Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Your favorite smith and Wesson 357

I'd buy the original .357 Magnum, possibly with a model number if I'm slumming. There is a bit of overlap with the Combat Magnum if K-frames are more your thing, though.

Having two 3" J's, two 3" K's, 4" GP100 and a 4" Colt Trooper in addition to the 6.5" 27, try firing two boxes, as in 100 rounds, of real .357s through a J-K-L frame size gun and you'll appreciate the extra weight of the N-frame....

95% of the ammo that goes through a .357 are .38 Special or downloaded .357 handloads... Shooting full loads through the 27 is pleasant compare to the others...

Bob

Are the newer 686s bad compared to the older smith's?

Bad in what way? To hear some talk the 686 is the crème de la crème of 357's although the GP100 and Blackhawk certainly match it step for step.

1. 5" Model 27
2. 3" Model 66
3. 4" Model 686

Absolutely true. I remember shooting the hottest .357 Magnum loads through my 28 and it feeling like target wadcutters. That would be the only justification I can think of for owning one.

Thanks for the info EE and trplem, before you guys posted to my inquiry I got on Gunbroker and Gunsinternational and began looking around, I suppose the N frames are stronger then the K frames? plus, I called and old friend to discuss, he said he has a 586 no dash whatever that means, that he 'may' sell me.

I think a clean old N frame will be a better running mate for my 1955 45 acp.

I have 8 S&W 357s; a 4" 19, a 3.5" 27, a 5" 27, a 3" 66, a 4" 66, a 5" 66, a 4" 520, and a 4" 620.

You can't beat the cool factor of the 27's, but I carry the 620 more often 'cause it doesn't require constant attention, plus they are smoother than the 19/66 and equally as smooth as the 27s.

I don't understand why the 27's with 3.5" barrels bring so much more $$ than those with 4" barrels.

The 5" 66 is a 6" that I had Ahlman's shorten by 1".

EDIT: I am a Skeeter Skelton fan, so the 5" S&W N-frames attracted me. I had Ahlman's shorten the barrels on two different 624s to 5" as a companion to my 5" 27.

A 586 is a good gun, just like the 686 only in carbon blued steel rather than stainless. Some prefer the look of blued whereas I always prefer stainless as I think it is superior, at least in anywhere near modern stainless guns-with the exception of copies of historical guns. The no-dash means there is no dash after the model designation. A dash followed by a number will indicate later runs of guns with changes to them-sometimes inconsequential, other times of significance. IIRC the early L frames had some bugs to work out, but I can't remember what they were. Many of these no dash guns were sent back and fixed. Smith usually designates that also by stamping the gun.

The N frames are stronger than K or L frames by way of mass. They are simply bigger guns and thus stronger. The N frame predates the K frame in 357 Magnum. Bill Jordan called for a K frame in 357 and is thought to be the father of the model 19-which is strange since Jordan was huge. It was thought that the time was right for a smaller 357 since by then the steel was better than a turn-of-the-century Hand Ejector say, which turned into the model 10. By the time the L frame came out, the N's were thought to be overkill for the 357, hence the emphasis nowadays on putting more holes in the cylinder of new iterations of 27's and L frames.

The L frame was brought out specifically to compete with the Python, which is one reason they have the underlug, mimicking the Colt gun. They are said to be a .41 caliber frame, which is enough mass for the hot 357 cartridge. For many years Smith bracketed the Python, et al with a .44 caiber N frame and a .38 caliber K frame. Now Smith even makes tiny J frame 357's. Colt beat them to that with the Detective Special.

The newer ones are probably the equivalent. It depends on whether you think MIM is inferior and whether you can co-exist with the keylock commony called the Hillary Hole that Smith got saddled with due to some lawsuit back during the Clinton era. Many guys HATE the keylock and some hate MIM parts. I personally like the look of the older guns better. I especially like the look of a square butt gun better unless you need extra concealment from your weapon.

NICE, Thanks, I'm headed to a local gunshop to pick up a couple 300 count buckets of CCI mini mag 36gr hp's, on sale for 22 bucks a bucket out the door, i'll look around at the Smith revolvers and see what they have, I've got my old 1955 45 acp here studying it, guess if I see anything S&W 357 with 4 or 5 screws in it at a good price I better grab it.

What I mean is not in the same class as far as smoothness accuracy overall quality. Some of the old-timers talk it's like only the old Smiths are worth anything and if it has a lock on it forget it it's garbage

The lock can be eliminated too, if that bothers you.

See my post a few posts back. The advent of MIM corresponds roughly to the lock guns and many don't like MIM. I think the new guns are plenty good but prefer the look of the old guns. By the time you get done modifying new ones to look like the old ones, you might as well have paid extra for an older model.

makes sense......

No contest, nothing else really close...................4", L-frame, 686.

MM

BWAHAHAHA, back from the gunshop, no S&W's in 357, gunshop Bud said here's what you need, and pulled out some kind of funny looking little Colt SF 1 something or another in 38 Special, rubber grips, bobbed hammer with no sights and a two inch barrel.

Everything is stronger than K frames......

If you can buy a 586 I would pursue that.

If I wanted a modern .357 in an L-frame sized gun I'd go Ruger.