Smith and Wesson Model 27 or 686?

C

Chris37

Inactive
Hi all,

A few weeks ago I posted a thread in the semi-auto forum inquiring about buying my first handgun. I ended up buying a Beretta M9 and am VERY pleased with it.

However now that I've made my first purchase, I'm starting to look forward to my second:D. This could be a downhill slide but I think I'll enjoy the ride.

Anyway as my second gun, I'm really thinking a revolver would make a great choice. I'm a bit recoil-sensitive due to a hand injury from a car accident many years ago and I mentioned that in my first thread: http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=493995 .

The M9 works great; a large, heavy semi-automatic with a relatively low recoil 9mm round is absolutely perfect for me. Now I'd like this same combo in a revolver.

I really like the look of the Model 27 with a 6 1/2 inch barrel but would also look into the S&W 686 with a 6 inch barrel as well. Any advice on either model? Is the recoil about the same between the two?

I'd probably shoot .38 special ammo due to the recoil of a full .357 round. Is a .38 special round shot in a S&W Model 27 or 686 comparable to the felt recoil of my M9 shooting 9mm?

I've heard .38 special is a fairly low-recoil round in its own right so by shooting it out of a large, heavy revolver would the recoil be quite easy to control?

I personally find the M9 is like shooting .22lr, very easy to handle with a little bit of muzzle flip.

Thank you in advance!
 
Cris37:

I'm not sure of the weights but the 27 is a larger revolver than the 686. You can't go wrong with either. The 686 has the K frame grip so it's small than the 27. However, I find that the grip of the 27 more confrontable. Both guns will last several life times.

Semper Fi.

Gunnery Sergeant
Clifford L. Hughes
USMC Retired
 
Having owned both, I feel I'm qualified to answer your questions.:D I first owned a 686-5, that's the first model change that has frame-mounted firing pin. Mine was the 6" variety. Beautiful gun. It handled factory 357 rounds with ease, the weight of it absorbed most of the felt recoil. Shooting 38's was barely noticeable. I sold it due to it giving me light primer strikes, something I attributed to the frame-mounted firing pin.
Next I bought the model 27-2, 5" variety.
524169_2978940931979_1733946156_n.jpg

IMO, there IS no other 357mag that compares to a model 27...no, not even a colt. It being an N-frame, there is some substantial weight to it. It handles hot reloads like the 686 handles 38's, other than the loudness, the felt recoil is minimal.
Both are excellent choices, but the 27 is in a class by itself and if you have the choice, it's a no-brainer.
 
I own both and would take a model 27 over a 686, but I don't think there is much difference in felt recoil. 357s are tough if you are recoil sensitive, but 38s are no problem at all. And, you can always buy cowboy loads (or load your own) that have almost no recoil at all.

Having said that, for a shooter only, I'd look at getting a model 28--basically the less polished version of the model 27. They average $100 cheaper in my experience, and are the same gun except for cosmetics. I am actually selling my model 27 right now because I view it as a collectors piece (and I'm not a collector), while my $340 model 28 will be with me the rest of my life.
 
When I got into shooting in the late 70s, a good .357 revolver was a must-have. What was true then is true now. A .357 wheelgun (preferably a DA with a four to six inch tube and adjustable sights) is accurate, durable, plenty powerful for most uses (I'll let the Alaska fly fishermen out of this discussion) and very versatile.

The K frames were very popular "back in the day" but there were always stories about long term durability, especially with hot .357 loads pushing 125 grain bullets. Probably more talk than substance of course.

When I was shopping for my first .357 my choice in the Smith was between a Model 19 and a Model 28. "Feel" is by it nature a subjective thing but to me the N frame gun felt too large. The K frame was about right but perhaps a little on the light side. (I solved that dilemma by purchasing a Ruger Security Six which has a grip frame similar to the K but a slightly larger cylinder). Later S&W brought out the L frames which seemed "just right"; I bought one of the no-dash 686s and it's a great gun.

Handle both and see what works for you. No question that the Model 27 is a very classy gun. I've always liked the five inch version in particular. If I were looking at an N frame in .357 I'd probably spring for one of the eight shot models. If you are going to carry that huge cylinder around, make the most of it!
 
Can't believe there is even a question. The Model 27 is considered one of the finest revolvers made by S&W. 686s are a dime a dozen. And while they are good guns, there's really nothing special about them. The 27s will always be a favorite. If the heftier frame of the 27 feels good, definitely go with that over the 686.
 
I like heavy guns, the heavier the better. Part of that has to do with recoil and part of that is that I find it's easier to keep a heavy gun steady.

That being said a long barrel N frame might be too heavy for some folks. If you do intend to only shoot .38s then the 686 should absorb all the recoil you need.
 
I tend to disagree with most folks, as I believe the Model 586 to be the ultimate .357 DA revovler. Here is my 6" 586:

101_0014.jpg


Two reasons for my choice: The K-Framed size grip fits my hand better and is more controlable for rapid double action fire, and its longer cylinder allows me to use my heavy bullet handloads without seating over the fron shoulder.

I have two of these, this and a 4" and have never pined for anything else in a double action .357 Magnum, including the vaunted Python.

Bob Wright
 
From S&W's website, a M27 with a 6 1/2" barrel weighs 48.5oz while a 686 with a 6" barrel weighs 44.9oz, so with the same ammo the M27 will likely recoil a tad less due to its extra weight though the difference probably won't be large.

Also, you must realize that due to the difference in frame dimension, you'll probably percieve the recoil differently in a N-Frame as opposed to a L-Frame. The N-Frame will probably have less felt recoil while the L-Frame will likely have less muzzle jump. The reason is the bore axis and distribution of weight. The N-Frame has a higher bore axis and lighter barrel so more of the recoil will be directed upward while the L-Frame's lower bore axis and heavier barrel will direct more of the recoil straight back into the shooter's hand.

The two guns also balance very differently due to the different barrel profiles. The 686 is much more muzzle heavy because it uses a heavy barrel with a full underlug as opposes to the tapered, half-lug barrel of the M27. In my hands, the M27 feels lighter and balances better because the center of gravity is right over the top of my hand rather than way out front. Different people have different preferences though and some prefer the more muzzle-heavy feel of the 686.

The action also has a different feel to it due to the difference in cylinder mass. The larger, heavier N-Frame cylinder has more momentum which seems to make fast double-action shooting easier, at least in my hands.

Finally, the two guns have a different gripframe that may or may not be an issue for you. The N-Frame does have a somewhat larger gripframe and longer trigger reach than the L-Frame does (the L-Frame has the same gripframe and trigger reach as the smaller K-Frame does). This is not a problem for me, but I have fairly large hands with long fingers.
 
I believe the K-frame grips and L-frame grips are the same, but the rest is different, L-frame being larger.
As for the 586 being ultimate 357 magnum over the 27....LOL! One of two reasons for this point of view. One, he never shot a 27 or two, he has small mits and the N-frame is too much for his tiny grip. An L-frame weapon handling hot magnum rounds better than an N-frame is laughable. That's like saying my Ford Taurus rides much smoother than a Cadillac Sedan DeVille.
 
The 686 is a very good utilitarian revolver and has its own appeal. However, the 27 is a timeless classic and harkens back to the great revolvers S&W made before WWII like the Registered Magnum and Triple-Lock. A 4" 586 is probably the only L-frame I'll ever own and even that is way down on the want list.


Two different posters have referenced the 686/586 as having the K frame gripframe. I believe both are L frames. Am I missing something?
Click to expand...
While the rest of an L frame is physically larger, the grip frames are identical between L's and K's. Grips interchange.


As for the 586 being ultimate 357 magnum over the 27....LOL! One of two reasons for this point of view. One, he never shot a 27 or two, he has small mits and the N-frame is too much for his tiny grip. An L-frame weapon handling hot magnum rounds better than an N-frame is laughable.
Click to expand...
We are all entitled to our opinions. I don't know Bob personally but I can say with little doubt that he is anything but inexperienced. Actually, for fast double action work, the L-frame is better due to less cylinder mass resulting in less battering against the bolt and the hole in the frame from which it protrudes.
 
We are all entitled to our opinions. I don't know Bob personally but I can say with little doubt that he is anything but inexperienced. Actually, for fast double action work, the L-frame is better due to less cylinder mass resulting in less battering against the bolt and the hole in the frame from which it protrudes.
Click to expand...

So, you don't know him, but can say "with little doubt" he is anything but inexperienced? Heh. I never said he was inexperienced. I said he either never shot a model 27(like many many other shooters) or has small hands.
The rest of your post makes me say "HUH??" Less cylinder mass results in less battering against ....what?...the bolt? and the hole in the frame from which it protrudes??? :confused:
 
I think "fast double action shooting" is not something that will likely be done with 6" barrel lengths like the OP is considering. Moot point really as there are other more important factors to consider if the OP is wanting to do a lot of "fast double action shooting". 6" barrels tend to be used for target shooting, not speed shooting.
 
Jerry Miculek used to compete with a long model 27. There's absolutely no reason to pigeon-hole longer barrels as strictly for slow target work. Or short ones for fast work.

I'm not saying it's a big deal or important to everybody but if we're gonna discuss all the minute details, that is one of them.
 
I highly prefer the N frame Model 27 to the L frame (586) in .357 magnum. Felt recoil is less. I also like the grip options in N frames. It just looks classier. The 586 was designed to replace the Model 19 K frame due to stress on the frame. But it does use the same grips. I look at the 586/686 as the utilitarian S&W.357 kind of like a Ruger SP101. The N frame Model 27 is up there in the top 10 or 20 of S&W best models ever made. They are highly sought after. The 586 is purchased (IMO) due to price and availability and the 686 (SS version) for low finish maintenance SS. But if you have the $ get the Modle 27. You won't regret it. Also if you want to sell your 586.. good luck they are a dime a dozen. I saw one sitting in a local pawn shops for over 3 months. So you can sell it but not for profit and it may take awhile. Put a Model 27 up for sale on the S&W forum and count "in minutes" how long it takes to sell:eek:
For that reason alone I would start with the Model 27. If you don't like it you can sell it at least for what you paid for it very quickly. Then try the 586.
Mike
 
First of all, we're talking .357 Magnums here, so recoil is of little consideration. Only when you get to the smaller K- or J- frames does recoil play that much of a role.

As to fast double action shooting, here is the gun I used for that:

101_0016.jpg



The L-Frame has a somewhat lower sighting plane that the bigger N-Frame. Remember, customized K-Frame Smiths were formerly the gun of choice for PPC and similar matches, as its sighting plane was even lower than the L-Framed guns.

As to experience with the .357 Magnum DA guns, here are a few I still have:

000_10861.jpg


As to my hand size, my glove size is Medium, and the long reach to the trigger does indeed shift the gun around in my hand.

While I've never owned a Model 27, I'm not completely inexperienced with that. I've shot a good many rounds through them, a 6 1/2" and an 8 3/8" gun, also had a friend who had one of the original 8 3/4" guns from 1935 or so. Also went through a Model 28, same size as the 27.

My preference for the 586 has come through some 15,000 rounds fired.

Bob Wright
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top