CD8-C75E-4520-B9BD-6960AC25C2BF.jpeg

Here is something to think about since you mentioned cylinder wall thickness: the thinnest portion of a S&W 6-shot revolver cylinder is the bolt stop notch. It is cut right over the middle of the chambers on these guns, making for a much thinner spot in the chamber wall than it appears.

On the odd numbered cylinders (5, 7 or 9 shot) the notches are cut between the cylinders. So, there may be more meat between the 6-chambers of the 686, but the weakest part of the S&W 6-shot cylinder is still that notch cut in the thinnest part of the cylinder wall. :) Still, the 686 is a tough gun. :thumbup:

Rapid fire DA, the 7-shot 686+ trigger pull seems a little bit faster than the 6-shot guns, I guess it is moving the cylinder a bit less with each DA trigger pull. Plus, adding around 16% more ammo carried in the same sized package (7 vs 6) is not a bad thing. ;)

Both are good guns. Personally I like the +, but if you want a touch of six shooter nostalgia the 6-shot 686 will do you right. :thumbup:

Stay safe.
 
Riomouse911 said:
S&W still does offer both the 6 and 7 shot L frame 686 series, kind of weird but there must be a call for it.

I have had a 7-shot 686+ 4” version for about 20 years. I shoot stout loads in this gun that I would not shoot in my .357 K frames. It did have a funky crane fit early on so it did go back to S&W several years ago for a repair, but outside of this oddity it has been a great gun.

View attachment 1142363 View attachment 1142364

Here is something to think about since you mentioned cylinder wall thickness: the thinnest portion of a S&W 6-shot revolver cylinder is the bolt stop notch. It is cut right over the middle of the chambers on these guns, making for a much thinner spot in the chamber wall than it appears.

On the odd numbered cylinders (5, 7 or 9 shot) the notches are cut between the cylinders. So, there may be more meat between the 6-chambers of the 686, but the weakest part of the S&W 6-shot cylinder is still that notch cut in the thinnest part of the cylinder wall. :) Still, the 686 is a tough gun. :thumbup:

Rapid fire DA, the 7-shot 686+ trigger pull seems a little bit faster than the 6-shot guns, I guess it is moving the cylinder a bit less with each DA trigger pull. Plus, adding around 16% more ammo carried in the same sized package (7 vs 6) is not a bad thing. ;)

Both are good guns. Personally I like the +, but if you want a touch of six shooter nostalgia the 6-shot 686 will do you right. :thumbup:

Stay safe.
Click to expand...
I was gunna say crane/frame fit seems to be the most common complaint with the Plus, Ive seen it several times myself.
 
Riomouse911 said:
Rapid fire DA, the 7-shot 686+ trigger pull seems a little bit faster than the 6-shot guns, I guess it is moving the cylinder a bit less with each DA trigger pull. Plus, adding around 16% more ammo carried in the same sized package (7 vs 6) is not a bad thing.
Click to expand...

Too, as you explained, the Plus is theoretically "stronger", having more meat in the cylinder where it needs it most but most would concede there's not much difference in strength between the two practically speaking. That said, if the revolver is intended for self-defense, that extra shot is extra insurance worth paying extra money for if need be. In terms of da trigger pulls, my Plus is every bit as good or better than my buddy's 686 six-shooter. And when it comes to needing the revolver for self-defense, if the decision comes down to buying a 686 Plus with the "lock", vs a "pre-lock" 686, I'd get the Plus (I maybe have the best of both worlds in that my Plus is a pre-lock variant).
 
LonesomePigeon said:
The local gun shops have some new S&W revolvers. Is there any reason, besides the extra shot, to prefer the 686 Plus seven-shot revolver over the regular 686 six-shot revolver?

I am kinda liking the six-shot a little better. There is a bit more meat between the chambers. Plus I am just used to my single actions which all have six chambers.
Click to expand...

The odd number of chambers moves the bolt stop off the chamber.
 
Speed loaders might be of importance to some.

HKS with the twist knob design offers six and seven
round models. But Safariland, which many prefer
because it is a bit faster to use, offers only a
six shot model IIRC.

Note, the 686 is an L frame and Ruger duplicates
it with its GP100 models in six and seven shot
models. So speed loaders are the same. (The
Colt Python, old and new, falls into this frame
size as well.)

Moon clips on a limited number of models might
also be a factor but I don't think that applies here.
 
Last edited:
Ive had both, and still have a 2.5" Plus. Other than constantly finding loaded rounds on the ground with my empty brass, I never really saw much of a difference. Apparently, my brain is still hardwired to dump them at 6, hence the live rounds with the empties.

As was mentioned, the trigger timing does seem to be a tad shorter/quicker with the Plus.

I fond the 7 round speed loaders are a tad slower/more fiddly too with the Plus and the HKS loader. It would be nice and better if Safariland had the Comp loaders for them.

If they are still coming with the rubber grips that cover the backstrap, youll probably want to ditch them for something like the Hogues that dont. S&W really screwed the pooch with their version. The Hogues are much more comfortable to shoot with, and they put your trigger finger in the right place for DA shooting.
 
Assuming they are made around the same time (both new, or both similar vintage used) to control for other variables, there is no reason other than personal preference to pick one over the other.

As has already been mentioned, one might assume that the 6-shooter may theoretically be a little stronger, but the way they are made, it is the other way around. Still, this is a very strong revolver that is more than capable of shooting the round it is designed around. Either will likely outlive you, your kids, their kids, etc.

Tradition is probably the biggest reason to pick the 6 shot version over the 7 shot version. Some people just don't like the idea of anything but 6 rounds in their revolvers. I get it. I sometimes choose a revolver for carry even though today's autos are every bit as reliable as a revolver, and you can get 15 rounds of 9mm in a gun the size and weight of a 3" J-frame S&W or D-frame Colt. The main reason is tradition, and enjoying that nod to the past.

Personally, I would get the 7 round version. I like revolvers, but appreciate greater capacity. I carry my Colt King Cobra (new model) and Taurus 856 more often than my Taurus 85CH, and until recently I carried the 856 more than my S&W 442. I would love a 7 shot 3" 686+ for occasional carry. I'd like an 8 shot N-frame for home defense, but with the price of the N-frames, I would push the 3" 686 into that role as well after I got it (maybe later this year).
 
I had a Plus. Wrong answer. It wasn't good for anything, USPSA was going to 8 shooters and IDPA was sticking with 6.
An automatic holds more and weighs less to carry.
So I got S&W to put in a six shot cylinder and I use it for IDPA Revolver.
 
I have a 6'', 4" and 3'' 686 and a 5" 686+. Don't notice much of a difference between them. It did take a while to get used to 7 shots at the range as compared to 6, but no different than a 7 round mag and a 8 round mag in my 1911s. Bought all of them new and none have been back to the Mother Ship for any issues. The 6" probably has 5,000 rounds thru her.
 
Sporting use, versatility, and good speedloader options were major issues for me, so personally, I never have considered, will consider, or had/have use for a 7-shot revolver. If I wanted the extra capacity, I'd for for a moonclipped-fed 8-shot N-frame.
 
I’ve never wanted an L frame until I shot my buddy’s 686+ 4 inch. Wow What a shooter! And then seeing an older pre lock six shot for sale on a local forum. Cosmetically I want THAT gun. Someday I’ll get one— as pretty as a Python Imho
 

Attachments

  • E9E6CDFC-232E-4B56-8DD2-B5996B27C69D.jpeg
    E9E6CDFC-232E-4B56-8DD2-B5996B27C69D.jpeg
    55.8 KB · Views: 21
  • D3996DC5-B009-4D8D-8AF3-E3472F58F6B1.jpeg
    D3996DC5-B009-4D8D-8AF3-E3472F58F6B1.jpeg
    56.3 KB · Views: 21
That is interesting about the location of the bolt notch. All the comments are helpful. One of the stores does have a used pre-lock 686 but I ruled it out because it seemed a bit loose compared to the new ones. There is also a post-war 38/44 Outdoorsman, now that is a temptation but it's also double the cost.
 
Somebody will flame me for saying this, but the bolt notch on the chamber center does not make the outer wall the weak link. The chamber is not a true cylinder and the stresses are not intuitive. The web between chambers is the weak link. Forensic postmortem on blown cylinders almost always shows the failure started in the web. I've seen several blow ups, all of which had the outer wall still intact. If you consult Hatcher, he relates while visiting the Colt works, being shown a cylinder with a slot cut all the way through the outer wall front to rear and the revolver then fired without letting go. I once had an article with pictures of a similar experiment at S&W. Its an easy matter to design a six shooter with offset bolt notches, ala Colt and Dan Wesson, but you don't see S&W et al doing it.
As for a 6 shot vs 7 shot 686, neither one is going to fail with any load this side of insanity.
 
I grew up when revolvers had five or six chambers. With a few high capacity 22 RF revolvers I have, I'm slowly adjusting my muscle memory for the higher capacity revolvers.

I have a number of 6 shot 586/686 revolvers but I might get a 686+ if I was in the market today.
 
Having looked at almost a dozen new and lightly used 686s (6 and 7 shot) last year, looking for just the right one, I can tell you quality control isn't what it once was.

I ended up with a 7 shot, because it had the best fit/finish and timing I could find. If I'd found a better 6 shot, I'd have bought that instead.
 
MrBorland said:
Sporting use, versatility, and good speedloader options were major issues for me, so personally, I never have considered, will consider, or had/have use for a 7-shot revolver. If I wanted the extra capacity, I'd for for a moonclipped-fed 8-shot N-frame.
Click to expand...

^^^ +1 on that part about no decent speedloaders for the + model. I had a 3" one and loved it. One of only 2 issues I had with it was that.
Really wanted the COMP II speedloaders for it.
The other issue was that once I fell in love with it, I wanted a matched set of them. Just a thing. I've always wanted a matched pair of... something.
Another could not be found anywhere. Well, other than paying a premium on Gunbroker...
I sold it once I found a set of the 6 shooter variety, although these have 4" barrels. These were from a father / son team. The son had reworked them inside with different springs and such. They're much smoother than my old one, so I'm quite happy.

HuBseaE.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Sergei Mosin
  • Locked
686 vs 686 Plus
2 3
Replies
58
Views
18K
Zaydok Allen
Zaydok Allen
D
  • Locked
Holster for 686 Plus
Replies
5
Views
2K
WC145
WC145
R
  • Locked
Six round vs. Seven round S&W 686
Replies
12
Views
1K
Jim March
J
R
  • Locked
S&W 686
Replies
7
Views
732
Steve F
S
TheFrontRange
  • Locked
S&W Model 686 - 7 shots vs. 6
Replies
20
Views
2K
DBR
D
Back
Top