Rather than just dip my toe in the water, I submerged my entire foot and lower leg. The reintroduced Ruger SP101 in 9mm got me interested, but not enough to buy one. It started me looking, however, and I soon found the Smith & Wesson 986 9mm revolver, which is much more expensive but far more appealing. It comes in a 5-inch Pro Series model and a 2½-inch Performance Center model; both have a 7-shot titanium cylinder with adjustable sights and built on the S&W L-frame. I ordered one of the 2½-inch Performance Center guns from Bud’s Gun Shop, my fourth purchase from Bud’s.

Upon inspection of the gun at my receiving dealer, I found that the cylinder would not release and swing open on two of the seven chambers. In addition, the gun showed wear marks not expected on a “new” Performance Center gun. There was a pronounced turn ring on the cylinder, carbon on the recoil plate, and a rub mark on the trigger guard that the dealer said looked like holster wear. The dealer even asked me if I had bought a used gun. Dismayed, I refused transfer and returned home to contact Bud’s. This was on a Saturday and the only customer service available was by online chat. Jessica at Bud’s took my report, asked if I wanted a refund or replacement, and said Bud’s would send a shipping label to my dealer for the defective gun.

Thirteen days later, which included two weekends when nothing moves, the replacement gun was at my dealer. It was A-Okay and I completed the transfer. Despite my anxiety, Bud’s did what any reputable business should do and what they said they would do, and sent a replacement at no cost to me except time. My four buying experiences with Bud’s have all been good.

I took my new 986 to the range today and fired 98 rounds of American Eagle 115gr FMJ. The last round from each of the first two moon clips fired was saved for measurement of bullet jump. Not knowing what to expect regarding recoil, I was pleasantly surprised that the 986 snubby is a cupcake to shoot. Weighing in at 34.7 oz. fully loaded, recoil is not an issue. Nor is bullet jump. My measurements showed that the two test rounds grew about .002-.003 inch in OAL.

The single action trigger pull is very nice-clean and light. Measurement with my Lyman gauge produced an average SA trigger pull of 4 lbs. 7 oz., although it feels much lighter. Discussion of double action trigger pull will have to wait. It wasn’t bad by any means, it’s just that I suck at DA and am not qualified to comment intelligently.

Shooting a 986 does require moon clips. As a trial, I chambered one unfired round of American Eagle ammunition without a moon clip and it sat too deep in the chamber to fire, as shown in the photo below. So, moon clips are needed to achieve proper headspace for reliable ignition. Smith & Wesson provides only two TK Custom moon clips. Forewarned, I ordered 20 more before the gun arrived, as well as, a BMT L9-7 Mooner moon clip loading/unloading tool. Using moon clips makes the range experience a pleasure. The gun is quickly loaded and unloaded with little fuss. I found that four loaded 7-round moon clips fit very nicely in the empty 100-round tray from 22LR cartridges, which makes transport easy.

The titanium cylinder gives me some concern regarding long term longevity as to its care and wear. I am otherwise quite pleased with the overall feel, fit, and finish of the Performance Center 986. The gun itself is pricey, but I now have a really nice revolver that I can shoot without having to reload and it fires the potent, ubiquitous, and affordable 9X19 Luger cartridge.


986left1K by GaryBF, on Flickr


WO_moonclip by GaryBF, on Flickr


986_open by GaryBF, on Flickr


BMTMooner by GaryBF, on Flickr

Those are nice guns, and thanks for the report. Reference your mention of the round dropping too far into the charge hole without the moon clip,my 940 is the same way. Without the moon clips, headspace is grossly excessive. With my 9MM Ruger Sp-101, headspace is held to a much closer tolerance. Function is flawless without moon clips, but of course moon clips are used for extraction,etc.

Thanks for the review; a nice looking gun.

I am, however, slightly dismayed that the chambers aren’t cut to permit rounds to be fired without the moon clips. Even most autoloading pistols can be fired as single shots without having a magazine if they had to be.

Is there a distinct headspacing step in the chambers, or is the narrowing sloped or tapered as in chambers for most typical revolver cartridges (e.g., 38 Special)?

Still not a fan of the non-fluted cylinder look, but the rest of that gun is really sweet.

Sounds like the first one was used, but problems right out of the box with PC guns is not surprising. As stated countlessly in recent times, the Performance Center ain't what it use to be.

Cool. Not quite an 'Alaskan' but you do get a few extra shots.

Is it rated for +P? Beautiful gun. I have the big brother and an older 3 in 9mm SP101. Yours is unfortunately very attractive.

You've probably noticed the info in the manual regarding cleaning protocol for the titanium cylinder, but if not, have a good look before you clean it. I used to own a 40S&W L frame S&W revolver with a Ti cylinder and I always wished it had been made of stainless steel.

I am surprised at how many guns leave the performance center with issues. i had a 357 with a bur inside the hole for the adjustable sight. the rear sight was away from the frame and unable to be screwed in.

But yours is really nice!!! thanks for taking the time to post this!!!

Very nice looking wheel gun. I have been thinking about swapping my wife’s .357 SP101 for one in 9mm.

Wish there was an affordable option with better sights, I have a S&W640 Pro .357, wish it was a 9mm.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Thanks for the review; a nice looking gun.

I am, however, slightly dismayed that the chambers aren’t cut to permit rounds to be fired without the moon clips. Even most autoloading pistols can be fired as single shots without having a magazine if they had to be.

Is there a distinct headspacing step in the chambers, or is the narrowing sloped or tapered as in chambers for most typical revolver cartridges (e.g., 38 Special)?

There is a distinct shoulder in the chamber of any modern revolver (with maybe the exception of the Judge & Governor types). I know of no revolver that has a tapering or sloped chamber.

There may be people that tell you that you can use your rimless cartridge moon clip gun without moon clips. They will claim that the round will headspace on the shoulder in the chamber, theoretically, they are correct. However, since SAAMI sets the specs for cartridge dimensions, the shoulder is placed at maximum case length depth for a given caliber. My experience has been that most factory ammo or brass, when new, is always considerably less than this dimension - meaning that, in reality, headspacing on that shoulder, by the case mouth, seldom actually occurs.

What does happen is that variances in chamber roundness, smoothness, cleanliness and other variables, will hold some cartridges firmly enough that a firing pin strike will ignite the primers. Others are driven forward in the chamber, which results in a light primer strike and a failure to ignite.

Just as some rounds are held tightly enough for ignition and others are driven forward, some cases may drop out of the cylinder from gravity, while others may be "pluckable" and yet others will have to be poked out using a rod.

You should consider moon clips essential for any revolver that is chambered for a rimless or semi-rimmed round. The other alternative is using the rimmed version of that round, if one exists.

Moon clips are the greatest thing since sliced bread and people’s aversion to them is, most likely, founded in falsehoods found on the Internet or from people who either have no personal experience, or just a passing experience with them.

In order to fully utilize, and fully enjoy, them requires the right tool(s) to load and unload the clips. The best tool that I’ve found is the BMT. It both loads and unloads the clips. RIMZ polymer moon clips are a nice alternative to metal clips. These are easily loaded and unloaded by hand. Unfortunately they are not available for the 986 models.

You may balk at the cost of these ancillary devices - but consider what you just spent for the gun - isn't spending that extra little bit to insure full enjoyment from your investment worth it?

Adios,

Pizza Bob

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Thanks for the review; a nice looking gun.

I am, however, slightly dismayed that the chambers aren’t cut to permit rounds to be fired without the moon clips. Even most autoloading pistols can be fired as single shots without having a magazine if they had to be.

Is there a distinct headspacing step in the chambers, or is the narrowing sloped or tapered as in chambers for most typical revolver cartridges (e.g., 38 Special)?

There is no distinct shoulder in the chamber. It just narrows down to form the throat. When I was doing my pre-purchase research on the 986, I scoured the internet for reviews, forum threads, and whatever. I came across one post from a Smith & Wesson forum in which it was stated that the 986 cylinder was chambered to also accept the European 9X21 cartridge. I have no idea if that is accurate, or not.

quote:

Originally posted by GaryBF:There is no distinct shoulder in the chamber. It just narrows down to form the throat. When I was doing my pre-purchase research on the 986, I scoured the internet for reviews, forum threads, and whatever. I came across one post from a Smith & Wesson forum in which it was stated that the 986 cylinder was chambered to also accept the European 9X21 cartridge. I have no idea if that is accurate, or not.

I don't mean to be a dick, but I suggest that you open the cylinder and look. If yours is smooth the length of the chamber it needs to go back to Smith.

What you read on the S&W Forum was written by one individual - not the factory - so the accuracy of that statement is in question.

Here's a photo looking into a 968 cylinder. Those sure look like shoulders in the chamber to me. I stand by my original statement.


Adios,

Pizza Bob

Pizza Bob,
I did look before I wrote that. In fact, I probed the chamber with a dental pick and found no shoulder. Mine looks just like yours. There is change in surface finish or texture there, but no shoulder.

quote:

Originally posted by GaryBF:
Pizza Bob,
I did look before I wrote that. In fact, I probed the chamber with a dental pick and found no shoulder. Mine looks just like yours. There is change in surface finish or texture there, but no shoulder.

What you are seeing is not a change in surface finish or texture, you are seeing the beginning of the throat, delineated by the shoulder. If you have been shooting yours, there well be carbon build-up leading to the shoulder, because as I pointed out, it is placed at max chamber dimension for a given caliber, and the cases are generally shorter than that.

Ask yourself why there would be a difference in texture or finish? And how that would complicate the manufacturing process. First they run in a throat reamer and then a chambering reamer, resulting in the shoulder. Doesn't take much build-up to obfuscate the fact that it is actually a shoulder.

Adios,

Pizza Bob

I had a 986pc but sold it. Hated the titanium cylinder. Who not steel? These aren’t exactly light weight carry guns.

quote:

Originally posted by Pizza Bob:
You should consider moon clips essential for any revolver that is chambered for a rimless or semi-rimmed round.

Decades ago I had an S&W model 25 that was chambered for the 45 Auto Rim cartridge and its chambers had a distinct 90° headspacing step to permit use of 45 ACP cartridges without clips.

The below revolver also has headspacing steps in the chambers to hold the 9mm cartridges at the proper position for firing. As should be obvious, clips cannot be used with the revolver, but it worked fine with the ammunition I used. I am therefore familiar with revolvers chambered for rimless cartridges.

I have no idea why S&W isn’t making their 9mm cylinder chambers with the same headspace step, but it’s not because it isn’t possible. It may be that the 90 degree step (as I call it) holds fouling and if it’s not removed properly it will prevent the cartridge from headspacing properly. The decision might consequently have been to use the tapered design that goes from case diameter to bullet diameter at an angle and then just require the user to employ clips to hold the ammunition in the proper location.






As for whether the mandatory clip thing is a big deal, it depends on one’s intended use of the gun. As a range toy after buying a drawer full of clips, it’s obviously not; by definition nothing about a “toy” is a big deal. For serious purposes, though, and especially for a gun that might be in use 50 years from now after replacement clips have long since been only a vague memory, it is a big deal. At least for me, and that’s why I’m happy to learn that I should give up any thoughts about acquiring a modern 9mm revolver.

Well my convertible New Vaquero certainly doesn’t use moon clips so I think that your basic assertion is incorrect. They absolutely can and and have made cylinders that you can use without moon clips the only problem of course now being extraction. In a pinch any 9mm revolver should be capable of reliably NOT using moon clips. Nice gun but the fact that it appears it can’t makes this gun a complete non starter for me. Which sucks because that is a nice looking gun. I agree with the why titanium cylinder vibe though.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
Well my convertible New Vaquero certainly doesn’t use moon clips ....

Thanks. That reminded me that I have a USFA revolver with 45 ACP and 45 Colt cylinders. The 45 ACP cylinder does not require using clips. The cartridges headspace on a distinct 90 degree step.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund: Decades ago I had an S&W model 25 that was chambered for the 45 Auto Rim cartridge and its chambers had a distinct 90° headspacing step to permit use of 45 ACP cartridges without clips.

It was chambered for .45 ACP. .45 AR was just an accommodation for those not wishing to use clips - which, at the time, were half-moon clips that were somewhat of a PITA. With the .45 ACP guns, failure to ignite when using rimless ammo without clips is more common with newer guns, with SAAMI-spec chambers. While SAAMI has been around since 1926 and the .45 ACP was adopted in its current form in 1911, the SAAMI cartridge dimension drawings weren’t done until 1979. So it is quite possible that early .45 ACP revolvers may be more likely to function without clips, with a higher rate of reliability, than guns made post-1979, as prior to that date, chamber dimensions were at the discretion of the firearm manufacturer.

quote:

The below revolver (pics of a S&W 547) also has headspacing steps in the chambers to hold the 9mm cartridges at the proper position for firing. As should be obvious, clips cannot be used with the revolver, but it worked fine with the ammunition I used. I am therefore familiar with revolvers chambered for rimless cartridges.

If you are basing your rimless cartridge revolver knowledge on that, then it is more accurate to say that you are familiar with an anomaly. The shoulders in the chambers on the 547's did not position the cartridge for proper headspacing. Like most semi-autos the cartridges headspaced on the extractors. The 547 was only made for a short period of time before S&W gave-up on the technology because they deemed it too expensive to produce. But they did like it enough to tie-up Charter Arms in court for a couple years for patent infringement on the CA's Pitbull line.

quote:

I have no idea why S&W isn’t making their 9mm cylinder chambers with the same headspace step, but it’s not because it isn’t possible. It may be that the 90 degree step (as I call it) holds fouling and if it’s not removed properly it will prevent the cartridge from headspacing properly.

That's the point - they haven't changed anything. Carbon build-up is a concern in all revolvers, especially those capable of firing sub-caliber rounds (think .38 SPL in the long .357 Mag chamber), so not something they would take into consideration.

quote:

As for whether the mandatory clip thing is a big deal, it depends on one’s intended use of the gun. As a range toy after buying a drawer full of clips, it’s obviously not; by definition nothing about a “toy” is a big deal. For serious purposes, though, and especially for a gun that might be in use 50 years from now after replacement clips have long since been only a vague memory, it is a big deal. At least for me, and that’s why I’m happy to learn that I should give up any thoughts about acquiring a modern 9mm revolver.

Kind of foolish to make a buying decision, on something you desire now, based on what might happen in 50 years. Heck, in 50 years the libtads may have taken over and there won't be any guns in private hands, let alone moon clips. Clips for rimless ammunition have been around for a hundred years - I have no doubt they'll be around for a hundred more. It's not like they wear out.

As for the single action guns - they do not have to concern themselves with extraction, since, by design, the empties are "poked" out, so it's a simple matter of making the firing pin long enough to still be effective even if the cartridge is driven deeper into the chamber - we're not talking huge dimensional differences.

I got my first moon clip gun 40 years ago (still have it) and in the ensuing years have added six more. In the last 4 years I've put more than 10K rounds down range out of moon clip guns, so I, too, am pretty familiar with their design and function.

Adios,

Pizza Bob

quote:

Originally posted by Pizza Bob:

quote:

(pics of a S&W 940)

If you are basing your rimless cartridge revolver knowledge on that, then it is more accurate to say that you are familiar with an anomaly. The shoulders in the chambers on the 940's did not position the cartridge for proper headspacing.

And you’re not familiar with that gun at all. It’s a model 547 that was purchased in 1982, long before the 940 was a gleam in a gun designer’s eye.
Added: I see you changed your post after I pointed out the mistake. My comment still stands, though, that I am familiar with a successful revolver that was chambered for the 9mm cartridge.

The fact is that it was and would be again quite possible to manufacture a revolver that was capable of handling a reasonable range of 9mm Luger cartridges without holding them in place with a clip. It’s been done before as with the convertible Ruger mentioned, and with the above model 547. And although I cannot find it now, I seem to recall owners of the Ruger SP101 having no problem firing their guns without clips; but I could be wrong.

In any event my other comment still stands. The fact that S&W designs its revolvers so that they won’t fire without clips is a reason for me to stop considering one. And again, thanks to everyone for that information.