The 686


PDA






Pages : [1] 2 3 4

g5reality
February 22, 2007, 05:28 PM
With the success of The 642 Club thread I thought there should be a place for 686. I hope this becomes as popular and helpfull as the 642 Club.

S&W has created a classic that comes in many configurations. I have a 686+ 4" and love it.

Welcome to the 686 Club:)

If you enjoyed reading about "The 686" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
1BLINDREF
February 22, 2007, 05:31 PM
g5
You're just looking for $5 for g5 :neener: :neener:

bigtuna
February 22, 2007, 05:57 PM
I'm in!

Just your standard 6-shot 686, 6" barrel

http://www.scottkeen.com/images/DSCN4922.jpg

Confederate
February 22, 2007, 06:03 PM
The first model was the best looking:

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=49385&d=1166289881

No lock, no MIM parts, stamped sideplate.

1BLINDREF
February 22, 2007, 06:18 PM
Confederate
:what: :what: Thats an awesome gun!

115grfmj
February 22, 2007, 06:43 PM
686+ 4"

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=53637&d=1172016360

fspitzdorf
February 22, 2007, 06:56 PM
686+ -6 variant 6" butler creek grips and a butter smooth action...

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n27/jaroot13/IMG_6080.jpg

CWL
February 22, 2007, 07:27 PM
Do 586 owners get to join?

My 586 6" is beautifully blued and has one of the smoothest actions I have felt in a wheelie or semi.

hexidismal
February 22, 2007, 07:52 PM
Aha, now heres one I can join in on. I cant stand those little 642s, but I love the 686

Here is a picture I took right outside my door just 2 or 3 days ago of my 686-5, 6inch 7-shot, wearing a set of badger customs. I would have to say that this is my most accurate handgun, or at least the one that I can shoot most accurately with. I considered trading it for a 1911 right after I got it, now I'm quite glad that I didn't. I still bought a 1911 though, now I'm poor but I have both. :D

http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j110/hexidismal29/686newgripouts1-1.jpg

g5reality
February 22, 2007, 07:53 PM
Welcome CWL,

Perhaps I should have named it the L frame magnum club instead. The Model 586 uses S & W's L (medium) revolver frame, with a K-Frame sized grip mated to a larger diameter cylinder. During the 1980s, Smith & Wesson developed its L-Frame line of .357 Magnums: the Model 581, 586, 681 and 686. These Magnums had a major effect on both law enforcement and sporting markets. In addition, these revolvers became the most popular revolvers ever made.

frabor68
February 22, 2007, 08:06 PM
3" 686-4 from 1994.

jato
February 22, 2007, 08:30 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v337/jatoman/gear/DSCN0042.jpg

Bob79
February 22, 2007, 08:30 PM
My favorite 686, the mountain gun version...

jad0110
February 22, 2007, 09:55 PM
My application for The 686 Club :p

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q139/jad0110/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Model%20686%20Plus%20357%20Magnum/Large/686_12-1.jpg


http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q139/jad0110/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Model%20686%20Plus%20357%20Magnum/Large/SW686side.jpg


http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q139/jad0110/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Model%20686%20Plus%20357%20Magnum/Large/686_12-5.jpg


Hey, anyone know of a good IWB carry rig for CCW :D ? I know, it's a bit large, but what the heck! It is a great gun that is more accurate than I am. Balances quite nicely in my hands, it just feels SOOOOOOOO right. Serves as my nightstand gun and car gun on long trips. May as well ride on my hip when I dress heavier for cold days.

tbtrout
February 22, 2007, 11:06 PM
That is the one I have and I agree. The best looking one out there. Never had a better trigger pull on any handgun. Better than my 1911.

WJR
February 22, 2007, 11:31 PM
frabor68,

That is a very nice 686. If you ever to decide to part with it, please let me know.

WJR

WJR
February 22, 2007, 11:33 PM
Here is my contribution:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v475/WJR/SmithWesson686CS-1andCarryComp.jpg

4" CS-1 and Performance Center 3" 686 Carry Comp.

WJR

Kor
February 22, 2007, 11:49 PM
One 6-shot 3" 686 for me at present, soon to add a 4" 686 no-dash.

jad0110: see www.caboholsters.com or www.hoffners.com

IDriveB5
February 23, 2007, 12:02 AM
Here is a quick-pic:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/IDriveB5/firearms/686003.jpg
Absolutely love this revolver!

Grips: These grips are one of several grips that were made by my great uncle (may he rest in peace) for my father's K frame.

Pine Cone
February 23, 2007, 01:34 AM
Here's a look at my entry, a 686-2 Classic Hunter, 6" barrel, unfluted cylinder. Only had it a short time, but it's very accurate and seems destined to be a favorite!

Alan Fud
February 23, 2007, 09:49 AM
4" 686+ owner.

WJR
February 23, 2007, 10:44 AM
Pine Cone,

Love the Classic Hunter. Nice pick up.

WJR

Baphomet
February 23, 2007, 11:00 AM
The 686 comes dangerously close to revolver-perfection in my opinion.
A bead-blast finish, a little action work, some dressy grips (courtesy of Mr. Kim Ahrends) and I'm good to go:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v149/Baphomet/PistolsII004.jpg

ZeSpectre
February 23, 2007, 11:06 AM
I had a 686, sold it. It is THE gun I repeatedly kick myself for selling. Will own another...eventually.

Greek
February 23, 2007, 11:15 AM
I bought one last year (yes it came with a lock). 4" barrel.
What a great trigger!

texas bulldog
February 23, 2007, 11:32 AM
...proud owner of a 586 6". i will certainly always have other handguns, but i just can't see the 586 getting displaced as the nightstand and car trip gun. if only i could conceal a 6" magnum...


side note: i seem to be noticing a preference for stainless over blued on the revolver forum. i like the blued myself, but the stainless ain't bad. anyone care to comment?

redneckdan
February 23, 2007, 11:41 AM
My everyday coat is a filson double mackinaw cruiser. I've found that its easily possible to conceal my 6" 19-4 in a cross draw holster, due to the fact that the mackinaw cruiser has good helping os stiff wool. I went with the cross draw because I can hang the holster over the side of my trick seat while driving.

texas bulldog
February 23, 2007, 12:18 PM
where do you live, redneckdan?

here in texas, i only get to wear a coat about two months out of the year, and even then it's generally a light one. most of the year it's just a t-shirt or other thin top. certainly i could pull off much larger carry guns in the north.

PzGren
February 23, 2007, 01:15 PM
I appreciate my 6" M686 since about a dozen years.
It is easy to shoot accurately.
It takes a stout load.
The stainless finish is easy maintenance.
Did I tell you what a great D/A trigger it has already?

$360 new out the door at the Indy gun show - and that was money well spent.

jad0110
February 23, 2007, 10:44 PM
side note: i seem to be noticing a preference for stainless over blued on the revolver forum. i like the blued myself, but the stainless ain't bad. anyone care to comment?

I love both!


Kor, thanks for the holster links - they have been bookmarked.

fiVe
February 24, 2007, 01:14 AM
Alright! Another "club" thread! Great pics, too.

I wish this club great success. Shucks, these things are major cool. I like the 4" version, and one day hope to join.

Kind regards from the 642 Club,
fiVe

KillitnGrillit
February 24, 2007, 02:57 AM
Can someone explain the differences in the different dash models?Or a website dedicated to the 686? I'm hoping to get one soon,Thanks.

Iggy
February 24, 2007, 08:25 AM
http://www.handloads.com/misc/Smith.Model.Changes.asp

Sistema1927
February 24, 2007, 10:36 AM
I'm in.

4" 686 with night sights that was part of an order for the Albuquerque Airport Police but never issued (they got Glocks). I gave $350 for it NIB. The day that it was advertised there were 7 of us lined up at the counter filling out 4473's within 10 minutes of the shop's opening time.

I replaced the Hogue style rubber grips with a pair of Pachmayr Compacs and it fits my hand very well, and carries fairly easily.

Black Knight
February 24, 2007, 01:32 PM
Carried one many nights on security patrol duty. It is a fine gun, next to my Pythons it is the best duty revolver I carried. Love it.

Confederate
February 24, 2007, 02:47 PM
Jad)110: What type of grips are those and did you grind your grip to a round-butt K-frame? The gun shown below also has a round butt, but whether it came like that or not I can't say.

I agree with those who have said that the 686 is one of the most perfect revolvers ever to hit the market. The accuracy exactly rivals, if not surpasses, that of the Colt Python. The gun will take far more magnum rounds without parts replacement than a Python, and just about anyone who can replace a spring can make the action equal to an out of the box Python. And a good gunsmith can make the 686's action exceed that of the Python.

But there's one place where the Python will always exceed the 686, and that is price. And some will say looks, but that's in the eye of the beholder. My 686 is almost the equal of a Python except that at the very end of the stroke, it goes a little heavy. Still, that's with the factory spring. A Wolfe spring undoubtedly would fix that problem.

http://www.calzaretta.com/scans/686%20right%20small.jpg

http://julia.hanovercomputer.com/firearms/mar04/Catalog/images/51834.jpg

These guns aren't mine, but they're nice specimens. I don't suppose
anyone will have a Glock engraved!

1man
February 24, 2007, 04:43 PM
another 686 fan. 686-4 4" RB with Hogue Bantam Grips. I'm going to get a set of Crimson T one of these days!

warriorsociologist
February 24, 2007, 07:05 PM
I'll join.

6" 686-4 7-shot
6" 686-4
4" 686-4

***WANTED*** --> 686 Mountain Gun...3" or 4" 686 CS-1...and 3" 686-4

Nematocyst
February 24, 2007, 09:33 PM
Ah, looks like I've come to the right place for an education about my new revolver: 686-6+ 4".

Thanks to Jad for the heads up, and to G5 for starting it. We'll give you post #686 in a few months. ;)

I've been lurking and posting in numerous other 686 related threads for a while, but I'm really glad to see this one pop up. I hope it's a clearly house for info on parallel to our 642 club, where I've learned a ton about mine.

Just got it last weekend, haven't even had a chance to shoot it yet. (Good sized storm rocked through here today; not as big as what's hitting the midwest today :eek: , but this is your next one.)

Anyway, I really like this gun already even if I haven't shot it. It could be two weeks before I get to since next weekend is a working weekend for me. :(

I'll post a pic once I get a decent one made, but it can't compare to some of the impressive pics that have already been posted. (Mine is "plain", comparatively, but beautiful in its own way.)

Image added by edit.

I look forward to learning lots here about grips, rnds, holsters, care, shooting tips, etc.

Nem (#39 on the way to 1000 ...)

Confederate
February 24, 2007, 10:12 PM
Yes, owners of 586s should be part of the family.

But we need photos. And pleeeeeeasse, all of you with blued guns and digital cameras, make sure you set the controls for about 1 stop overexposure. We can't appreciate the blue finishes you have if they're silhouettes! It's like snow shots. People mistakenly assume because snow is bright that they need to underexpose. It's just the opposite. Snow can make a picture come out underexposed, so it needs to be slightly overexposed.

My first 686 was a 586...well, you know what I mean. Anyway, it was beautiful. The gun didn't have all those scratches on them that the stainless ones often do.

jad0110
February 24, 2007, 10:40 PM
Jad)110: What type of grips are those and did you grind your grip to a round-butt K-frame? The gun shown below also has a round butt, but whether it came like that or not I can't say.

Packmayr Compac Grips SK/C S&W "K"&"L" Frame Round Butt.

http://www.lymanproducts.com/cgi-bin/sc/order.cgi?rd=1&storeid=*16b136c54364310b278fa04a88&sbid=SSMSB1172374292.28974&prevlocation=http://www.lymanproducts.com/store/page88.html

I got mine off of eBay for $25 with shipping. The box says "S&W 'K' - Round Frame SK-C", but it also fits the round L frame since the L shares it's grip frame with the K. So no grinding necessary.

They were a little tough to get on at first, but after a few days the grips "set" to the gun perfectly. I much prefer them over the stock Hogues, as it's finger grooves were in the wrong place :p .

I'm thinking of getting some Ahrends wood stocks for mine. But I'm tortured between sticking with a Round Butt style or going with a Round-to-Square conversion.

Any thoughts on this?

My main use for my 686+ is as my primary nightstand gun/range fun. I don't CCW it, yet anyway. I may or may not, haven't decided yet.

Nematocyst
February 24, 2007, 10:54 PM
Well, fiVe and G5, you've started something with the concept of "club".

If there are any Marlin 336 owners in here, come on over to the 336 Club (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=3145731#post3145731). :D

We now return you to the regularly schedule 686 club, already in progress ...

Nem

jad0110
February 24, 2007, 10:56 PM
Yes, owners of 586s should be part of the family.

Might as well let in 581s and 681s too ;) .

The 686 Club could really turn into something special! Afterall, I was reading elsewhere on THR that more 686s have been sold than any other revolver. That's the myth anyway.

Confirmed or Busted? :D

I look forward to learning lots here about grips, rnds, holsters, care, shooting tips, etc.

Hey Nem, welcome to The Club #2!!!

Grips: Pachmayr Compacs (though some sweet Ahrends are in the future, see post above).
Rounds: Practice - Any name brand on discount (WWB 38 Special works pretty good and I've had good luck with Independence 158 grain 357 Mag); Home Defense - 38 +P Remington Lead Semi Wadcutter Hollowpoint (LSWCHP) R38S12, the famed FBI Load (don't want to go blind touching off a Magnum in a darkened room); Car Gun - either the FBI Load or 357 Magnum Federal C357B 125 grn semi jacketted hollowpoint, depends on my mood :o .
Holster: Some cheapo no name OWB. Works well enough at the range (and hiking in the Blue Ridge Mtns, if I ever get the time).
Care: Breakfree CLP, a Boresnake, and a Leadaway cloth (STAINLESS GUNS ONLY) make cleanup a snap.
Shooting tips: As shooting 38 Special feels like a 22, be sure not to fall asleep :neener: . Seriously though, the best tip I can think of is to remember the 4 rules.

Tim L
February 24, 2007, 11:24 PM
Cool, a club I can Join! Just picked up a 4" 686 no dash, and am looking forward to shooting it.

Tim

Nematocyst
February 24, 2007, 11:24 PM
Thanks, Jad.
I have a feeling this thread could turn into a class act and an education in itself.

What Jad just posted above ...

Grips:
Rounds:
Holster:
Care:
Shooting tips:

...is something we started over on the 642 club.

Good way to collect information about what each user does with respect to each of those. Then G5 - as thread founder - can collect all the information after about 1000 posts and summarize it for us. :neener: :D

I'll hold off for a while since I'm a brand new owner of a 686 and not experienced enough yet to fill in those blanks.

Nematocyst
February 24, 2007, 11:29 PM
Bob79 and others,

What's a source for speedloaders for a 7 shot like in your image, please?

g5reality
February 24, 2007, 11:35 PM
I use HKS model 587-A 7 shot speed loaders for S&W 686+
or
586-A for the 686 6 shot

hexidismal
February 24, 2007, 11:41 PM
Same here Nematocyst, I use the 587-A loaders.

Nematocyst
February 25, 2007, 12:39 AM
G5 and Hex, thanks. Found the site for those loaders.

Confederate: pheeeweeee, you've got some 686 porn!

antediluvianist
February 25, 2007, 01:38 AM
"I have a 686+ 4" and love it. "

Me too. Mine is a non-lock -5.

Had a severe financial reverse recently, but can't get myself to sell my 686+.

jad0110
February 25, 2007, 10:31 PM
Does anyone know if all L Frames came in round butt configuration, or were a few square butt models offered early on?

Always wondered about that.

Nematocyst
February 26, 2007, 12:33 AM
Speaking only for myself,
I prefer round butts.

:evil:

Nematocyst
February 26, 2007, 01:58 AM
...this thread is currently
{edited the next day}
8th in the revolvers forum
in terms of number of views (1408).

Tenth if you count stickies.

Behind The 642 Club,
but rapidly closing in... :uhoh: :scrutiny:

Why, there must be an interest here 'bouts in 686.

But I'm a member of both, so what do I care? :p

Go 642 and 686! :D

(Not to mention 336 (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=258000) :) )
________

There's something happening here.
What it is ain't exactly clear.
There's a man with a 686 over there,
Telling me I got to ...

...get to the range
soon and shoot it soon! :rolleyes:

WJR
February 26, 2007, 08:57 AM
"Does anyone know if all L Frames came in round butt configuration, or were a few square butt models offered early on?

Always wondered about that."

I do not have my Smith and Wesson Standard Catalog in front of me, but this is my best recollection:

581s, all square butt until later Performance Center ported model

681s, same as 581s

586s, all square butt until this latest release

686s, Square Butt - No Dash Models through mid -4 models, Mid -4 to present, round butt models.

Hope that helps. That should be close if not right on the money.

WJR

Checkman
February 26, 2007, 10:29 AM
Smith went to the round butt configuration on all standard production models in the late 90's. Until then square butt was standard. L frames made in the 80's and the first half of the 90's will (mostly) be square butts.

Checkman
February 26, 2007, 10:33 AM
Proud owner of a 4" barreled 686+ (pre-lock).

I also own a 6" 586 (no dash). Sorry had to get that in there.;)

Great revolvers.

It's about time that we L frame fans get a club.

Seven For Sure
February 26, 2007, 10:51 AM
I tried to post a pic but could'nt figure it out. I have a 3" and 6", both +.

Ala Dan
February 26, 2007, 11:06 AM
Well, I'm a member of this club too; as I own a 6" S&W 686-5. It has a
WOLFF spring kit (13 lb. trigger return spring) installed, and its action
is as slick as a newborn babys butt. Its very accurate, but does not
see as much range time as some of my self-loading .45 ACP's~! :( :eek:

Nematocyst
February 26, 2007, 04:39 PM
So, kidding aside (for the moment :) ), this is an interesting discussion about butts, a
nd as a side benefit, I'm getting more informed about this "dash" business. (* see story below)

In fact, I find an interest in the whole topic of evolution of design of guns: how they've changed (and continue to) and why, as a reflection of experience with former designs and experiments with new designs.

It's very interesting that something as seemingly small as "butt shape"
(on the gun, yes, yes, on the gun :rolleyes: )
can be such an interesting focus of attention.

If the question had been shape of the cylinder release, I suspect it'd have gotten less attention.

So, I'm curious. Anybody have an hypotheses about why 686 butt shape has morphed from square to round?
Is it purely aesthetic, or are there functional reasons, as well?

And did it go from one shape to another in a single jump,
or were there small increments in the evolution towards "roundness".

Nem
___________

* I'm just now beginning to "get it" about "dashes". Example, as I was buying my 686-6 +, while the salesperson was ringing up the sale, I read the tag on the case: "Model 686 6". Note there is no "dash" in the printed version on the box. It didn't say 686+ 6. That made me wonder if the proper box should say "Model 686 7 (for 7 shot). So, I asked the salesperson, are you sure this is the right box (serial number is on it; I wanted to make sure).

He assured me it was, saying something like, "Aw, Smith and Wesson have weird numbering systems. They're always changing them." He didn't say anything about "dashes" and stuff.

Iggy
February 26, 2007, 05:04 PM
http://www.handloads.com/misc/Smith.Model.Changes.asp

buck460XVR
February 26, 2007, 07:58 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v333/buckanddot/my357.jpg

jad0110
February 26, 2007, 08:47 PM
Nem,

Square vs Round butt seems more a matter of preference, like blue vs stainless.

My small revolver collection is 50/50 split between square and round butt guns. I think most people who have larger hands like the feel of square butt guns better. I know I do, so I'll probably be getting some round-to-square Ahrends conversions for my 686 soon. Yeah, I was undecided a few posts ago, but it just sorta "clicked" in there at last! Those with smaller hands (like my wife) generally like the prefer the feel of round butt stocks (she can't get a good grasp around the wider bottom of a square butt stock).

Therein is an advantage of the round butt design. A round butt frame can accept round but stocks or round-to-square conversions. A square butt gun can only use square butt stocks.

Round butt guns tend to be a little easier, IMO. So round butt J Frames make sense to me anyways.

My .02 red cents.

HighVelocity
February 26, 2007, 10:30 PM
I'll play. :D

http://webpages.charter.net/silverspurs21/range/686nodash.jpg

No dash, all steel and a nice square butt. She also has one of the nicest stock DA triggers I've ever felt on a S&W.

Kor
February 27, 2007, 12:54 AM
Square butts are usually found on larger revolvers designed for use as hunting guns or police duty sidearms; round butts were originally reserved for shorter-barreled civilian CCW/plainclothes LEO guns.

My take is this: the flare at the bottom of a square-butt grip frame acts to force a muzzle-heavy long-barreled hunting revolver or a 4" duty gun to point a little higher, so the muzzle doesn't droop too low for you to pick up your front sight; the flare also tends to counteract the tendency of your little finger to make the gun pivot downwards around its center of gravity.

Since snub-nosed CCW/plainclothes revolvers aren't as muzzle-heavy, they have nothing to lose and everything to gain by going with the smaller round-butt configuration.

Of course, there's exceptions - S&W Combat Masterpiece(M15) snubs, Ruger Security-Six snubs, Colt Python/King Cobra/Lawman snubs, and certain others I can't recall off the top of my head, all had square butts - but I think those were more a result of manufacturing inertia, in that the factories didn't feel there was enough demand for those particular models to justify the extra labor of round-butting the existing square-butt service-gun frames; just install a snubby barrel instead of a 4" duty-length barrel, and call it good. Also, LEO's and civilians may have wanted the square butts on their snubbies to maintain a consistent grip-feel between their CCW guns and the full-sized duty or target guns they practiced more regularly with.

Still, up until S&W decided to standardize on the round-butt frame, it was pretty much a rule of thumb: barrel 4" or greater, square-butt; barrel 3" or less, round butt(except for a limited run of 3" heavy-barreled square-butt Chief's Special/M36 guns, which some experts considered the best-handling, most ergonomic of the J-frames).

Checkman
February 27, 2007, 10:33 AM
If you really want to get confused consider this. Through the late 1800's and into the first decade of the 20th century S&W's revovers were round butts. That changed a few years before WWI started. Afterwards the RB was a feature found mostly on snubbies, but not always.

Plus the S&W snubbie (M&P,etc.) didn't become common(i.e. standard) until after WWII. Smith made them, but in the 20's and 30's if you wanted to go to the store and buy a "belly gun" it was going to be a Colt Detective Special, Bankers Special and so on. Colt had a grip that was a little bit round a little bit square.

By the 1980's the RB was a highly desirable feature on revolvers and there were shops that made alot of money converting N frames from SB to RB. Now that the RB is standard you have people complaining about the SB's demise. There is just no pleasing some folks.

Grip evolution is fascinating. In days of yore ergonomics and computers didn't exsist. It was pretty much a hit and miss affair. Personally I like the RB because I have small hands, but there is something about a 586/686 with a 6" or 8-3/8" barrell and wood square butt target grips. They have style.

lev83
February 27, 2007, 05:42 PM
I love this game and these guns. Not a big fan of the integral ramped front sight that S&W uses but I plan on correcting this soon.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y224/lev83/th_SW686.jpg (http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y224/lev83/SW686.jpg)

jes
February 27, 2007, 06:22 PM
http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q81/jsmolen/IMG_1025.jpg

OUTSTANDING trigger!:D

jad0110
February 27, 2007, 08:26 PM
Not a big fan of the integral ramped front sight that S&W uses but I plan on correcting this soon.

What were you planning on replacing it with? I ask because I don't particularly care for the ramped front sight either. I do like the white outline rear sight, and am thinking of picking up a pair for my S&W M14 and K-22 so they all match.

I was personally considering trying out a "McGivern Style" Gold Bead on a Partridge base of some kind.

Nematocyst
February 28, 2007, 01:17 AM
Iggy, interesting history on Smiths.

Jad, Kor and Checkman, good history on butt evolution. Thanks.

Oh, yeah, this is a good thread.

PS: Due to a technical glitch at my ISP, I lost Internet connectivity for 24 hours. Can you say THR cold turkey?

Bellevance
February 28, 2007, 09:36 AM
My 686+ and his little brother:

http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u119/Bellevance/IM000616.jpg
http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u119/Bellevance/IM000597.jpg

Checkman
February 28, 2007, 12:28 PM
Those are hot. :cool:

Who made them? What's the material and how much? Very nice.

Bellevance
February 28, 2007, 09:02 PM
Thanks, Checkman. I do like the the light-colored grips on the stainless. Mine are tiger maple (fiddleback or curly maple, some call it) by Kim Ahrends. I asked him for a strong figure in the wood because the grain is pretty subtle. The figure--the tiger stripe--is subtle too, and my photography doesn't do it justice. These are Vermont guns, so the maple seemed appropriate.

Nematocyst
February 28, 2007, 11:58 PM
Club fever is settling in. (I think that's a good thing.)

For any Smith owners who also own a Ruger GP100, or want to,
here's the Ruger GP100 thread (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=258602). ;)

DAdams
March 1, 2007, 03:27 PM
Mine is a mid 80s 686 no dash CS-1 (US Customs Service) with 2M mark. 3 inch barrel. The 3 inch were plain clothed agents and four inch were worn by the "uniformed".

"The "2M" mark means it's had the bushing modification, and was checked two times. Apparently there were guns modded, and some still in service, so S&W sent armorers to Glynco, and ran all the CS-1's through to make sure.

IIRC Smithnut said there were 3000 3" CS-1's made. Janet Reno destroyed around 1500 of them. They won't make any more like that."

I saw one of these on GunsAmerica recently. Asking price was around $1100. It's gone.

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m22/dadams111/P2250039.jpg

This has the smoothest trigger on a revolver I have ever come across, although I'm sure the Performance Center revolvers are nice.
The only other 686 I want is a 586 in a 3 inch which will have to make it a PC L Comp. Drool.

Dennis

g5reality
March 1, 2007, 11:51 PM
By HMMurdock
Senior Member

Contractor Magnum

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Long story short, I have spoken with an ex-Vietnam era Navy SEAL (credentials are real, I investigated him) that told me a bunch of ex-SEALs he knew are working the security contractor circuit in Iraq right now and one of their overlooked requisite firearms is a reliable .357 Magnum.

He said for short distances or situations when you can't carry or simply don't have a long rifle, a .357 Magnum makes the best bet for taking out an enemy that may be pinning you down. I think of the way he described it as a poor man's "counter-sniper" or, in this case, "counter DM" weapon. He said on top of the reliability, the .357 has the range and trajectory in combination with the sheer power to do the job. It'll use one round to hit what you want and drop with a well-placed blow and possibly even make its way through barriers at a decent distance. --Just going by what he said.

Anyone have any insight on this? Those that agree, anyone care to suggest a combat-worthy sharpshooting magnum that can put a round up a fleas @$$ (or a round in the enemy's noggin) at a fair range? I asked the gentleman what his "associates" preferred and he said he was aware of most of them having S&W 686+'s with 4" or 6" barrels, some with red dot optics and all with tuned triggers.

I know this guy personally and he is the real deal and one hardcore old SOB, but I have no clue as to how successful or down-to-earth his "associates" are...

TRL
__________________

Interesting that the requested 357 is a S&W 686 For Power/accuracy/reilability

Nematocyst
March 2, 2007, 01:07 AM
G5, that's an interesting story, and an interesting topic for me.

Part of my motivation for buying a 686 relates to owning a minimal set of firearms that could be of value for multiple uses (SD to hunting) in a situation where limited weapons were available. That could, for example, just be an extended backpacking trip that involves hunting to supplement food carried.

In my case, the scenario involves carrying a .22 rifle (for me, that's my Marlin 39A for small game) and one handgun, which would certainly be my 686 (for SD & larger game, in a pinch).

I'll follow this subtopic with interest.

Nem

fspitzdorf
March 2, 2007, 08:39 AM
the only experience i have with noting how lethal a 357 is, is in whitetail hunting...

i regulary practice, offhand, 50 yards and can keep them on a 4 x 4 plate... that's about all i can do... i am sure the 686 can do better and maybe someone with optics better still... i just stick to the standard S&W adjustable irons and my aging eyes...

I have taken one doe with my 686. 35 yards, 158 grain XTP over 16.5 grains of 296 - right around 1400 - 1420 through the chrono... shot that big ole doe in the base of the neck, dead center vertically, just forward of the brisket... she hit the ground like a ton of bricks, never even kicked, just like someone turned off the light switch... upon skinning, seeing the devastation that XTP did i have no issues using it for hunting, i'd hate to be on the receiving end of an XTP or any other JHP for that matter... you had to see it to believe it... extreme trauma to a wide area... tissue damage in the wound channel was something else... bullet passed completely through so no recovery of such.

Airborne Falcon
March 2, 2007, 11:04 AM
686 + 6" ... picked it up last year at my local shop's S&W sale sponsored by S&W no less.

Best purchase I made last year without a doubt. Love the darn thing. Not absolutely crazy about the grips, particularly the buldge that sort of hinders removal of that last spent cartridge closest to the grips ... but I am shopping for a set of grips that will really look good on my stainless frame. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

PS: I thought the 686 was/is a "L" frame, not a J frame. Nevermind, I see where several members already caught that.

g5reality
March 2, 2007, 11:10 AM
Welcome new members"\:

Airborne Falcon
fspitzdorf
DAdams -Buck 119?
Bellevance - Nice grips
Checkman
jad0110
jes
lev83
HighVelocity - nice grips too
buck460XVR - 6" barrel? Big Boy

and anyone else I might have missed. We're growing quickly into a great little community.

dbarale
March 2, 2007, 12:02 PM
All right 686 experts, the local gun shop has a 6" 686 with a compensator for sale for 450$
That's all the info I have right now, deal, no deal? What is it?

HighVelocity
March 2, 2007, 12:19 PM
All right 686 expert, the local gun sho has a 6" 686 with a compensator for sale for 450$
That's allthe info i have right now, deal, no deal? What is it?

Need more info. If it's a FACTORY compensated gun (aka SW Performance Center Gun) then you better go buy it NOW or PM me the stores phone number. :uhoh:

Nightcrawler
March 2, 2007, 01:39 PM
Sold this gun. Wish I hadn't.


http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=38487&d=1145161855

jad0110
March 2, 2007, 05:06 PM
Best purchase I made last year without a doubt. Love the darn thing. Not absolutely crazy about the grips, particularly the buldge that sort of hinders removal of that last spent cartridge closest to the grips

I had the same problem with the stock Hogues. I slapped on a set of Pachmayr Compacs for K & L Frame round butts. No more spent cartridge ejection issues and they work fine with speedloaders.

I'll also be ordering some wood stocks from Kim Ahrends soon. I've heard they also work well with speedloaders and case ejection.

Bellevance,

I really like those Ahrends. I was thinking of Cocobolos, but now, I dunno!

Here's a pic of my 686+ with the Pachmayrs:


http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q139/jad0110/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Model%20686%20Plus%20357%20Magnum/Large/686_12-6.jpg


G5,

I know a guy who did a couple of tours in Iraq and later went to Seal school. He broke his leg halfway through the program (nasty compound fractures in 2 places), but stayed in touch with some of his buddies that made it through. I'm not exactly sure which specific Seal unit it is, but they were issued 4" 6 Shot S&W 686s to be used in specific littoral operations where, as you alluded, the 686 possess superb corrosion resistance relative to other sidearms. He also stated that they use the 686 when moving from underwater to land as all you have to do is tip the barrel forward to let the water run out and the 686 is ready to go. Naturally, the 686 gets stowed when their other gear comes out of dry containers.

I'm just relaying this guy's story, so don't shoot the messenger if it is B.S. :eek: !

1911afficianado
March 2, 2007, 08:22 PM
I officiallly joined the 686 club today. I am waiting my 10 days to pick up my 10yr old 686 with only 100 rounds through it!!!! Got it for $400 on a trade. This thing is beautiful!@!

g5reality
March 2, 2007, 08:27 PM
1911afficianado,

Congratulations and welcome to the club.

G5

Checkman
March 2, 2007, 10:15 PM
jad0110

I've heard the same thing about the SEALS using the 686 when conducting operations in the water. Sorry I don't know the exact high speed nautical term for water ops.

I also took the Houges off of my 686. I tried really hard to like them, but they just didn't work for me. I put on a pair of Pachmayr Grippers and all is now well. I prefer having the backstrap covered.

pwrtool45
March 3, 2007, 09:54 AM
If it's a FACTORY compensated gun (aka SW Performance Center Gun)

Not necessarily a PC gun if it's ported. The 686PP (http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10001&storeId=10001&productId=14801&langId=-1&isFirearm=Y) (Powerport) was (and still is) available as a regular production item.

Depending on condition and dash number, that's probably a pretty good deal. If you like the feel of a 6" fully lugged barrel, go for it.

Additional reading on the "revolvers and dirt" topic:
http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi
Specifically:
http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000111#000002
http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000030#000006
http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000423#000001

I think these were posted somewhere on THR or TFL (and the old tacticalforums) a long time ago. The new TF aparently uses UBB, complete with poor search functionality.

Bellevance
March 3, 2007, 10:19 AM
Bellevance,

I really like those Ahrends. I was thinking of Cocobolos, but now, I dunno!


jad0110--

Hey, who doesn't admire a natural blonde? If you do decide to go for the tiger-maple, ask Kim to look for a strong figure in the wood. To my eye, that's what makes those stocks special--the stripe that runs across the grain. It's subtle, but in indirect light it adds a sort of palomino shimmer to the look. :)

jad0110
March 3, 2007, 10:43 AM
Bellevance,

Thank you for the information, I'm going to have to let this one "simmer" for a while!

I see you have what appear to be round-to-square conversions on your 617 (can't quite tell on the 686).

If my observation is correct, how do the conversion stocks work for you? I ask because I was considering round-to-squares for my 686, but heard some people say they don't quite feel the same as a true square butt gun.

Bellevance
March 3, 2007, 11:20 AM
jad0110--

You're right; they're both round-to-square conversions, and they don't have the same feel as a traditional SB. I have a fairly large hand, and they fill my hand a little deeper than my M19, if that makes sense. On these, the edges of the back of the butt seem sharp to me, too, so shooting magnums causes the butt to bite the heel of my hand, but I don't shoot enough heavy rounds for that to be a bother. I might eventually sand them down a tad, though.

benedict1
March 3, 2007, 04:47 PM
I bought one--686+, all standard factory. Being in the People's Dictatorship of ********** I have to wait 10 days to pick it up. It's not like I don't have anything to shoot?:rolleyes:

But I want my 686----;)

g5reality
March 3, 2007, 08:34 PM
Congratulations benedict1, and welcome to the club.
Being in the People's Dictatorship of ********** I have to wait 10 days to pick it up. It's not like I don't have anything to shoot?

But I want my 686----
I know exactly how you feel:banghead:

KONY
March 3, 2007, 09:32 PM
hmmm ... 686-0 over here. Only wheelgun I own. Coincidence? You be the judge! :cool:

DAdams
March 3, 2007, 10:12 PM
g5

Thanks for the welcome. The Buck is a 121. I found it back in the mid 70s while walking a deserted two track in south central Idaho. Must have fallen off someone's truck.

I have taken good care of it for him/her.

I'm not a Buck afficianado. Any significance to the numbers/model and in this case the 121?

jad0110
March 3, 2007, 11:07 PM
On these, the edges of the back of the butt seem sharp to me, too, so shooting magnums causes the butt to bite the heel of my hand, but I don't shoot enough heavy rounds for that to be a bother.

Hmmm, may have to go with round rump stocks afterall. Good information, thanks again! I currently shoot a ratio of roughly 1 Magnum for 5.5 38s. But that will change now that I have a 38 Special Model 14, plus getting into handloading soon and all. I suspect the 686 will be fed more Magnums in the future, perhaps 1 Mag to 3 38s.


Actually, I saw these Walther Roper Stocks on a Registered Magnum that appear to be very comfortable for those that like to grip the gun as high on the frame as possible. The covered backstrap is interesting in a Roper, as I don't think it was very common. Or maybe it is just the angle of the picture??? :confused:

I know original Walter Ropers sell for $350 and up in good condition, but I'm wondering if anyone sells wood stocks with a similar backstrap shape with no finger grooves, just like the Ropers pictured below:


http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q139/jad0110/Misc/WaltherRoper.jpg

Iggy
March 3, 2007, 11:23 PM
Try Herret's Gunstocks.

http://www.herrett-stocks.com/thumbs/roperbut.jpg

Nematocyst
March 4, 2007, 02:04 AM
I thought I'd get to take the new 686 to the club (range) today.

I thought I'd get off work at 3, and head on over to shoot it for the first time.

I was wrong. I was tied up until 5. By that time, it was too late to get there.

So, disappointed, I went to the deli and bought a slice of pepperoni and some baklava.

I came back to the studio, and tried out the 686 in a Bianchi Shadow II holster (http://www.bianchi-intl.com/product/Prod.php?TxtModelID=7) with a pair of Perry suspenders (http://www.perrysuspenders.com/index.html).

I like the suspenders. They help support any belt carried handgun (along with keys, knives, watches, etc).

But, as suspected, I didn't like the 686 in an OWB. It's just too heavy.

Now, I admit, it could be this particular OWB.

It's designed as a holster for either strong side carry OR cross draw.

I tried it as both tonight. First cross draw. It stood up in an angle that is too acute. Just felt "in the way".

If I'm going to do cross draw with this revolver, I want it to lay at an angle that is closer to horizontal.

Second, I tried it as a strong side carry. That didn't work either.
Similar problem: stands up too tall, barrel digs into my hip.

If I can find a cross draw that's more horizontal and a comfortable carry, I'll consider it.
I'm seeking recommendations.

Otherwise, I'm leaning towards a shoulder holster like this one (http://www.copsplus.com/prodnum2207.php).

I suspect for camp carry, it'll be some kind of chest holster, like this one (http://www.simplyrugged.com/leather_goods/chesty_puller_conv.html).

What say you?

Nem

Iggy
March 4, 2007, 08:27 AM
Maybe Mernickle's cross draw holster is what you are looking for.

http://www.mernickleholsters.com/fc/fc_imgs/FC3s.jpg

pwrtool45
March 4, 2007, 09:26 AM
I didn't like the 686 in an OWB. It's just too heavy.

Now, I admit, it could be this particular OWB.

Could be, but the Bianchi #7 is a fairly solid piece of working leather. May not be super nice, but it'll hold the revolver in place and not sag. If it feels too heavy on the belt, you might check to see if the belt is of appropriate size. (Is it wide enough to fill the slots on the holster? How thick is it? How tight are you wearing it?) You also might try a rig which holds the gun a bit lower, as the #7 rides pretty high. That might help with the muzzle digging into you, as well as feeling a bit different on the belt (possibly helping with that heavy feeling).

I carried and competed in IDPA/SSR with an L-frame and a #7 on a Don Hume B109 trouser belt for several years and had no serious complaints about the setup, other than the fact that it really wasn't competitive. Served fine as a carry rig.

Oh, and I didn't have much luck with wearing it crossdraw, either. FWIW.

Nematocyst
March 5, 2007, 12:31 AM
Well, I took the new beast to the club today.

First sighted in a new scope on the relatively new Marlin 39A, and experienced a FTF problem (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=259973).

Then, shot the little mule 642. Damn, regardless of what others say, that little thing may be IS a work of art, and is what I wear around the studio (and it will be my CCW piece once I get the license), but IMO it is NOT fun to shoot. Its recoil is beyond comfortable for me, even with a set of full Hogue monogrips that replaced the stock grips.

I saved the maiden voyage with the 686 for last. And it was a pleasant ending.

First I loaded up 7 Magtech 158 gr. .38 FMC-flat. Shot them at 7 yds. Piece o' cake.

Yeah, I was all over the target, but it was the first shots, so I was fine with that.
Just taking it for a test spin, still not knowing exactly when the hammer was going to drop.

Then, I did 7 more, then 7 more.
By the end of the third set,
I was comfortable, most landing in or quite near the bullseye.

I did most of the third set in SA. Way easier.

(I really became aware of how long that DA trigger pull is. I'm still being very cautious with it.
By next trip, I think I'll be able to do the full pull more smoothly, and reach break more quickly.
This time, I was paying too much attention to aiming for bullseye, and taking too long to trigger break.)

Then, I loaded up some Rem .357 158 gr. SJHP.

I found no noticeable difference in recoil from the .38s. I was pleasantly surprised.

By that time, I was relaxing into the experience.
I guess I was expecting more of a pounding from the .357 loads.
Relative to the 642, it was very manageable, and fun.

My last set of the .357 rnds put 6 of 7 into about 3".
I thought to myself, I wouldn't want to be on the other side of the barrel of this tool.

I also acknowledged that this revolver has a lot of potential.
(I already knew that, but this experience took me to level 2.)

I considered doing another couple of sets at 25 yds, but was tired by then.
Early on in the day, I had been surrounded by .30-06 and .308 shooters, and was feeling concussed. :what:
(The muzzle blasts were palpable.) I was also feeling a bit bummed by the 39A FTF.

So, I headed home. Enough for one day.

Next week, I'll try my hand at longer distances.

One minor problem that I hope to overcome: ejection of spend cases isn't fast and clean.
They hang in the cylinder for me. (Same with my 642.) I wind up having to pull them out with my fingers.
Is that normal? Will they just drop out easily if I hit the ejector more forcefully?

Overall, for the first time out, I'm very happy with Mr. 686.

Bigga bada boom.

Nem

g5reality
March 5, 2007, 01:00 AM
Nematocyst-870,

I too find little difference between the .38 and .357 loads. Is the 686 not a perfectly balanced gun?

Congratulations again

and Happy shooting

Nematocyst
March 5, 2007, 01:28 AM
Is the 686 not a perfectly balanced gun?It is a perfectly balanced gun, G5. It just feels so comfortable and effortless.

Getting used to that LONG DA trigger pull is going to take a while. But I will.

It's mostly very smooth. Any roughness will work out with lots of dry fire. (Working on that now.)

This is SUCH a fine revolver.

Nematocyst
March 5, 2007, 04:53 AM
Maybe Mernickle's cross draw holster is what you are looking for.Iggy, I had that one bookmarked. Now, it looks even better.

It's got the right angle for cross draw carry. Will examine more closely.

If it feels too heavy on the belt, you might check to see if the belt is of appropriate size.
(Is it wide enough to fill the slots on the holster? How thick is it? How tight are you wearing it?)Tool,

My current belt is a 1.2" leather belt for Carhartts, not for gun carry.

I'm looking at gun belts, but have yet to purchase one.

My gun shop doesn't stock belts in my size (*).

I'd appreciate hearing opinions about those reinforced nylon belts v wide leather.

Which one will support a 40 oz handgun better?
___________

(* They stock belts for big people, not for smaller people. I've been frustrated for years dealing with racks filled with clothing dominated by lots of L, XL, and XXL, and one or two M & maybe a S as a token to thinner people, like we don't exist. I've finally come to accept that's largely (so to speak) due to the fact that we're predominantly "overweight". No offense, but it's true. There is an obesity epidemic in this country. The sizes of clothing - including belts - available in shops is a reflection of that. And we're not healthy because of it. We need to eat less, exercise more. Get out and walk some long trails with that 686! :neener: OK, off soapbox. Sorry, just had to vent.)

warriorsociologist
March 5, 2007, 10:21 AM
I wear a double-thickness 1.25" Filson belt when in jeans - works well for my holsters...though, I admit to pocket-carrying my 642 (Nemesis) most of the time.

pwrtool45
March 5, 2007, 07:40 PM
1.2" is a little thin. The belt I use is 1.5" wide and is constructed of pretty thick leather. Linky. (http://www.donhume.com/Products/ProductsPage.cfm?ProductID=82) In your case, I'd probably order a belt online. In the mean time, it might not be wise to spend money on a holster until the belt situation is rectified. Some people use the Wilderness Instructor belt (or clone thereof) with what seems to be positive results. No first hand experience on the matter.

Personally, I use the linked-to Don Hume B109 for carry and IDPA. Used it originally with my Bianchi #7 and currently use it with my Ready Tactical kydex rig. The belt's held up fine for many years.

OH25shooter
March 6, 2007, 08:27 AM
My proudly Made In America 686-5PP. Manufactured September 2000, no lock, Wolff spring kit, trigger job, Hogue grips, trijilion front sight.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y68/OH25shooter/DSCN2620.jpg

Ida Noski
March 6, 2007, 02:40 PM
Attempting to post pic.

g5reality
March 7, 2007, 02:20 AM
Welcome new Members:

Ida Noski
OH25shooter
pwrtool45
warriorsociologist
KONY
Nightcrawler

Glad you're here

Ida Noski
March 7, 2007, 10:59 AM
g5reality,
Thanks for the welcome. I've been lurking around here for a while. Don't post a whole lot, but sure do learn a lot by listening and watching.

Thanks again,

Jim

jad0110
March 7, 2007, 09:05 PM
In addition to a new gold bead Partridge style front sight for my 686, I was thinking of getting a different white-outline rear sight that has a wider gap between the two posts. I find that when focusing on the front sight I shoot better at distances greater than 21' when I can see light on either side of the front sight blade in the rear sight post. I shot a 6" S&W 66 once with this setup and it was amazingly accurate in my hands. I really liked "seeing the light" around the front sight. I recently shot a Kimber 1911 with a similar sight picture and made one large hole at 21'.

Any recommendations on the best combo and where I can get it from would be appreciated. My current front sight ramp is pinned in place if that helps.

frankt
March 7, 2007, 10:58 PM
I am joining also. I bought a 4" 686 about three months ago. I have always been fond of S&W revolvers and I wanted to try shooting IDPA matches with one.

I started with my 2 1/2 66 then tried my 4" Model 10 and finally decided to go all the way and get the 686.

I use a Kydex holster from Talon Tactical, Speed loader holders from Ready Tactical and Safariland Comp IIs and IIIs.

I have probably put around 500 rounds of my 158 gr handloads in .38 SPL and not had a minutes problem. I would like to get the cylinders chamfered but it is working OK the way it is for now.

The stainless finish is not as good as on some of my earlier S&Ws and I might have it bead blasted sometime in the future. I want to add some wood grips also.

All in all it is a great gun.

Nematocyst
March 8, 2007, 12:02 AM
I would like to get the cylinders chamfered...Frank (and others),

I'm assuming "chamfered" was a typo and that "chambered" is what you want to do,
but I could be wrong, of course.

In either case, I'm unclear about what that word means with respect to a 686
(or any other gun for that matter). Please explain.

Is that related to why extracting spent cartridges is not easy?
Is that why I have to pull them out why my fingers?

Guzzizzit
March 8, 2007, 02:28 PM
I've been looking to pick up a revolver for some time now. is $529.99 a decent price for a 686 Stainless steel (.357 mag) with a 4" barrel? It's brand new from the factory.

g5reality
March 8, 2007, 02:42 PM
Yes, good price for a New In Box 686+ 4"

On Gun Broker.com they are selling NIB for more. I paid $649 for mine @ a Los Angeles Gun Store in Late 2006.

You won't be disappointed once you've shot it.

Welcome to the club.

G5

Checkman
March 8, 2007, 02:53 PM
"chamfering" is when the edges of the cylinder chambers are beveled. It assists in the loading process. The bullets will hit the rounded edges and slide in. You don't have to be lined up exactly with the chamber openings. Saves time. Hard to have it done on the old P&R models.

The S&W factory will chamfer the chambers.

Nematocyst
March 8, 2007, 04:03 PM
$529.99 a good price on a 686?Guzz, I agree with G5: that's a very good price for a NIB 4".
I looked around a lot. Prices here were mostly $600+ (as high as $630 in my local store).

I found a new one on sale just north of here for $525.
(Normally it was $550 at that store; I just hit a lucky weekend. :) )

Checkman, thanks for the edumacation about "chamfering".
I guess I could have googled it. Interesting word, that is.

OK, so I understand it will aid with loading. Would it also aid extracting spent cases?
I mentioned here or somewhere that mine tend to stick, and I have to pull them out by hand.

Then again, maybe I'm not using the extractor forcefully enough.
Do others have that problem? Should the spent cases just drop out more easily?

Advice appreciated (says the former semi-auto shooter who is now a wheel gunner...)

Nem

Checkman
March 8, 2007, 04:56 PM
Try working the extractor with more force. It could indicate that the rounds are too hot - the cases might be swelling. Sometimes this can happen even with factory loads if something was wrong with a lot's propellent. It isn't unheard of with reloads. Somebody got carried away with the load.Trying to Wilcat a new load or something.

The other possibility is you might try having your cylinder chambers polished.This is a pretty common job and most professional gunsmiths can do it - as can the factory. Of course you can also have a smith look it over.

Nematocyst
March 8, 2007, 05:54 PM
Good advice, C'man. Thanks.
Try working the extractor with more force.Will do. Maybe I'm "babying" it.
It could indicate that the rounds are too hot - the cases might be swelling.Hmm. My 686 is brand new, and I've only had it to the range once, but I'm pretty sure the factory rnds I shot in it are not especially hot. Specifically, I shot two kinds of rnds, both 158 gr: Magtech.38 spl FMC-Flat, and Remington .357 mag SJHP.
The other possibility is you might try having your cylinder chambers polished.Excellent. I've found a great gunsmith here that is going to be doing some work for me soon on a rifle. I'll talk with him about that.

Checkman
March 8, 2007, 06:58 PM
Sure thing. Glad to help.

Ida Noski
March 8, 2007, 08:33 PM
Regarding ejection issues,
I find that sometimes if you shoot a bunch of .38 first, the shorter case causes buildup of "crud" in the cylinder so that when you fire .357 with the longer case, when it expands it can kind of hang up on that "crud".
That's my story and I'm stickin' to it:neener:

Jim

Checkman
March 9, 2007, 08:41 AM
That is another possible reason. Forgot about that one. :o

Nematocyst
March 9, 2007, 08:53 AM
I would expect that a build up of "crud" in the cylinders -
sufficient to stick spent cases - would occur after
several hundred rnds (w/o cleaning).

I checked my cylinders after firing ~ 20 .38 spl,
followed by ~10 .357. Mag.

IMO, there was not sufficient "crud" to stick spent cases.

And, the sticking was occurring with spent .38 cases as well,
not just .357s.

But I will keep an eye on it. :scrutiny:

Thanks for the suggestion.

Checkman
March 9, 2007, 08:58 AM
It is advised that if you shoot alot of 38 rounds through a magnum you should give the cylinder a good cleaning before firing 357 rounds. The cylinder is actually smaller with the buildup and can cause pressure around the longer magnum case. That can be a bad thing.:what:

Nematocyst
March 9, 2007, 09:01 AM
It is advised that if you shoot alot of 38 rounds through a magnum
you should give the cylinder a good cleaning before firing 357 rounds.C'man, what's "a lot"?

A) 10 - 20
B) 20 - 50
C) 50 - 100
D) 100 - 200
E) more than 200

g5reality
March 9, 2007, 11:03 AM
I would guess D but I'll probably follow E

tankusaz
March 9, 2007, 11:43 AM
I have a 686 with a cracked frame. It runs from the hammer slot along the right side to the bottom of the cylinder well. Can this be welded or repaired? Can the revolver be shot at all? Appreciate the help. Steve
After thought, my 686 is serial # AAB 50xx. I would like to get some wood grips. What frame would this be and what grips would fit it. This is the 1st Smith & Wesson I have owned and it is all new to me. Love the weapon tho', Thanks again, Steve

g5reality
March 9, 2007, 11:56 AM
tankusaz,

PM sent.

the 686 is a L-frame. Others I'm sure will have many options on different grips.

Guzzizzit
March 9, 2007, 01:12 PM
Well, I've just joined the 686 club. Did the paperwork this morning. (Excedrin headache number 104, buying a handgun at cabela's, but thats a topic for a different thread) Because of the 3 day waiting period i dont get to pick it up untill sunday, but i'm excited none the less.

g5reality
March 9, 2007, 01:15 PM
Lucky you I h ave a 10 day wait in California. will pick up my Remington 700 Monday and DROSing my Glock 26 in about half hour. Won't get to play with it for another 10 days.

G5

Welcome to the club

Guzzizzit
March 10, 2007, 02:01 AM
Is there anything i should do with my 686 before i shoot it? It's brand spankin new, never fired, saw the seal broke in front of me. Does it need oil or can i take it right to the range?

Also, i remember hearing a while back that one of the S&W frames was too light to shoot alot of .357 mag and should be used mainly with .38 specials. I think it was either the L frame or the K frame, does anyone know?


Oh, and g5, what part of california? I was born while my father was stationed at Vandenberg AFB in Lompoc.


Thanks,
Guzz

ugaarguy
March 10, 2007, 02:22 AM
Guzz, the L Frame is the beefed up version of the K Frame. Your 686 will be fine with a steady diet of 357 Mag. The K's run into more problems with lighter bullets - 125 gr - than heavier - 158 gr - in the full magnum loadings.

I'd clean the protective oil off and lightly relube with a good gun oil - I use breakfree or Mobil 1 motor oil. Make sure that the bore and chambers are free of oil as well. Then hit the range.

dogngun
March 10, 2007, 01:47 PM
I bought a 4" 596-3 almost 2 years ago. It has become my favorite .357 mag. A great shooting, well balanced, accurate, tough, great looking revolver.

I know you guys said 686, but there should be a place for the blue, too.

Mark

EDIT...Yeah, that's supposed to read 586-3. Thanks.

Nematocyst
March 10, 2007, 03:57 PM
...a 4" 596-3...Dogngun, I certainly would have no problem with including other similar models (like the blued version of 686), but then I'm not the president of this club (or even on the board of directors :rolleyes: ), so don't have the final word. I know that on the 642 club , other similar models are discussed, so I suspect something similar will apply here. (But again, I'll let others, notably G5, set those criteria.)

I am curious though: is the correct model of the blued version of a 686 a "596"?

I wondered if that was a typo and should have been "586" instead.

I find a "586 L-comp (http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&langId=-1&productId=43926&tabselected=tech&isFirearm=Y&parent_category_rn=)" model on Smith Wesson's page, but find only two references in google to "Smith Wesson Model 596", and one of those (on the Smith Wesson forum) is dead link.

Just curious. You know your gun's model number better than me. :)

Nem

g5reality
March 10, 2007, 04:14 PM
Welcome,

dogngun

YES you are always welcome here. Blued you say? Please post a pic as we'd all like to see it.

Nematocyst-870, your participation is exemplary, please consider yourself an important member of this club thread.

Also A Warm Welcome to New Members:
frankt:
Guzzizzit:
tankusaz:
ugaarguy:

KINGMAX
March 10, 2007, 04:32 PM
Yes I do own a S&W 686 - 1, one of the first w/ a 4 inch barrel. :) It has the large oversize Walnut grips. It is, (JMOHO - without reservation), one of the BEST Revolvers of all times. It is one of the best 'Service Revolvers' ever made. :fire:

jad0110
March 10, 2007, 11:40 PM
I have a 686 with a cracked frame. It runs from the hammer slot along the right side to the bottom of the cylinder well. Can this be welded or repaired? Can the revolver be shot at all? Appreciate the help. Steve
After thought, my 686 is serial # AAB 50xx. I would like to get some wood grips. What frame would this be and what grips would fit it. This is the 1st Smith & Wesson I have owned and it is all new to me. Love the weapon tho', Thanks again, Steve

:(

Sorry to hear about your 686. I'm almost 100% certain that a cracked frame can NOT be repaired. I most definitly would not shoot it until I had an experienced gunsmith look at it. Since it has a lifetime repair policy, I'd consider sending it back to S&W. They will most likely give you a new one. If you don't like the new ones, you can sell it to buy an older one.

Nem,

The blued version of the 686 is the 586. The 696 is an L Frame stainless 44 Special. I'd assume if S&W ever made a blue L Frame 44 spl, it would have been called the 596, so maybe that's what dogngun was referring to - but he called it a 357? Oh well, I dunno!

KONY
March 11, 2007, 12:07 AM
Already a member here but I long to be a member of the "627 Club" ... or unless S&W decides to release the 10-shot .357Magnum with the X-frame first! :evil:

Lawnman380
March 11, 2007, 05:06 AM
Can I sign up?????http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r134/frankcape/DSCN0145.jpg

pwrtool45
March 11, 2007, 09:34 AM
Nematocyst-870

WRT cases sticking: Work the extractor more forcefully. Also "flicking" the revolver (rotating the muzzle upward) right as the ejector is almost fully depressed should cleanly extract .38 and .357 empties. You should use enough force to temporarily leave a little circle imprint on whatever finger you use to operate the ejector rod. It should stay there for 10-20 seconds, depending on how calloused that digit is.

Gently pressing the ejector while holding the revolver stationary isn't going to pop the .357 empties out. If the extractor were long enough to do that you'd be having spent-case-under-the-star troubles. It likely won't knock all six .38 empties out, either. I assume the stuck .38s you're getting are the 2-3 chambers closest to the rollmark on the frame?

tankusaz

You're sure that "crack" isn't the sideplate seam?

Misc

The sticky at the top of the forum (Jim March's revolver checkout) also has some good info.

Depending on how interested you newer guys are there are books by kuhnhausen as well as other resources available on the web, such as this checklist (http://www.americanpistol.com/Pistolsmiths/swchecksheet.html) on the American Pistolsmiths Guild website. Geared mostly toward armorers/smiths, the second checklist should get you started. Many items on the list are subjective. Asking "how much" in this thread (or a new thread) should produce a ballpark answer. Same goes for unfamiliar terms. ("Singing" will probably be a new one to most. An explination is in the last post in this thread. (http://smith-wessonforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/530103904/m/875107028?r=1631077271))

bratch
March 11, 2007, 03:44 PM
Joined today.
http://img1.putfile.com/thumb/3/6915134330.jpg (http://www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=4957418)

Sean Dempsey
March 12, 2007, 05:24 PM
Would anyone in this thread recommend a 4" 686 for primary self-defense? I am considering selling an XD45 to purchase one of these guns, but want to gather some opinions first.

benedict1
March 12, 2007, 05:45 PM
That's why I purchased mine--it will be shot a lot, but it will be the 'nightstand' gun every night from now on.

Nematocyst
March 12, 2007, 06:21 PM
Sean D,

My (and I suspect others') answer to your good question will depend on how you define "primary self-defense". In particular:

Will it be a carry gun - and if so, concealed or open carry - or will it mostly stay on the night stand?
Is self-defense here in reference to bi-pedal hominids or does it include larger toothy tetrapods?

For example, my 686 will not likely be an EDC outside of camp and wilderness travel. I find it just too massive for city carry. I don't even keep it on my nightstand; the 870 is my "go to" for bumps in the night.

Once I get CCW permitted (I'm working on that now), I'll EDC my 642, but for late fall, winter and early spring, may also carry a K-frame (likely a Mod 60; exploring options now for potential future purchase).

Nem

Sean Dempsey
March 12, 2007, 08:06 PM
Sean D,

My (and I suspect others') answer to your good question will depend on how you define "primary self-defense". In particular:

* Will it be a carry gun - and if so, concealed or open carry - or will it mostly stay on the night stand?
* Is self-defense here in reference to bi-pedal hominids or does it include larger toothy tetrapods?

For example, my 686 will not likely be an EDC outside of camp and wilderness travel. I find it just too massive for city carry. I don't even keep it on my nightstand; the 870 is my "go to" for bumps in the night.

Once I get CCW permitted (I'm working on that now), I'll EDC my 642, but for late fall, winter and early spring, may also carry a K-frame (likely a Mod 60; exploring options now for potential future purchase).

Nem




It will be a nightstand, car, and purse gun. I conceal my 638 in a IWB all the time. The larger 686 would be for "off the body" carry, which is fine because I have a man bag I take most places also. But in the car, at home, or places where I have my bag, I'd like to have a larger .357 ready, but still have the .38 in my waistband.

sounds like this is the gun for me, though.

Nematocyst
March 12, 2007, 08:28 PM
sounds like this is the gun for me, though.Given what you just wrote in response to my query for clarification, I agree. ;)

Speaking of "man bags", check out the Versapacks by Maxpedition (http://maxpedition.com/store/pc/viewCategories.asp?idCategory=4). :cool:

Sean Dempsey
March 12, 2007, 08:41 PM
Speaking of "man bags", check out the Versapacks by Maxpedition.

I own the black Fatboy already :D

I also have this for more casual use, the Gravis Sidearm
http://www.zappos.com/n/p/p/7252281.html


And I ALSO have the jack bauer CTU bag, complete with CTU monogram.

g5reality
March 12, 2007, 09:22 PM
Sean D,

Welcome to the Club

I'd have to agree with Nematocyst-870, I have a Glock 19 in the nightstand, The Remington 870 is on my wife's side of the bed. I carry daily a 642 and will be using tha as primaril ya BUG whe I get my Glock 26, next week. Te 686 is a great all around gun. It's a bit heavy to carry IWB all day. I primarily use it in an OWB holster Strong side when camping, hiking and out in the wilderness.

G5

jad0110
March 12, 2007, 10:21 PM
Sean,

My primary nightstand gun. Hate to be the BG coming face to face with this :eek: ! :D

686+ 4"

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q139/jad0110/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Model%20686%20Plus%20357%20Magnum/Large/686_12-1.jpg

10xforever
March 13, 2007, 04:43 PM
Thanks for invite to the 686 club.
I recently purchased a model 686-6 with 6" barrel and Powerport option.
The gun came with Hogue grips which are outstanding.
I like the partridge sights, as i do a lot of target shooting at the local range.
I currently load my own with the following components:
Case is starline 357 mag
Primer is Winchester small pistol
Powder is W231 at 3.2 Gr
Bullets include 148 Gr hollow base wadcutters, bevel base wadcutters and double bevel base wadcutters.
All shoot great in this 686.
I do not have a picture yet but plan to take one and i will upload in near future.

WJR
March 14, 2007, 01:02 AM
10xforever,

How are you liking the powerport? I recently purchased a -4 with powerport and it is now my favorite 686. It is a 6" like yours and has the patridge sight.

My last range session was really fun with it. I do not reload, but it handled all of the factory ammo I had with aplomb, both .38 and .357.

WJR

2hawk
March 14, 2007, 02:45 AM
My PC686+

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d150/2hawk/PICT0035.jpg

Nicest shootin' revo I've ever had. Never part with her. :D

KONY
March 14, 2007, 11:33 PM
My primary nightstand gun. Hate to be the BG coming face to face with this!

Jad, maybe he won't mind as it seems unloaded! :neener:

benedict1
March 15, 2007, 12:05 AM
The ten day wait was over this morning and my 686+ is out of 'custody', custody of the ********** bureaucrats. It is the 4" bbl. version.

I shot 100 rounds of light .357 Mag loads, 6.1 gr Unique with 158 gr plated bullet and 50 rounds of .38 Spec., 3.9 gr Win 231 with the same bullet. I had a little problem jerking the trigger in double action--I'm mostly a 1911 shooter. So I just finished off the rest of the rounds shooting single action, which was most satisfying.

My final 50 rounds at 15 yds with the .38 Spec loads starting grouping hits nicely in and around a 4" circle.:D

I am going to shoot it again tomorrow and really concentrate on the d. a. trigger pull. I shoot a G21 too and have no trouble with that d.a. pull; the 686+ is a little heavier and a little different feel, obviously.

I will get a picture posted later in the week. It is one handsome revolver! I brought it home and cleaned it and polished it up--very classy.

Nematocyst
March 15, 2007, 02:17 AM
...maybe he won't mind as it seems unloaded! :neener: Unlike this one ... :evil:

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=53861&d=1172377011

benedict1
March 15, 2007, 06:45 PM
I have only shot for about a year and mostly with 1911-style semi-autos, so my new 686+ double action is a new challenge.

Here is a target I shot at 7 yds today--for the orange area about 60 rounds; for the head area I shot at 10 yds and these were the last ~40 rounds I shot--I got a little tired and jerked about a dozen of them--

I feel good about these-they were all .38 Special. I didn't shoot .357 Mag today because I thought it best to shoot lighter loads while trying to learn to shoot double action.

Edited: I neglected to mention--I shoot left-handed

Golddog
March 15, 2007, 07:37 PM
I've owned maybe ten 586's (including the scarce 3") and probably twenty 686's in every barrel length (including three 5" and the very rare 7"). For awhile I also had the ported, bead blast 3" 681.

Currenty I've got a 2 1/2"; three 3" (including the rare unluted bead blast model and the PC ported, unfluted, factory night sight version); three 4" (including a CS-1), a 5" Bill Davis National Match unfluted with Patridge sights; and a 6", which has the best trigger of any of the hundreds of DA revolvers I've shot.

I've tried most of the readily available grips and prefer Ahrends round butt finger grooves and Eagle Classics for the square butts.

The best concealed carry holster has been the Tucker Texas Heritage IWB. The handsomest is a Saguaro Leather IWB. For shoulder carry, I prefer an old Lawman Leather Dirty Harry rig, built gor 4" N frames but perfect for L frames, too.

jad0110
March 15, 2007, 08:44 PM
Jad, maybe he won't mind as it seems unloaded!

Yeah, well, I was just seeing if you guys were paying attention ... Good job!

I figured to that if it were loaded I would have violated one of the 4 rules :p .

Nem got around that though with a really cool angle. I'll have to try that sometime.

benedict1,

Those look like pretty respectable shot groups to me. Give it time, the S&W DA pull will grow on you to the point that you'll like it as much as anything else (if not more so).

WJR
March 15, 2007, 09:46 PM
Golddog,

I aspire to have a collection like yours.

WJR

barneyrw
March 17, 2007, 03:33 AM
Does anyone know if the 686 plus cylinders are interchangable with the 6 shot 686's or 681's?

jad0110
March 17, 2007, 08:33 AM
Does anyone know if the 686 plus cylinders are interchangable with the 6 shot 686's or 681's?

No, as the timing of the two are totally different for one thing (one cylinder has to rotate and stop on 6 holes and the other 7). That would probably mean having to get all new guts for the gun, and at that point you have a really good excuse to add another wheelie to your collection :neener: !

Now, you could move a 6 shot cyinder to another 6 shot gun, but there is usually no need to do that. Plus, I assume that there would be some hand fitting involved to get the cylinder to fit the yolk barrel (err, the thingie that the cylinder spins on :o ) without being too tight or too lose (end play/shake).

Just curious, were the 681 and 581 offered in 7 shot format? I know the 586 was.

Checkman
March 17, 2007, 09:31 AM
Not during ther regular production run of those models (581 & 681). Both were discontinued before the seven shot models were introduced by Smith.

I don't have my copy of Supica and Nahas with me as I type this (I'm at work shhhh don't tell the boss), but I believe that the Performance Center has made a special run of 681's with seven shot cylinders in the past few years. However I'm not certain.

WheelGunMom
March 17, 2007, 06:21 PM
Any other ladies out there with a 686+???

Mine is the 4", with Pachmayr Compact grips just like jad0110's.

The long trigger pull takes some getting used to, and it's a bit heavy for me for extended range time, but it's a thing of beauty and I love to shoot it.:)

(+1 for Lead Away patches -- don't know how to get the front of the cylinder really clean without using these . . .)

jad0110
March 17, 2007, 06:39 PM
(+1 for Lead Away patches -- don't know how to get the front of the cylinder really clean without using these . . .)

Amen to that! Lead away patches are one of the greatest cleaning implements for stainless steel guns ever devised, IMO. Right up their with Breakfree CLP, Hoppes #9, and boresnakes.

Mine won't wear the Pachmayrs forever. I'd like to get some Ahrends exotic hardwoods for it someday.

So, where's the pic? :p

WheelGunMom
March 17, 2007, 06:52 PM
So, where's the pic?:p

I don't have any pictures of "Lucky 7" -- guess I'll have to dig out the digital camera and take some cheesecake shots of her reclining on my nightstand.:D

glockman19
March 19, 2007, 12:10 PM
I have a 686 4" I'll join.

ace99
March 19, 2007, 01:01 PM
i had one. it was a police issued one. it had some scratches so i just sanded it and gave it a brushed stainless look. and put some hogue grips on it, and got a speedloader. it was ok, but i wanted a .44 more, but that was all i could get at the time.

yours are nicer than mine. mine didnt have that rail on top like s&w's have now.

Deanimator
March 19, 2007, 01:42 PM
side note: i seem to be noticing a preference for stainless over blued on the revolver forum. i like the blued myself, but the stainless ain't bad. anyone care to comment?
I currently own and have only ever owned one stainless firearm of any kind.

I don't like stainless. I looked for a 3" S&W Model 13 for over a year and didn't see a SINGLE one at local gunshows. I finally bit the bullet and jumped on a great deal on the nearly identical Model 65s that CDNN had last fall.

My preference is still for blued firearms. The only other stainless gun I'd consider would be a pre-lock 4" 686, if I couldn't find a 586 for a reasonable price. I have the unpleasant suspicion that it's going to be a 686.

Brian Williams
March 19, 2007, 03:26 PM
Does anyone know if the 686 plus cylinders are interchangable with the 6 shot 686's or 681's?

No, as the timing of the two are totally different for one thing (one cylinder has to rotate and stop on 6 holes and the other 7). That would probably mean having to get all new guts for the gun, and at that point you have a really good excuse to add another wheelie to your collection :neener: !

Now, you could move a 6 shot cyinder to another 6 shot gun, but there is usually no need to do that. Plus, I assume that there would be some hand fitting involved to get the cylinder to fit the yolk barrel (err, the thingie that the cylinder spins on :o ) without being too tight or too lose (end play/shake).

A 7 shot cylinder can be fitted to a 6 shot gun and visa-versa, If anything the hand might have to be changed. But you are looking at at least $150 for the cylinder assembly including; the cylinder/extractor star, the ejector rod, the cylinder lock pin and spring. Plus fitting a new cylinder will be about $50 at a local smith.

I called S&W and asked approx price for this conversion and it would be around $200 to switch from a 6 shot to a 7 shot cylinder. This did not include shipping both ways.

cowboy117
March 19, 2007, 09:44 PM
686-4,4",Hogue Monogrip,trigger job.Sweet!!!!!!!!!!:)

Sun195
March 19, 2007, 11:59 PM
Just recently joined the club: 686 4". Debated whether to go with a six or seven shot model - six just seemed right for a revolver.

Still trying to figure out what grips to go with. Don't like the Hogues that came on it. Got Uncle Mike's on right now, but they don't fit all that well. May try some Pachmayrs next.

migD
March 20, 2007, 10:35 PM
might as well make my first post here.

686+, 4" barrel and hogues. for years i've been itching to put some money into it but it just works so well i never got around to it. i think i'm gonna finally break down and get a wolff spring pack this week to start.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b44/mikeD4V/dec25012_2.jpg

Baphomet
March 20, 2007, 10:42 PM
Still trying to figure out what grips to go with...

I might suggest something from Mr. Kim Ahrends (http://ahrendsgripsusa.com/revolver.htm).

His square-butt conversion grips are the best damn grips I've ever put on a Smith'.

JGreywolf
March 23, 2007, 05:40 PM
I read your posts for hours after finding this. Really enjoy 686's and own several.
Bought a 686 -1m, couple of months ago for $399 + tax in about 80-85 %, mostly scratches, bore very good. Was probably police carry. Am curious as to you all prefer early 686, 686-1 or later 686 -5, etc. I believe action jobs and untouched revolvers of first series guns are smoother.
Thank you and take care......

Nematocyst
March 24, 2007, 08:24 PM
MigD & JGreywolf, welcome to THR, and to The 686 C... (Be sure to check out our "new members" thread in General Gun Discussions. Good place to make your interests be known.)
__________

Today, I'm picking up on some research that I started a while back,
but got side tracked: one or more holsters from my 686+ 4".

I'm pretty sure I'm going to end up with a chest holster of some kind for it for hiking with a backpack with waist belt (for example, maybe a Simply Rugged Chesty Puller (http://www.simplyrugged.com/leather_goods/chesty_puller_conv.html)), and am considering shoulder, cross draw and strong side holsters as well. (I've ordered a Galco gun belt, and want to get it before advancing too far on and trying out cross draw and strong side.) I'm also hungry for a Maxpedition Versapack (http://www.maxpedition.com/store/pc/viewPrd.asp?idcategory=&idproduct=6).

But today, another option crossed my mind that might work as well as chest holster with a backpack: a thigh-mounted holster. I know nothing about these except for having seen a few images on more tactical oriented web pages, like this one (http://www.copsplus.com/prodnum1617.php). So far, the only holsters like that I've found are for pistols, not revolvers. I'm not even sure if they make such things for revolvers.

Such a holster could work well for me because while being supported by the belt, the holster itself would hang low and thus not interfere with backpack waist belt use.

Do any of you have knowledge about such a holster for revolvers? Names, models, links, advice, pros, cons...?

Thanks.

Nem

Rollis R. Karvellis
March 26, 2007, 09:07 AM
Nematocyst-870 those pepperroni&baklava sandwich's give me gas:neener:
Love the 686 have a 7 shot, now looking for a used one for open sight shooting, the whole sale is $509.00 as of 03-22-07.

ga41
March 28, 2007, 11:26 PM
I'll join in, I bought my 686 in the mid eighties right after Shooting Times tested one. Mine is the 6" adjustable Front sight model. Perfection indeed

Nematocyst
March 28, 2007, 11:30 PM
Still enjoying my 4" - even though I didn't have time to shoot it at the range today due to problems encountered with other guns :( .

But, I also got to handle and fire a friend's 686 2.5". Wow. What a nice revolver. Felt very solid, manageable (even though the .357 rnds were a handful in it, more so than in my 4"). Way bigger difference for some reason between the .38 spl +P rnds and the .357 Mag rnds, unlike in mine. Not sure I understand why.

Also, he had his "blacked" (some kind of duracoat like finish, but not duracoat), so it's all black. Beautiful revolver.

Now of course, I want one ... :uhoh:

benedict1
March 29, 2007, 12:39 PM
The 686+ story gets better and better for me--7 shots with .38 Special, 158 gr plated bullets at 7 yds. The 5 shots in the orange can be covered with a 25 piece. I am definitely hooked. Oh, yeah, I shot them double action.:what:

Nematocyst
March 29, 2007, 01:28 PM
Benedict, nice shooting.

Remind us, please, what barrel length?

benedict1
March 29, 2007, 02:25 PM
Sorry--4".

It has the standard Hogue grips on it and the standard sights.

I have cheated just a little--we have a first-class pistolsmith at the range where we shoot and he did some lightening on the double-action trigger pull for me. It started at 12.5# and he got it down to 7#. Reason? I want my wife to shoot it too and she couldn't quite get that 12# trigger back to the "boom" spot.

The single action pull is fantastic! It is smoother than any semi-auto in our collection and that includes a Wilson and two Kimbers.

This revolver is becoming a bit of an obsession.

Nematocyst
March 29, 2007, 02:27 PM
The single action pull is fantastic!I have repeatedly described the SA pull like this:
you don't actually have to pull the trigger, just think about it.

LanEvo`
March 29, 2007, 02:43 PM
The first model was the best looking...No lock, no MIM parts, stamped sideplate.I have to agree. Here's mine:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v58/anwarius/Guns%20and%20Knives/SWpic01.jpg

I also own a 6" 586 (no dash). Sorry had to get that in there.

Me too ;)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v58/anwarius/Guns%20and%20Knives/SWpic03.jpg

benedict1
March 29, 2007, 02:46 PM
I have repeatedly described the SA pull like this:
you don't actually have to pull the trigger, just think about it.

Exactly!

Stainz
March 29, 2007, 09:09 PM
I put a HiViz front sight, Ahrends square conversion f.g. cocobolo stocks, and reduced effort Wolff springs in my new 6" 66-6 the day it arrived from CDNN ($350 - what a deal!), along with a new 2" 10-11 ($280 - another deal!). Before that day, in 9/03, I hadn't touched, much less shot, either a .38 or a .357M. My life was happy - between .44 and .454. That revolver just felt great. The full lugs of the 6" 686+ just made it muzzle-heavy to me - and I don't like Hogue rubber grips (That changed when the .500 Magnum grips became available!). Within a few months, the 5" half lug Stocking Dealer Exclusive 686+ was available - and I knew I'd have to have one.

I delayed acquiring one until the next fall. I just couldn't see such a close duplicate of what I had. The 5" 686-6+ had the nice partial lug, taking some of that weight off the muzzle, and already had the HiViz and the same Ahrends stocks I initially put on my 6" 66. I wasn't too sure about the near-duplication, they both even have the Lock, but S&W gluttony prevailed. Ultimately, I waved good-bye to my old friend - my first DA revolver - a 7.5" .454 Ruger SRH... my shooting hand regained some feeling as the local pusher took the SRH on trade. Not much moola changed hands - for some reason, the 5"-er was $489 vs the 4" standard 686+ a few inches away in the case being ticketed at $519. Oddly, it handles very similarly to the 6" 66 - weight and 'pointability'-wise. I had another set of reduced effort Wolff's, so, after 'break-in', it got a spring change. Their triggers are similar, yet different. I feel quite fortunate to have such fine revolvers.

Now the bad news... I shoot .38's and wimpy-.357M's. I have never bought a .357M round for either revolver. In fact, today found me loading the hottest rounds thus far for them - a 125gr Zero JHP over 5.5gr Titegroup in mixed .357M brass - should be 1050-1100 fps - watch out! Up until the time I try these, the hottest rounds I have had through either .357 is the Rem R38S12 +P rated 158gr LHPSWC .38's - the so-called 'FBI loads' - which made 990-997 fps. As .38 launchers, these guys are super. In fact, as wimpy 125gr Berry's FP @ 665 fps .38 launchers, for 'pinging' steel plates, they just cannot be beat - no recoil - accurate - and 'ping'. I hate to think which one would go first... like that 5" 686+. I do keep an HKS 587A or two loaded with those FBI loads, and a trio of 10's for both the 66 and the 10. I keep SD loads ready in speedloaders/moonclips for all of my revolvers in a strategic - and unlocked - spot, while the revolvers are locked up.

I don't see another 686/+ in my future - that full lug dislike. I do see a 620, the 4" 66's replacement built on an L-frame and 686+ style 7-shot cylinder - but with a partial lug. It'd have to have some nice Ahrends, of course...

Stainz

sfmittels
March 29, 2007, 10:17 PM
Count me in. I've got a plain-vanilla 686-5 4-inch 7-shot (no lock). It's got the second-best trigger pull on any gun I've ever owned OR fired, but the other one doesn't count because it was heavily stoned (it, too, survived the early 70s). I tried it with a set of Crimson Trace lasergrips a few years ago, but they would lose their zero if it even bumped something, so I gave up. That's okay - I like the stock Hogues much better anyway.

Nematocyst
March 30, 2007, 04:46 AM
Count me in.You're in this club, too?

Sfmittels, you're going like it here.

Nem

PS: For those of us
who like fewer keystrokes,
what do we call you?
SF?
SFM?
MIT?

Nematocyst
March 31, 2007, 02:08 AM
The following statement from this article (http://www.gunthorp.com/ammo%20basics.htm) made me smile broadly.

The 45 ACP has compiled an impressive record as an effective stopper, virtually tied with the .357Wow. You mean my little ol' 686 is ranked up there with the almighty .45 ACP?

Hey, I'm proud. :D

Maybe I'll buy another one with a 2.5" barrel for carry.

Or will it be a 60? (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=263134)

For the next revolver, it's a matter of weight as much as power, but dang, that 686+ 2.5" is a fine revolver...

Rollis R. Karvellis
March 31, 2007, 07:50 AM
Stainz try the 110gr xtp-hp over 19gr of 2400 with a fed200 smpp I can get one hole groups at fifty yards with this combo.

warriorsociologist
March 31, 2007, 04:05 PM
6" 686-4 plus currently...looking for / to "make" a 686 Mountain gun.

WJR
April 8, 2007, 09:17 PM
BTT. I wanted to revive this thread.

WJR

sportsterguy
April 9, 2007, 09:39 PM
Hello all. Have a 2.5" 686 and a 4" 586 in nickle. Don't see many of the nickles around. Gotta say these two pistols are the best shooting revolvers that I own. Had the trigger smoothed out on the 586 and will put it up against a Python any day of the week for accuracy and trigger pull. Keep the 2.5 in the truck for company and always enjoy it's comforting presence. Anyone have any idea what the 4" nickle is worth? It is in Xcellent condition and still have the original box and papers.

Sportsterguy

ASTCS/E-8 US Coast Guard Helicopter Rescue Swimmer ret.

(Did Costners job but somehow my check was a little on the thin side compared to his 13 mil. Donations being accepted to supplement my retirement check at this time. Please PM me for mailing address)

AMT Back-up (Good for throwing at BG's or as a paperweight)
model 36 nickle (light carry)
model 66 3"
model 586 4" nickle
model 686 2.5"
model 57 4"
model 58 4" nickle
CZ-75B
CZ-83
SA 1911 semi-custom (heavy carry)
Ruger SB 4 5/8"
Sig 228

SwampWolf
April 10, 2007, 04:09 PM
Submitting membership application. A couple of years ago, I traded a 696 for a 4" 686+ (-5). I have many other revolvers and pistols that are well-suited for self-defense but I think the 686+ with a 4" barrel may be the ultimate "nightstand" self-defense handgun. Extreme reliability, no safetys to undo, no compressed springs to get fatigued and stuffed with seven 125 gr JHP .357 Mag. rounds (the very load much research has revealed to be the top-rated "man-stopper") makes this revolver a serious candidate for best handgun HD duty. As much as I like certain S&W "K" frame revolvers for self-defense (including the models 13, 65 and 19), I feel the extra weight of the 686's "L" frame helps dampen recoil and the full-length barrel underlug aids in reducing barrel jump; all contributing to more controllable repeat shots.

However, as a retired le who carried a sidearm for over thirty years on a daily basis, I have to say that, imo, the "L" frame is a mite heavy and bulky for regular carrying concealed duties. It can, of course, be done but I think there are better choices out there. As a matter of fact, I'm an advocate of having multiple sidearms to employ in varied situations: in hot weather (or when social circumstances limit the size of a gun) my pocket-carried 642 is perfect; in most other arenas I tote a 6906 or a SIG 220 Carry in 45 ACP.

But at home, in my nightstand, a 686 lies at the ready. And not to fret, Nemo, in a closet not far from the bed, a 12 ga. Benelli Nova is on tap if time permits...

glockman19
April 10, 2007, 04:21 PM
SwampWolf, thanks.

I too have the 686/642 Combo. I agree tha tthey are two of the bets revolvers around. I pocket carry the 642 and also have it as my nightstand gun because of the CTC laser grips. The 686 has been spending time in the safe keeping my others company.

I have been considering getting another 686 6" or 3" to go along with my 4".

Nematocyst
April 11, 2007, 04:15 AM
And not to fret, Nemo, in a closet not far from the bed, a 12 ga. Benelli Nova is on tap if time permits...:D

S'Wolf: nice. We think a lot alike.

12 ga for serious social work near the sleeping area;
686+ in 4" for the night stand;
642 for those times that demand light weight and small.

However, as a retired le who carried a sidearm for over thirty years on a daily basis, I have to say that, imo, the "L" frame is a mite heavy and bulky for regular carrying concealed duties. It can, of course, be done but I think there are better choices out there.I heard that.

I bought my 686 4" mainly for wilderness carry (in some suitable holster, perhaps slung from a shoulder holster), but am now seeking a more intermediate weight revolver between the 686 & the 642.

I've been giving thought lately to a 686 2.5"; balance is fantastic,
but it only saves a meager few ounces over the 4".

Any thoughts about a model 60 in 3"? (http://thehighroad.org/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=2972)

Nem

acdodd
April 11, 2007, 04:02 PM
I'm in.
I bought my 4" 686 around 1977 from a Navy buddy for $100 .
It is the one gun I will have until my son inherits it, then his son after him.
Came with pachmayr grips on and the original wood unused in the box.
A couple of months ago I put the wood grips on for the first time in 30 years .
It sure does look good in the original configuration.
AC

SwampWolf
April 11, 2007, 06:34 PM
Nem, we do seem to be on the same page a lot of the time. I have a Model 60 with the 3" barrel and it's stoked with .38 Special + Ps with 125 gr Semi-jacketed HollowPoints. I like the adjustable sights and the extra weight helps tame recoil (and I don't care what anybody says, I've shot a LOT of handguns in my time and I've yet to find a gun more unpleasant to shoot than my 642 using +P ammo-mind you, it is the perfect pocket pistol and I would never be without it!).

The 3" Model 60 is one of my favorite "trail" guns. I'm in my mid-sixties so (excess) weight becomes more and more of an issue when I'm doing my thing. I try to get to the Boundry Waters every other year or so and portaging alone from lake to lake ,toting my canoe makes shedding unneeded weight a priority. As an aside, though there are many bears in the areas I frequent, my main reason for having a firearm in camp is to deal with the possibility of a two-legged menace- no 911 in the wilderness! The little Model 60 seems to strike an ideal compromise between adequate "stopping power" and compact portability. I must confess, though, I've been eyeing one of them Smith light-weight .44 Magnums- if they weren't so dang expensive! :eek:

perpster
April 12, 2007, 12:52 AM
Anyone know if the 2 1/2" 686 Plus (7-shot) was made before the change to MIM? I'm talking regular production, not Performance Center. Thanks.

hexidismal
April 12, 2007, 03:19 AM
Wish I could get a picture, but my camera is on the fritz. For the last few days I've taken the 6" 686 that I have pictured in post #9 of this thread and I've polished it down to an absolute mirror finish, even on the parts of the gun that have the bead blasted finish, all except for the circle around the muzzle. Looks pretty neat. :D I'm not sure I even could get a proper picture with the light reflection without having some kind of diffusing light box.

perpster: I don't think so. I could be wrong about this, but I've been led to believe that all the +1 models are post MIM.

mkonops
April 12, 2007, 09:47 AM
First handgun I bought was this 686+ 4" in 357 Mag. Been with me ever since, and it found itself a set of leser grips somehow :evil:

http://www.boazct.com/gun/686plus.jpg

benedict1
April 12, 2007, 09:58 AM
Mine just acquired a 2x 42mm Tru Glo Red Dot sight and Weigand Mount. Funny how that happens.

KINGMAX
April 12, 2007, 01:44 PM
A 686-1 is truly a classic. The first run was the best I feel. Can't improve on perfection.

MR.G
April 12, 2007, 08:02 PM
I have a pair of 686 Plus revolvers with 4" barrels. Both have an action job, and Wolf springs. They are the best shooting guns I have ever owned. Really awesome guns.

Stainz
April 12, 2007, 09:05 PM
My 6" 66-6 and 5" h-l 686-6 7-shooter:
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u307/Stainz_2007/IMG_0210.jpg

perpster
April 13, 2007, 03:32 AM
Hex, I'm hearing there is such an animal, and even has the old-style thumblatch. But no confirmation, photo or model # yet.

mormonsniper
May 5, 2007, 11:59 PM
I've owned a 686 no dash 6 in, sn: AAF 68XX, for a long time. Bought new at a Rod & Gun Club in Giessen Germany many years ago when they first came out (at least to us in Germany).I left Germany in late 1982 so I think I bought it a year or so before I PCS'd.


Blessings to all,
ms

(yes I am)


eta: no S&W stamp on the side plate. Is one suppose to be there?

glockman19
May 6, 2007, 01:06 AM
Welcome,
mormonsniper

Nematocyst
May 6, 2007, 05:26 PM
I haven't visited this thread in a while. No lack of interest, just extremely busy at work (read, eating my lunch) and my limited gun time has been pulled elsewhere for a while.

However, I have a 686 specific question, and where better to ask it than here?

My question is about a comparison between 3" and 4" 686s.

For those of you who own one, or preferably both, what's the max range that you can consistently keep all rnds on, say, a 12" pie plate (or some other reasonable minute of quadruped or biped metric)?

If you site range data, please specify which barrel: 3" or 4".

I'm asking because I'm considering replacing my 4" 686 with a 3". I originally bought a 4" so that I could, in a pinch, hunt deer with it, even though it's mainly an SD gun for wilderness camps. When I was researching this revolver, I told people that I may occasionally hunt with it, so they said, understandably, "If you're going to hunt with it, don't go with less than a 4" barrel."

But now, I'm re-evaluating the main purpose of my 686. I'm understanding that far and away, it's main purpose is going to be SD, with use as a hunting weapon ONLY in an emergency (which is to say, rarely or hopefully never).

I LOVE the 686. It has found a permanent place in my tool kit. But I'm finding the 4" to be just a little too unwieldy for me, a bit barrel heavy, and just too long to comfortably handle for me. (I'm a relatively smaller person; tall and thin.) So, I'm starting to consider a 3" to replace it, but am unsure how much accuracy I'm going to give up when I lose that extra inch.

Sadly, I've been so busy at work that I've shot my beautiful 686 far too infrequently to even have a good sense of what its realistic range is for keeping all rnds on said 12" pie plate. Hence my question about the comparison.

Yes, I fully understand that such results are STRONGLY influenced by the shooter, and only partly a function of barrel length. But I'm only looking for approximations here, and those who have shot both (with the same skill level) will be able to offer the best estimates.

I haven't made any decisions yet, and am open to arguments pro or con about the transition. I won't make a decision for at least a month (finances is driving that more than anything).

Thanks for data and opinions. Reading with interest.

Nem

Stainz
May 6, 2007, 06:34 PM
Oddly, my 'short barrel' .38/.357M revolvers are both .38's, a 2" 10 and that fairly recent 642. I did have a 3" 65, but it's fixed sight made my .38's and wimpy .357M's a challenge due to the 'wrong' blade height. I sold the 3"-er, determined to replace it one day with an adjustable sighted 686+ - enter a new one from S&W... now, all I need is the moola! No, I won't sell one of my 5'-ers; a h-l 686+ and a PC JM 627 V-Comp... too much S&W gluttony here!

I will relate my experiences with 3", 4", 6", & 6.5" .44's... somewhat predictive of your anticipated results. The 3" is a 696, the 6.5" were 24's - .44 Specials. The 4" & 6" are 629's - .44 Magnums. The ammo used is my favorite .44 Special - a 240gr LSWC or LRNFP over 4.6 gr Titegroup in a Federal LP primed Starline brass case. The measured muzzle velocity, as expected, increased from 740 fps from the 3" 696 to 815 fps from the 6.5" 24's. I ultimately said goodbye to the 24's in favor of a new 6" SS 629, and the velocity drop was not statistically significant from the 6.5".

When the rear sights were adjusted for the range, 15 or 25 yd, the groups grew smaller as the barrel length increased - from a hand held shooting stance. At 100yd - shooting freehand at a 16" steel plate - hits were reported more frequently from the longer barrels - and with less 'Kentucky elevation'. Still, from a sandbag, the 3" 696 could hit 2-3 times out of five easily... but the 4" 629, Mountain Gun or standard 4", was 3-4 out of six. The short sight radius of the 3" is a problem. That 6" 629? It thinks it is a rifle!

So - if you are trying to dispose of a 16" diameter target at 100yd shooting free-hand, a long barrel helps - as does less caffein. Now, go to something stabilizing - like sandbags - and that 3"/4" is fine - but you knew that. If you get rid of your 4" for that new 3" 686+ - be prepared to find a longer barreled .38/.357M, too - it's a matter of time - and, revolver, particularly S&W, gluttony!

Stainz

PS My 6" 66 is a great shooter - the partial lug keeps it from feeling so muzzle heavy, like a 6" 686 - and 66's are around - as are the blued versions - 19's. Good luck!

BoneDigger
May 6, 2007, 07:27 PM
May I join?

My new 686-2...

http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n203/T_McMakin/Guns/686.jpg

Todd

Nematocyst
May 8, 2007, 03:51 AM
BD, welcome.

Stainz, good advice. Thanks.

Now, here's a question.

A trusted THR colleague tells me that the 686 3" has been "reintroduced",
and provides this thread on the SW forum (http://smith-wessonforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/530103904/m/3751033222/p/1) as evidence (read the 6th post from the top to find, "The newly reintroduced 686 in 3" is next on my list")

Yet, today, I called two gun shops from which I've bought guns, and both say, "686 3" are not available".

AND, I've tried for 10 hours today to get to the SW site to find their contact info for Customer Service, to call to find if they, indeed, are producing 686 3", but their site has been down continuously. :scrutiny:

What's the deal?

Yes or no?
Has SW "reintroduced the 686 3"?

Honestly, I wasn't even aware that it wasn't in production.

Please make my day: tell me new ones are available.

Nem

Stainz
May 8, 2007, 06:21 AM
S&W: 1-800-331-0852

From pg 34 of their '07 catalog:
3" 686+ 36.8 oz SKU #164300 MSRP $790 (Same as all other 686+ models.)

From pg 33:
2.5" 386+ Sc/S 21.2 oz SKU #163169 MSRP $869

Some interesting new 7-bangers!

I am packing my range bag for a quickie range trip later this AM... I'll take a couple of 7-bangers... my 686+ AND an 1895 Nagant...

Stainz

glockman19
May 8, 2007, 12:26 PM
Yes they make a 3" 686

Nematocyst
May 8, 2007, 05:40 PM
Stainz and G'man, thanks.

Yep, I called SW to confirm: they are in production.

I then called Sportsman's Warehouse (lowest prices in my area) to inquire if they could get it.

Their response: It's not currently in their stock system. We can get it on special order, but it won't be at our normal low price.

I was told to send a mail to their corporate headquarters requesting that the 3" be added to their company's normally carried items, because "if they receive enough customer requests, they will pick it up".

I've already mailed the company headquarters.

lev83
May 8, 2007, 06:32 PM
Just wanted to add the latest photo of my S&W 686-0 wearing its new shoes. I really love this gun except for that ramped front sight. But cant seem to bring myself to spend $100 to get it changed to a pinned sight. Anyone have any suggestions for how to do do this on the cheap?


http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y224/lev83/th_MISCPics002.jpg (http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y224/lev83/MISCPics002.jpg)

glockman19
May 8, 2007, 07:06 PM
I'm deciding on what one to get a 3" or 5" decisions, decisions, decisions

SwampWolf
May 8, 2007, 10:48 PM
If I couldn't decide between a 3" or a 5", I'd think hard about a 4"...

colt357
May 8, 2007, 11:42 PM
I have one bought new back in about 1998. I love it. I would love to pick up a second one. However, I never see them in shows, or stores, or even on line.

Does anyone know how many of these S&W made? I believe they only made them the one year (1998).

Does anyone have a price check on what one in decent condition might cost today?

Thanks,
Dennis

BTW, I have lurked here for a VERY long time, just never bothered to register because I never had anything to say.

glockman19
May 8, 2007, 11:59 PM
If I couldn't decide between a 3" or a 5", I'd think hard about a 4"...

I've already got one.

texas bulldog
May 10, 2007, 08:19 PM
not a 686, but here is my 6" 586 no dash...

http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z54/wpbickford/SW586-012-1.jpg

thinking about getting some nice wood grips, but haven't decided on any yet. the pachmayr are quite comfortable to shoot.

Baron357
May 11, 2007, 04:34 PM
Is there any certain years for the 686 to stay away from or they all good?

lev83
May 11, 2007, 05:47 PM
All 686's are good guns Baron but probably the best of the bunch is the -4 models. These are pre MIM parts and pre lock and as an added bonus they have the pinned front sight to allow the shooter to change front sight blades to thier own preference without involving some expensive mill work.

qbpc
May 11, 2007, 06:07 PM
I'll play here is my 586 no dash with a 16oz Jarvis weight

Nematocyst
May 11, 2007, 06:46 PM
...a 16oz Jarvis weightOK, there's a new concept for me.

What's a "Jarvis weight"? I see it on the underlug, and assume it improves stability for target shooting.

Right?

qbpc
May 11, 2007, 07:08 PM
That Jarvis weight is about 15years old and it came from Brownells.It controls muzzle rise big time. I can put 6 in a target under 2.5 sec @15yds thats including the draw. Thats full load .357. Standard 170 PF loads almost like shooting target loads out of a stadard 586.

Baron357
May 12, 2007, 09:30 AM
Is there a time line that anyone has showing the model designations by year, there is a a nice 686 2' barrel at the local gun shop that I know was made between 88' and 94' and want to know what designation it would be.

jad0110
May 12, 2007, 01:34 PM
thinking about getting some nice wood grips, but haven't decided on any yet.

http://ahrendsgripsusa.com/index.htm

For my 686 I just ordered some Ahrends round-to-square Goncalo Alves wood stocks, unfinished. I'll apply my own stain when the come in, probably an Olympic oil-based stain in "Red Oak" with a satin polyurethane coating.

They shipped today, so maybe by next weekend I'll post some pics. BTW, Kim Ahrends is a good guy to work with, I was happy to give him my business.

Here's a picture of a 581 from their site with some awesome stocks:


http://ahrendsgripsusa.com/images/ecandy/ec%207.jpg


lev83,

Ramp front sights aren't my favorite either, but it works on my 686. One day I may put on an Ed McGivern style gold bead sight.

gunut
May 12, 2007, 01:44 PM
I have 2 of the 686-3 hunter [unfluted cylinder] models....one for show one for go...

Hawk
May 13, 2007, 11:39 PM
I joined Saturday - 686-6" used.

Nematocyst
May 13, 2007, 11:52 PM
Here's a picture of a 581 from their site with some awesome stocks:Whoa! :what:

Nice!

I'm into synth grips for my applications,
but if anything could convince me to try wood, those could ... ;)

I'm curious, since I've never owned a handgun with wood grips.
What's the appeal? Is it mostly aesthetic, or can they affect shooting, too?

(I guess different shapes could affect grip, of course, so I guess I just answered my own question, but still wondering about texture, durability, etc...)

Mervyn_b
May 25, 2007, 01:24 AM
Sry, newbie here. Been checking this forum since I'm interested in getting a 686+ 4 or 6 inch (yet to decide).

Any opinions on current 686? It features an internal lock and adjustable rear sights - what does MIM stand for, pls?

Thanks.

glockman19
May 25, 2007, 01:37 AM
Wecome, to THR & the 686.

what does MIM stand for
Metal Injection Molding

I like the 686+ 4" it's a 7 shot 4" full lug barrel. Perfect balance and little recoil. I use it mainly for camping & SD/HD. If you're looking for something to CCW then the 3" would be better.

All S&W New revolovers have the internal lock. I don't use mine. It doesn't effect the gun in any way performance wise.

WJR
May 25, 2007, 09:58 AM
Sry, newbie here. Been checking this forum since I'm interested in getting a 686+ 4 or 6 inch (yet to decide).

Any opinions on current 686? It features an internal lock and adjustable rear sights - what does MIM stand for, pls?

Thanks.

You will find strong opinions both ways regarding MIM and the internal lock. My opinion, for what it is worth, is that you can find a pre-lock, pre-MIM 686 at a lower cost than a new MIM, IL 686.

Regarding, the 6" versus 4", I really enjoy the 6" for time at the range, but the 4" is handier if needed for self-defense or a truck/car gun.

I have a number of 686s and love them, but all of mine are pre-lock, pre-MIM.

Any particular reason you want the 686+??

WJR

Ninja42
May 25, 2007, 10:15 AM
Hey 686 enthusiasts, I have a few very basic questions about this gun, so I hope you dont mind me using this thread. You see, I will be on the market for a gun very soon (I hope!), and the 686 might just be the gun for me... however:

a) The gun I am looking at is an 'S&W M.686 Performance Center', as the gunsmith calls it on his website, but that model dosent show up on the S&W website, and that makse me suspicious... is this guy trying to trick me?

b) The Performance Center upgrade is 'amongst other things' a trigger job, a bead blasting and a Romulas walnut grip. What could that 'amongst other things' be? The Performance Center upgrade is as expensive as the gun itself, so there must be something more to it.

c) The gun comes with a choice of either a 6 or 7 shot cylinder.. is that even a choice? Why would anyone choose to have one shot less? Is it because the 6 shot cylinder is more durable, or is there some other significant advantage of not having that extra round?

This is a pic of the gun taken from the smiths website:

http://www.huntershouse.dk/images/sports/smith-wesson/pc/sw_686_security/sw_pc686_ss-v.jpg

Moondancer
May 26, 2007, 12:27 AM
I bought a 4" 686 when they first came out. I actually ordered it from a local home-based dealer before they were shipping FWIW. I sold it four years ago to get some more money for down payment on my house, and have regretted it ever since.

Needless to say, I've been looking to buy another one just like it, but man are they scarce.

So, my question is this: what would the correct designation for the first batch of 'em be? 686-1? 686 (no dash)?

Inquiring minds want to know! I did see one today in a local gunstore. It was marked 686-5. It had the firing pin on the hammer, old-style cylinder release, no lock, red ramp, and had some filing work done to the front sight. FWIW, the store was selling brand new 686s for $499 and they wanted $599 for this one.

glockman19
May 26, 2007, 12:35 AM
http://thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=1934961&postcount=3
Anyways - approx history is -

686 ''dash nothing'' - 1980

686-1, 1986 - radius stud package and floating hand

686-M - 1987 recall stamping on earlier versions

686-2, 1987, hammer nose change, bushing and ass'd parts

686-3, 1988, new yoke retention system
1990 - 2 1/2" barrel introduced.

686-4 ........ 1994 thru 1998 - many changes including move to 7 shot, sight changes etc.

glockman19
May 30, 2007, 02:40 PM
Some Pics of my 686:

highrider
May 30, 2007, 06:42 PM
mine .......
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b340/highrider98/IMG_2629_edited-1.jpg

Logos
May 31, 2007, 03:29 PM
I just stopped by today and I'm happy to report that I have a three-inch, round-butt 686 that I got about 1993.

Just put the Crimson Trace on it yesterday......since I went with the model that fits N, L and K.....the butt is now square and bigger.

More comfortable to shoot, but harder to conceal.

Haven't shot it with the CT yet, but I do believe this laser thing is gonna be GREAT.

Nematocyst
May 31, 2007, 04:00 PM
...a three-inch, round-butt 686 that I got about 1993.
A 3" 686? :eek:

I'm craving a 3" 686 (which just went back into production).

Gonna probably (? still debating this ?) put my 4" up for sale or trade soon.
I can't afford two, and only want one.
(Why is not relevant here.)

Images! We must have images of the 1993 3"! :D

<lust> ... :evil:

PS: all the revolvers imaged on this page are ... beyond words ...

If I had to choose one word for the 686,
it would be "magnificent".

Wayne02
May 31, 2007, 08:39 PM
Ok, talk me out of this craziness I'm about spout here, or not...

I am a big fan of S&W revolvers and have a few of them, 2", 4", some J-frames, and this 6" 686

http://waynef.smugmug.com/photos/74302319-M.jpg

I like this gun ok but only shoot it a couple of times per year. It has the typical good S&W trigger, love the sights, and is quite accurate. However, the thing has enough mass to make a good blunt impact weapon if needed. I've never been a big fan of the full under-lugs and this gun with the 6" barrel and full lug is quite nose heavy in terms of balance.

Most of my time is shooting paper at 25 yards and occasionally reactive targets when I make my way to an informal range or my property. The only competition I can see this gun fitting into is maybe pin shooting, but I've just been too lazy to make the drive to the range that has the pin shooting competition. Thus the reason this thing does not get shot very often.

No, I'm not interested in selling it.

However, I am wondering about the feasibility of modifying it, either by having the under lug cut back to the ejector rod, or having the whole barrel cut down to say 5" and the lug cut back also.

Can you buy replacement barrels from S&W? Maybe a 5" half-lug?

How about a smith who could do a good job at cutting the lug back?

I would think given the integrated target sights and grooved top strap cutting the barrel back and making it look right again would be quite a bit of work.

Failing that, I suppose I could put a big old scope on it. Never had a revolver with a scope on it, of course I don't hunt either...

What are my options for the above desires???

Thanks

Logos
May 31, 2007, 10:01 PM
Images! We must have images of the 1993 3"!

I understand lust.

:)

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d181/DenVII/686007.jpg

jad0110
May 31, 2007, 10:52 PM
I'm into synth grips for my applications,
but if anything could convince me to try wood, those could ...

I'm curious, since I've never owned a handgun with wood grips.
What's the appeal? Is it mostly aesthetic, or can they affect shooting, too?

First, wood stocks on revolvers, particularly blued ones, just do it for me. I did get my Ahrends stocks for my 686. Just got done staining them a few days ago. Wow, what a difference over the rubber Pachmayrs and Hogues (for me anyway). Wood just has a consistency of feel in my hands that cannot be matched by more plyable rubber. Again, that's just my take. I hope to try them out sometime, but things have been busy lately. Now, if I were going hiking, I'd probably slap the Pachmayrs back on for durability's sake.

Anyway, here's some pictures of my 686 wearing it's new Ahrends round-to-square Goncalo Alves stocks, no finger grooves. If anyone is considering wood stocks, I highly recommend speaking to Kim Ahrends (http://ahrendsgripsusa.com/index.htm). As I said, I ordered these unfinished (along with 2 other pairs for my Model 14 and 17). I stained them with 2 coats of oil-based Olympic Golden Pecan and finished them with 3 coats of oil-based Olympic satin polyurethane:


http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q139/jad0110/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Model%20686%20Plus%20357%20Magnum/IMG_1587.jpg


http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q139/jad0110/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Model%20686%20Plus%20357%20Magnum/IMG_1519.jpg


http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q139/jad0110/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Model%20686%20Plus%20357%20Magnum/IMG_1559.jpg


http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q139/jad0110/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Model%20686%20Plus%20357%20Magnum/IMG_1621.jpg

glockman19
May 31, 2007, 11:05 PM
my 642/686 Combo:
http://thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=58527&d=1180549794

Nematocyst
June 1, 2007, 03:03 AM
G'man19, I've got exactly the same 686/642 combo.
You can see them here (http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=54091&d=1172651793) with the rest of my toolkit.
Great. (Even if I'm going to trade the 4" for a 3".)

Jad, beautiful gun with beautiful grips.

Logos, magnificent. I want a 3".

Logos
June 1, 2007, 08:13 AM
Yes, the 3" is a handy package. When I picked it up for the first time, I knew I had to buy it. Plus, of course, I had never seen that barrel length before and I knew I might not get another chance to own one.

It's simply a great gun.

glockman19
June 1, 2007, 11:05 AM
Nem,

Nice Family Picture. I need to take a Family pic too. I would like another S&W but and I like the K& L frame series but in order to expand my collection I'm leaning toward a 629 in a 5" or 6.5".

Logos
June 1, 2007, 06:09 PM
http://www.gunsamerica.com/976883468/Guns/Pistols/Smith-Wesson-Revolvers/Full-Frame-Revolver/686_3inch_new.htm

Nematocyst
June 1, 2007, 08:46 PM
Logos, thanks for the heads up on that one.

They want $895.00, though. I've already found a standing deal on one for $600. (It's in neighboring town an hour away, but still ...)

Right now, the hold up is funds. Summer is my downtime financially. I'll probably have to wait until fall to swing this one without some extraordinary financial luck.

Logos
June 1, 2007, 11:28 PM
Hey, an hour is not bad.....those things are hard to find and you also found a good price.

Good luck!

hexidismal
June 3, 2007, 12:31 AM
I've driven a heck of a lot more than an hour for the right gun. A LOT more.
Anyway, heres some gun pron for you. Got the rosewood badgers in today, so I figured I'd throw 'em up here just for fun.
http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j110/hexidismal29/badgerboth-10-2c.jpg

If you enjoyed reading about "The 686" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!