Newb Here!!!

tolesy · January 14, 2010, 09:34 AM

Hi guys, this is my first post to the forum and though I am not new to guns I am new to pistols. I am looking at a .357/.38 snubby revolver and have narrowed down my choices to:

S&W 686 2.5"
Ruger LCR

Can you guys help out a newb and give me some insight into your person experiences with either gun. I know the 686 has a great following.

Thanks!!!

KingEdward · January 14, 2010, 09:38 AM

Having two 686s (3 in and 4 in) I can say they are great.

Accurate, handle wide variety of loads, great trigger, etc.

I am not anti Ruger just more pro Smith due to trigger out
of the box.

WC145 · January 14, 2010, 10:25 AM

What are your plans for it? While they are both snubby revolvers they are very different:
The 686 is much larger and heavier than the LCR.
The 686 is all stainless steel, the LCR is polymer and stainless.
The 686 is a .357mag, the LCR is a .38spl.
The 686 is available in either 6 or 7 shot versions, the LCR is a 5 shot.
The 686 has adjustable sights, the LCR hs fixed sights.
The LCR is DAO with a conealed hammer the 686 is a traditional double action revolver.

I do not own a Ruger LCR, but I have handled and dry fired them. They have a very nice trigger, light with no stacking. I'm sure they are accurate and reliable. They are similar in size to a S&W J-frame and just as easily concealed. They are very light (13oz), and that's a big deal when it comes to carrying all day, but the increased felt recoil that comes with a light weight gun can be an issue for some.

I don't have a 686 either but I do have a 586 L-Comp, which is basically the same gun in blue with a 3" barrel. All of the L-frame S&W's are rugged, accurate, and reliable, but can be large and heavy for everyday carry. Belt and holster choice is much more important where comfort and concealment are concerned compared to the smaller, lighter LCR. They are comfortable to shoot, even with hot magnum loads thanks to the extra size and weight, and my gun is incredibly accurate.

IMO, your choice should be based on your intended use because, as I said, while they are similar, they are also very different.

tolesy · January 14, 2010, 11:54 AM

The gun will be used primarily for carrying when I am not working (HS teacher, they frown upon us bringing guns onto school property). However, I want something that is fun, realtively cheep, and comfortable to shoot.

I have read so many comments on both guns and am still having trouble deciding. As many have said the 686 wins in the looks and durability dept. but in terms of function and comfort the LCR is a great option.

Does anyone have both or at least shot/handled both??

41mag10mm · January 14, 2010, 11:54 AM

I agree with WC145. I have a 586 (4 inch) and while the 2.5" 686 may have a short barrel, I wouldn't catagorize it as a snubby. The L frame smith is a much larger revolver than the LCR in all respects. If you want to stick the Ruger in your pants pocket for CCW you'll have no trouble with concealment and probably comfort. You'll need an IWB or OWB holster for the Smith. A better comparison would probably be the Smith 640.

tolesy · January 14, 2010, 11:56 AM

WC,

Which grip did the LCR have? I read the the CTL grips enhance felt recoil and the gun feels small in hand.

tolesy · January 14, 2010, 11:58 AM

thanks 41mag, i'll do some research on the 640!

carguychris · January 14, 2010, 12:30 PM

Quote:

thanks 41mag, i'll do some research on the 640!

FWIW you should also check out the other two hammer configurations S&W offers for their J frame (compact) revolvers. The 640 has a fully concealed hammer like the LCR, making it double-action-only (DAO). If you would like to be able to cock the gun manually and fire single-action, you'll want a Model 60, which is the same gun with a fully exposed spurred hammer, or a Model 649, which has a shrouded hammer prevent snagging on clothing.

WC145 · January 14, 2010, 12:44 PM

Quote:

WC,

Which grip did the LCR have? I read the the CTL grips enhance felt recoil and the gun feels small in hand.

I've handled them both, and a friend has one with the CT grips. Personally, I preferred the feel of the Ruger grips over the CT, but my friend loves his. He has big hands and the CT grips fit him better.

I like the gun, I'd buy one if I didn't already have a custom scandium S&W J-frame that I carry as a BUG and often an off duty gun. The Ruger trigger must be felt to be appreciated, it's very impressive. Of course, it's still butt ugly, but that's okay.

I carry my 586 off duty but it requires a stout gun belt and quality holster to do so comfortably de to the weight. If the OP hasn't handled these two guns he really needs to see them in person to appreciate the differences.

ilmonster · January 14, 2010, 01:54 PM

Agree with previous posters. They really are different guns. If you are looking to carry, I would first try the 686 out on a carry rig to see if it indeed is small enough and light enough for you to carry on your frame (YMMV). If it is, it certainly is as well built as anything out there.

If it is too large/heavy for concealed carry, then a LCR is a fine weapon, so is a S&W 442/642, 60, Ruger SP101, etc. I would first decide what size and weight weapon fits the job, then look for a revolver that fills the bill. Certainly all the guns coming out of Smith & Wesson and Ruger are quality pieces. It's not like you're looking at a Jenning or Davis piece of garbage! May also want to rent one at a local range to see how you like it. Good luck!

Big Bill · January 14, 2010, 04:38 PM

If you're going to carry concealed, buy the Ruger LCR. If not, buy the S&W. In the S&W, you'll have a revolver that holds six rounds and with a longer barrel and sight radius that will be more accurate and effective at longer distances.

Smilin Jack · January 15, 2010, 02:19 PM

While the 686 is a fine weapon it's a little large and certainly larger and heavier than the LCP which may give you some concealment problems. I carry a S&W 649 Bodyguard in .357 and it fits and carries very well. Also with it being stainless the little bit of added weight helps with recoil and it stays looking like brand new. It was much more expensive than the LCP but there's a reason why. You get what you pay for and I'm not willing to compromise on this issue. You obviously like the Smith so you may want to check out the stainless Bodyguard models to see if they have what you need.

savit260 · January 15, 2010, 03:36 PM

Quote:

The gun will be used primarily for carrying when I am not working (HS teacher, they frown upon us bringing guns onto school property). However, I want something that is fun, realtively cheep, and comfortable to shoot.

I have read so many comments on both guns and am still having trouble deciding. As many have said the 686 wins in the looks and durability dept. but in terms of function and comfort the LCR is a great option.

Does anyone have both or at least shot/handled both??

Small pocket guns aren't particularly comfortable to shoot. While I haven't shot the Ruger LCR as it's fairly new to market, I HAVE shot plenty of small, light 5 shot .38's that are in the same class. I would say some of these guns can fall into the "comfortable enough" and "fun enough" to shoot, but none are going to compair to a 686 (or similar size mid frame) revolver.

I think what you need to do is pick your priorites, then make your decision from there.

YES, a 686 can be a CCW gun. I personaly carry a 4" Colt Python which is basicly the same size as a 686 with no issues. The thing is you have to 1. have a GOOD holster and belt 2. Dress around the gun.
This size revolver will be MUCH more pleasent to shoot at the range, and if you are new to Revolvers.... probably a better platform to learn to shoot well on.

If your priority is ultimate concealment, the LCR (or similar size/weight Smith, Charter, Rossi, Taurus etc.) is going to be MUCH easier to carry.
These small pocket revolvers however, are harder to shoot acurately. The light ones can have a fair amount of kick. Require more practice and concentration to shoot well. MAY hurt your hand if the grips don't fit you well. You may get frustrated quickly if you don't shoot it well. The 5 shot snub can take a while to master.

Niether the Ruger LCR or the Smith 686 are particularly cheap either. Both are high quality brands.

So, I'd say think long and hard about what you want most out of the gun. There are trade offs in everything.

BigJimP · January 15, 2010, 04:50 PM

I vote for the S&W as well / they just have way better triggers in my opinion.

Elvishead · January 16, 2010, 09:41 AM

tolesy

Quote:

Hi guys, this is my first post to the forum and though I am not new to guns I am new to pistols. I am looking at a .357/.38 snubby revolver and have narrowed down my choices to

Those two gun's are night and day. I think you should do some more reading and research before coming up with a gun you "Need, or want"

Elvishead

Elvishead · January 16, 2010, 10:02 AM

Quote:

The gun will be used primarily for carrying when I am not working (HS teacher, they frown upon us bringing guns onto school property). However, I want something that is fun, realtively cheep, and comfortable to shoot.

Well, after reading that, if your only choice's that your giving, obviously the LCR, but.... you mentioned the fun factor.

Why not the S&W 638 Bodyguard? It's as much or cheaper than the LCR and the 686. There's a no snag hammer that you can shoot double action, or single action, and I'm not just telling you this because I own one. Awesome carry gun! And if I want to take that 50-100 yard shot, SA baby(!), SA, nothing like that light 1mm trigger.

January 14, 2010, 09:34 AM	#1
tolesy Member Join Date: January 12, 2010 Location: NE Indiana Posts: 69	Newb Here!!! Hi guys, this is my first post to the forum and though I am not new to guns I am new to pistols. I am looking at a .357/.38 snubby revolver and have narrowed down my choices to: S&W 686 2.5" Ruger LCR Can you guys help out a newb and give me some insight into your person experiences with either gun. I know the 686 has a great following. Thanks!!!

January 14, 2010, 09:38 AM	#2
KingEdward Senior Member Join Date: April 22, 2009 Location: The Volunteer State Posts: 439	Having two 686s (3 in and 4 in) I can say they are great. Accurate, handle wide variety of loads, great trigger, etc. I am not anti Ruger just more pro Smith due to trigger out of the box. __________________ "It'll happen fast once I start" - Charlie Waite

January 14, 2010, 04:38 PM	#11
Big Bill Senior Member Join Date: December 29, 2008 Location: Idaho Posts: 1,053	If you're going to carry concealed, buy the Ruger LCR. If not, buy the S&W. In the S&W, you'll have a revolver that holds six rounds and with a longer barrel and sight radius that will be more accurate and effective at longer distances. __________________ There is only one tactical principle which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wound, death, and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time." - General George Patton Jr

January 14, 2010, 10:25 AM	#3
WC145 Senior Member Join Date: October 18, 2008 Location: Downeast Maine Posts: 1,836	What are your plans for it? While they are both snubby revolvers they are very different: The 686 is much larger and heavier than the LCR. The 686 is all stainless steel, the LCR is polymer and stainless. The 686 is a .357mag, the LCR is a .38spl. The 686 is available in either 6 or 7 shot versions, the LCR is a 5 shot. The 686 has adjustable sights, the LCR hs fixed sights. The LCR is DAO with a conealed hammer the 686 is a traditional double action revolver. I do not own a Ruger LCR, but I have handled and dry fired them. They have a very nice trigger, light with no stacking. I'm sure they are accurate and reliable. They are similar in size to a S&W J-frame and just as easily concealed. They are very light (13oz), and that's a big deal when it comes to carrying all day, but the increased felt recoil that comes with a light weight gun can be an issue for some. I don't have a 686 either but I do have a 586 L-Comp, which is basically the same gun in blue with a 3" barrel. All of the L-frame S&W's are rugged, accurate, and reliable, but can be large and heavy for everyday carry. Belt and holster choice is much more important where comfort and concealment are concerned compared to the smaller, lighter LCR. They are comfortable to shoot, even with hot magnum loads thanks to the extra size and weight, and my gun is incredibly accurate. IMO, your choice should be based on your intended use because, as I said, while they are similar, they are also very different.

January 14, 2010, 11:54 AM	#4
tolesy Member Join Date: January 12, 2010 Location: NE Indiana Posts: 69	The gun will be used primarily for carrying when I am not working (HS teacher, they frown upon us bringing guns onto school property). However, I want something that is fun, realtively cheep, and comfortable to shoot. I have read so many comments on both guns and am still having trouble deciding. As many have said the 686 wins in the looks and durability dept. but in terms of function and comfort the LCR is a great option. Does anyone have both or at least shot/handled both??

January 14, 2010, 11:54 AM	#5
41mag10mm Senior Member Join Date: January 7, 2010 Location: The Zoo, NC Posts: 271	I agree with WC145. I have a 586 (4 inch) and while the 2.5" 686 may have a short barrel, I wouldn't catagorize it as a snubby. The L frame smith is a much larger revolver than the LCR in all respects. If you want to stick the Ruger in your pants pocket for CCW you'll have no trouble with concealment and probably comfort. You'll need an IWB or OWB holster for the Smith. A better comparison would probably be the Smith 640.

January 14, 2010, 11:56 AM	#6
tolesy Member Join Date: January 12, 2010 Location: NE Indiana Posts: 69	WC, Which grip did the LCR have? I read the the CTL grips enhance felt recoil and the gun feels small in hand.

January 14, 2010, 11:58 AM	#7
tolesy Member Join Date: January 12, 2010 Location: NE Indiana Posts: 69	thanks 41mag, i'll do some research on the 640!

January 14, 2010, 01:54 PM	#10
ilmonster Senior Member Join Date: January 4, 2009 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 180	Agree with previous posters. They really are different guns. If you are looking to carry, I would first try the 686 out on a carry rig to see if it indeed is small enough and light enough for you to carry on your frame (YMMV). If it is, it certainly is as well built as anything out there. If it is too large/heavy for concealed carry, then a LCR is a fine weapon, so is a S&W 442/642, 60, Ruger SP101, etc. I would first decide what size and weight weapon fits the job, then look for a revolver that fills the bill. Certainly all the guns coming out of Smith & Wesson and Ruger are quality pieces. It's not like you're looking at a Jenning or Davis piece of garbage! May also want to rent one at a local range to see how you like it. Good luck!

January 15, 2010, 02:19 PM	#12
Smilin Jack Senior Member Join Date: December 31, 2009 Location: West Florida Republic Posts: 131	While the 686 is a fine weapon it's a little large and certainly larger and heavier than the LCP which may give you some concealment problems. I carry a S&W 649 Bodyguard in .357 and it fits and carries very well. Also with it being stainless the little bit of added weight helps with recoil and it stays looking like brand new. It was much more expensive than the LCP but there's a reason why. You get what you pay for and I'm not willing to compromise on this issue. You obviously like the Smith so you may want to check out the stainless Bodyguard models to see if they have what you need.

January 15, 2010, 04:50 PM	#14
BigJimP Senior Member Join Date: February 23, 2005 Posts: 13,195	I vote for the S&W as well / they just have way better triggers in my opinion.