S&W 686+ 2.5" or 4"
This is a discussion on S&W 686+ 2.5" or 4" within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; The real answer is what do you want? There is not a tremendous amount of difference between the 2. How you are going to carry ...
January 8th, 2013 04:41 PM
The real answer is what do you want? There is not a tremendous amount of difference between the 2. How you are going to carry it makes a difference. I have found that a 4" conceals just as well as a snubbie in a shoulder holster or belt with a suitable cover garment. A 686 weighs about the same as an N frame 44.
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
doing something over and over expecting different results
January 8th, 2013 07:07 PM
I owned a 2.5" 686+, if I had purchased the 4" I would probably still own a 686+. The short Bbl. isn't optimal for the .357. The fireball generated on an indoor range draws quite a bit of attention. That gun was a great way to get alone time on ranges as well, shoot a cylinder full of hot .357's and everyone would go home.
January 8th, 2013 07:18 PM
What he said. I have the older six shot, 4" version, and can conceal it easily in my Simply Rugged pancake holster. Imho, the 4" .357, whether it be S&W, Colt, or Ruger, is the ultimate in versatility, from low-recoil SD loads in .38 spl to big game (including two-legged species) stoppers from Buffalo Bore. And don't forget, one popular load in .357 mag has, by far, the best one-shot stop statistics since they started charting them.
Originally Posted by stanislaskasava
January 8th, 2013 10:54 PM
I have the 686 in 2.5, 3 and 4".
Originally Posted by ksholder
2.5" Pros: Very well balanced. Feels like an extension of my hand. Easier to carry (but I carry j-frames or semi's, my 686's are my night stand guns).
2.5" Cons: Shorter sight radius makes aimed shooting a bit less forgiving to user error. A little snappy with .357's but not bad.
4" Pros: Longer sight radius provides great "point shootability." Tames the .357's somewhat. Much easier to shoot accurately at longer ranges.
4" cons: Longer barrel can be a bit heavy and bulky. Not as handy as the 2.5".
Some are concerned about "losing" the .357 effect with the shorter barrel. That doesn't concern me, and I have it loaded with .38+P anyway.
January 8th, 2013 11:11 PM
The obvious choice then isn't the 2 1/2 or 4 but the 3 inch.
Originally Posted by PEF
Search tags for this page
686 2.5 inch
686 2.5 vs 4
s&w 686 2.5
s&w 686 2.5 vs 4 inch
s&w 686 4 inch
s&w 686 4 inch vs 2.5 inch
s&w 686-4 2.5 inch
show your 686 snub 2.5 inch
smith 686 snub
smith and wesson 686 snub
smith and wesson model 19 2.5 verses 4 inch barrel
Click on a term to search for related topics.