Smith and Wesson Model 27 or 686?

Recoil is primarily a factor of weight but I don't think you'll be able to tell much difference here. Smith Wesson lists their modern six inch N-frame at 45 ounces and the six inch L-frame at 46.3 ounces, yet the frame on the N-frames are slightly bigger and heavier. The L-frame gains weight because it has a full length barrel underlug (runs the entire length of the barrel) and the N-frame does not. The underlug shrouds the revolver's ejection rod. This effects the balance of the handgun and that is a matter of personal choice. I prefer the shorter underlug.

As others have mentioned, the L-frame has a smaller grip frame which a lot of shooters prefer. I do not like the Model 27 target stocks because of the size. You can replace these with a nice, smaller set or do what I did and get some fairly inexpensive "rubbers" from Hogue or Pachmayer. With your sensitivity to recoil, I would suggest those over traditional hardwood grips.

With soft .38 specials, both of these guns should recoil considerably less than the 9mm from your Beretta.Sellier and Bellot make some 148 gr. wadcutters that are positively mild.
 
I have owned a 4" 586 (blued version of the 686), a 6" M-27 and a 5" M-27.
I liked the 586 and shot it pretty well. But when I bought and fired the 5" M-27, the 586 and the 6" M-27 were sold shortly thereafter.

The N frame Model 27 is up there in the top 10 or 20 of S&W best models ever made.
Click to expand...

I'd say the top two or three, but I might be a little biased. :)
Mine is far from perfect, so it's no collector piece. That said, it is one of my very favorite revolvers, and I'd only sell it if I found another P&R M-27 in better condition.
 
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?
Click to expand...

Any advice on either model? Is the recoil about the same between the two?
Click to expand...

Owning both I can say firing 38 Specials out of a long barrel L or N Frame is quite easy to control. The felt recoil with either revolver will be mild with most 38 ammo.

smith27and686.jpg


My 27 is a 8 3/8" but with the tapered barrel it is not as heavy as it may appear. The 686 in same barrel lengths as the 27 is actually listed as a heavier gun. I don't buy into the "felt recoil is less with the 27." With all that barrel mass hanging out there the 686 seems "mild" even with 357 Magnum loads , to me more so than the 27. Although both tame Magnum recoil quite well.

Both are extremely accurate revolvers , I can enjoy both with equal enthusiasm.
 
Thou I have no experience with the 27. I can not accurately explain how much I enjoy shooting my 686. I has replaced a Glock and a 1911 as my daily carry. I've used it varmint hunting at over forty yards can keep a tight group in defensive DA shooting as well. With a good holster like mine I've no problem wearing it all day. The .38 special is a dream to shoot and my hand loaded .357s and the most acurate and easy to shoot rounds I've put through a pistol. And, if four inches is good enough for Keith it's good enough for me.ImageUploadedByTapatalk1342754023.984673.jpgImageUploadedByTapatalk1342754110.472671.jpg
 
I personally find the M9 is like shooting .22lr, very easy to handle with a little bit of muzzle flip.
Click to expand...

Since recoil is an issue, and you like the look of the 6" 686, maybe consider a 6" 617, which is chambered in .22LR? Terrific guns, too.

26304.jpg
 
I am a crazy 22lr revolver fan, but the 617 in 6" takes what I don't like about the 686 and makes it worse. A gun (the 6" 686) that I don't think balances well at all, is still better balanced than the 6" 617. If you want a 22lr, get a model 17, 18, 4" 617, 34, 35 (good luck), or 63. Just one man's opine.
 
Between the S&W K,L and N frames it is a matter of personal preference. It may be true that the K frame will not stand up to hot loads with light bullets as well as the other two (I don't know) but it is my chose. Like the OP my hands are arthritic, I shoot mostly 38s or light 357 (cowboy loads). I find that rubber grips that cover the back strap take a lot of the sting out of heavy loads and keep my middle finger from getting rapped by the trigger guard. :)
 
Not to hijack this thread, but then it has gone on for two pages.
Re: "...I sold it due to it giving me light primer strikes, something I attributed to the frame-mounted firing pin..."
Being a compulsive fixer of things not working, I am intrigued by this statement. Frequently the mainspring strain screw will back out causing that condition. Or someone has installed an after-market mainspring that is too light. Or, someone has ground and polished the original mainspring down to produce a lighter double action pull.
In any event, light primer strikes are something that can be remedied, and would not normally require abandoning (selling) the gun. It is unlikely that the design of a frame mounted firing pin was causing the condition. Nevertheless, now, we will never know what caused it. To others who have such problems, do not panic...such things usually can be fixed without too much effort.
 
Both models are great revolvers. Both have their followings and either one will work for you. I like both the N frames and the L frames and own both. What else can be said? Have fun and let us know.
 
S&W Model 686 grip and frame size.

In a recent post a member stated that the S&W Model 686 has K-frame grips.

I own a 686 and the grips seem larger,,,
Also on the S&W website it states the 686 is an L-frame gun.

Every other piece of literature I have read says the 686 is an L-frame.

I tried swapping some K-frame grips onto my 686,,,
They did not fit.

Can someone clarify this for me?

Is there such a thing as an L-frame with K-frame grips?

Aarond

.
 
I tried swapping some K-frame grips onto my 686,,,
They did not fit.

Can someone clarify this for me?
Click to expand...

K- and L-frame grips are one and the same, but the butts have to match. Was it possible you were trying to fit round butt grips on a square butt gun?
 
Re: "...I sold it due to it giving me light primer strikes, something I attributed to the frame-mounted firing pin..."
Being a compulsive fixer of things not working, I am intrigued by this statement. Frequently the mainspring strain screw will back out causing that condition. Or someone has installed an after-market mainspring that is too light. Or, someone has ground and polished the original mainspring down to produce a lighter double action pull.
In any event, light primer strikes are something that can be remedied, and would not normally require abandoning (selling) the gun. It is unlikely that the design of a frame mounted firing pin was causing the condition. Nevertheless, now, we will never know what caused it.
Click to expand...

Since you are "intrigued", I'll give you the rundown. The light primer strikes were infrequent, perhaps one in every 40 or 50 rnds. Different manufacturers, factory, reloads...didn't matter. I actually did attempt to have it resolved and sent it back to S&W. They had it for about 3 weeks and sent it back without charge, unfortunately it still did same thing without change. This is when I gave up on it and sold it. As for any changes made to the gun, I bought it used and could not say for sure whether someone did or did not modify it before me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd like to clear up any misunderstanding concerning my opinions/experience with the Models 27 and 586.

I sure didn't mean to imply the Model 27 is a clunker. It is a fine DA revolver, equal to, in quality and design, the Model 24,25,29, and 57, just to name a few, all N-Framed revolvers.

My personal opinion is that the Model 27 is a mite oversized for the .357 cartridge, the L-Frame more suited to that cartridge. What my comments, apparently misconstrued, meant about about handling my heavy loaded .357s was that the Model 27's cylinder was too short to handle my loads. At the time, I was loading the 173 gr. SWC in heavy loads of #2400 powder. I was seating these bullets in the crimping groove for my Ruger Blackhawk, which handled this overall length very well. When I loaded these into a Model 27 and closed the cylinder, I noticd the bullet noses protruding from the face of the cylinder, considerable. The same was true when we loaded them into a Colt Python. These handloads would only work in my Ruger and my son-in-law's Model 19. (Yes, we shot these out of the Model 19, which is still going strong as far as I know.

The Model 27s that I have shot all had wide target triggers and target stocks, which I have said are too big for me to handle effectively in double action shooting.

I did have a Model 625 in .45 ACP with a smooth combat trigger and combat stocks, an N-Framed revovler, which I shot fairly well in rapid double action fire. But the lower sighting plane of the L-Frame made recovery between shots faster for me. I realize there are others who handle N-Framed guns much better than I. Again, these my observations.

As to stocks for the 586, this is my Model 586, the stocks were originally on a Model 17 .22 LR, a K-framed revovler:

101_0014.jpg


I apologize if my statemnents set off ill feelings.

Bob Wright
 
Jerry Miculek used to compete with a long model 27.
Click to expand...

JM actually set his recent world speed records with S&W model 64(38spl), and a S&W model 627 in the records before that, probably NOT magnum rounds, so this "fast dbl action work" referred to is not best suited for 357magnum, as the recoil and muzzle rise is substantially more than it would be for 38spl, just ask JM.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I tried swapping some K-frame grips onto my 686,,,
They did not fit.

Can someone clarify this for me?

Is there such a thing as an L-frame with K-frame grips?
Click to expand...

What model K-Frame, specifically, were the grips from? The reason I ask is because some K-Frames have different grip dimensions than others. Probably the most notable example of this is probably the Model 12 as those prior to the -4 engineering change had narrower gripframes than the steel K-Frames did.
 
:D
Since you are "intrigued", I'll give you the rundown. The light primer strikes were infrequent, perhaps one in every 40 or 50 rnds. Different manufacturers, factory, reloads...didn't matter. I actually did attempt to have it resolved and sent it back to S&W. They had it for about 3 weeks and sent it back without charge, unfortunately it still did same thing without change. This is when I gave up on it and sold it. As for any changes made to the gun, I bought it used and could not say for sure whether someone did or did not modify it before me.
Click to expand...
I would have loved to have had the oportunity to find and fix that problem. The K,L,N revolvers have few parts and fewer still that could cause that problem. I have purchased firearms (that I knew had issues) before that were sold because someone else (gunsmiths) tried and failed to fix them. The most expensive part, the frame itself, is very unlikely to have been the problem. The problem almost certainly was one or more of the replaceable small parts.
Nevertheless, not all people are mechanically inclined and I understand the frustration of those who have to reley on others to do repairs. ( My father, and three brothers could not be trusted to screw in a light bulb :D )
 
The grips were a set of Pachmayers I purchased at a gun show,,,
But never got around to putting on my Model 67.
Click to expand...
The first S&W revolver I bought, I picked up a pair of hogue grips. The gun was a K-frame square butt, and I got the k-frame square butt grips. I got home and spent about a half hour trying to get the grips on. Just couldn't do it. Drove me about mad. Finally, I got on line and did some searching, and the grips that were in the package that said square butt were mis-packaged and were round butt grips. Now that I've owned a few of each, I would have known immediately, but it was my first S&W!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top