S&W 686-6 5" Barrel


PDA






Werewolf
July 5, 2004, 05:34 PM
Yeeehah...

I finally broke down and bought me a 686 with the 5" barrel. This is one nice feeling revolver with the best trigger in SA that I've ever used (I've never paid for a trigger job so I probably don't really know what a really good trigger feels like).

Anyway I mainly got the 5" version S&W 686 5" Revolver (http://www.swfirearms.vista.com/store/index.php3?cat=293566&item=865428&sw_activeTab=1) because S&W lists it as having a large frame vice the medium frame that all the other versions of the 686 have.

From handling other versions I can see a difference but not much. Is the large frame on this 686 an N frame or an L frame?

OH! One more question. This is the first Stainless handgun I've ever owned. The S&W manual says not to use ammoniated cleaners on any of their products. Well - hell! How is one supposed to clean out the copper wash that builds up after firing a lot of jacketed bullets if one isn't supposed to use ammoniated cleaners? I use Birchwood Casey bore scrubber which is definitely ammoniated about every 500 or so rounds on my other handguns with no ill effects. What's the deal with S&W and no ammoniated cleaners?

Ah! And while I've got your attention anybody got a recommendation on a good OWB holster for this model 686?

If you enjoyed reading about "S&W 686-6 5" Barrel" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
OH25shooter
July 5, 2004, 05:47 PM
Got one myself...doubt you'll trade it away! Also had a trigger job done. You think it's smooth now. It can be BETTER.

Standing Wolf
July 5, 2004, 07:52 PM
That's an L frame revolver, which is a beefed up K frame. The front sight looks awfully funky to me, but the five-inch barrel is idea: almost all the sight radius of the six-inch barrel, and most of the handiness of a four-inch barrel.

I can't imagine why cleaners with ammonia shouldn't be used. I've been using Hoppe's No. 9 on stainless firearms for years with no harmful results. Of course, perhaps Smith & Wesson has found a plastic substitute for MIM parts that won't hold up to ammonia.

Werewolf
July 5, 2004, 08:24 PM
The front sight looks awfully funky to me :D I thought so too - at first. But the front sight has one of those fiber optic tubes in it and that red dot is the brightest and most visible front sight on any of my 6 handguns. I liked it. We'll see how well it actually works this coming weekend.

Jim March
July 5, 2004, 09:13 PM
Good gun.

Ummmm...all 686s use the same frame. Period. I guarantee that gun's frame is no stronger (or heavier) than on any other current model 686.

I dig the half-lug barrel. Should point REALLY well (it'll have a "muzzle light" feeling).

Bullet
July 6, 2004, 12:11 AM
I'll bet you will realy like your 686. The fiber optic sights are great (easy to see). I want one too.

Shootcraps
July 6, 2004, 12:33 AM
>>OH! One more question. This is the first Stainless handgun I've ever owned. The S&W manual says not to use ammoniated cleaners on any of their products. Well - hell! How is one supposed to clean out the copper wash that builds up after firing a lot of jacketed bullets if one isn't supposed to use ammoniated cleaners? I use Birchwood Casey bore scrubber which is definitely ammoniated about every 500 or so rounds on my other handguns with no ill effects. What's the deal with S&W and no ammoniated cleaners?<<


You don't need a special cleaner. Buy a bronze Chore Boy kitchen pad. Clip a few coils off and wrap them around your cleaning brush. Dip it in some Hoppes and a few passes will clean the barrel and remove all jacket residue really well. I do this for all my guns and it works like a charm.

Lone Star
July 6, 2004, 04:10 AM
I'm guessing here, but I suspect that blanket S&W statement was meant to protect their Scandium or Ti guns, which reportedly have a lot of finish flake-off problems. I personally would not buy one of these guns, partly for that reason.

I've used Hoppe's No. 9 solvent and Break-Free CLP on several stainless and blue S&W revolvers for years, with no ill effects.

I imagine that this M686 with 5-inch barrel will make a splendid all-round gun for anything but concealed carry, which is not its role. As a general holster weapon for defense and animals to at least coyote size, it's about what one needs. It will certainly take deer under ideal circumstances, but a .44 Magnum (or a rifle!) is a better deer gun.

Lone Star

Werewolf
July 6, 2004, 08:56 AM
Jim March said:Ummmm...all 686s use the same frame.I don't doubt you at all. I'm not a revolver guy and this one is my first modern type revolver so what I know first hand and from personal experience about them could be written on a post-it - a really small post-it. I wonder though why the S&W web site lists specs for the different variations of the 686 as having medium frames and the 686 with 5" barrel having a large frame? Typo?

It's not a big deal because everything I've read here and elsewhere points to the fact that the 686 will stand up to more full load .357's than I'll ever be able to shoot out of it - but still one of the reasons I chose that model was that S&W specs say it is a large frame vs medium frame revolver.

Koveras
July 6, 2004, 09:18 AM
I wonder though why the S&W web site lists specs for the different variations of the 686 as having medium frames and the 686 with 5" barrel having a large frame? Typo?

Many large company websites are run by people who have no idea what the product is their company sells. They are IT people (been there, done that). In many cases, the web site is run by another company altogether. If you do a search by caliber on .357 at the S&W website, you will see they are not consistent in frame size nomenclature. Sometimes they just list "Small" or "Medium", sometimes "J-Small", "L-Medium", etc. My guess is the marketing people sent the web-maintainer a designation of "L-Medium" and it was entered as "Large".

But the 686 with 5" barrel is not an N frame. I just compared it with a couple of N-frames and its not even close.

Marshall
July 6, 2004, 01:11 PM
Werewolf,

Congrats on your new 686! I really, really like that gun! Nice wood, half shroud, 5" bbl, fiber front sight, 6 shooter intead or 7 or 8. I have had my eyeballs on em too. :)

If you don't mind me asking, what did you pay before tax, if any?

Werewolf
July 6, 2004, 03:26 PM
If you don't mind me asking, what did you pay before tax, if any? The ticket price was $531 and I used S&W's $25 instant rebate coupon they've got posted on their website so I got it NIB for $506 which isn't bad considering list is $740 (but I know someone's gotten a better deal on one ;) ).

Actually it is a 7 shooter. The 5" model is posted on the site as limited supply and I believe it because it's taken me about 4 months to catch one in stock (and there are 5 gun shops I use here in OKC).

I haven't shot it yet - will this weekend - but I've dry fired the heck out of it. I'm not a huge fan of the DA trigger - it's smooth compared to what I'm used to but the pull has to be at least 10 or 12 pounds and that's just too much (compared to the DA pull on my CZ's which is in the 7 to 8 pound range). When push comes to shove DA's not that big of a deal since with my pistols only the first shot out of the holster is done DA. All others are SA. Since I do Cowboy Action Shooting I'm used to SA and the cock and fire routine. Practice with the S&W using DA will be done but since it won't be a carry gun DA firing will be done just enough times so I know how it feels - all other will be done SA.

The SA trigger is the best yet of all my handguns - in fact it's almost too light :what:. When dry firing many's the time that the thing went off and I didn't mean for it to so that's gonna take some getting used to.

I am also going to try my hand at shooting it at 50 yards. Offhand anyone know what the drop is on a .357 158gr bullet at that range?

I really like the fiber optic sight. It's a very, very bright red dot - even in dim lighting conditions. I would have preffered green but it is possible that red will stand out against a wider range of backgrounds than green would - we'll see.

Saturday seems like it's so far off! :banghead:

Marshall
July 6, 2004, 05:11 PM
I stand corrected, I could have sworn remembering it as a 6 shooter. Glad my eyes are better than my memory. :evil:

I'm kinda like you in the SA/DA thing. I have always been a single action shooter with my larger caliber revolvers. I think I cock em fast enough to where it's already done before I re-sight. DA trigger pulls just don't lend themsevles to enough accuracy to warrant them on revolvers with a good kick, IMO. Smaller calibers that allow you to regain site fast, different deal.

Sounds like a very fair price to me. Enjoy it and thanks for the pricing!

Ala Dan
July 6, 2004, 07:06 PM
Congrat's on your purchase of one fine handgun; as the
S&W 686 is an outstanding performer, in the field and on
the range. Mine is a -5, six inch barrel model with a WOLFF
spring kit installed; making for an excellent shooter!

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

Wolfy
July 7, 2004, 04:35 AM
Shootcraps

OH! One more question. This is the first Stainless handgun I've ever owned. The S&W manual says not to use ammoniated cleaners on any of their products. Well - hell! How is one supposed to clean out the copper wash that builds up after firing a lot of jacketed bullets if one isn't supposed to use ammoniated cleaners? I use Birchwood Casey bore scrubber which is definitely ammoniated about every 500 or so rounds on my other handguns with no ill effects. What's the deal with S&W and no ammoniated cleaners?<<

I think S&W is now selling MPro7 on there website the bottle shapes of the cleaners are the same as MPro7 and S&W state that it is a nontoxic cleaner meaning it has no ammoniated cleaners just like MPro7.

http://store.smith-wesson.com/store/index.php3?cat=293465&sw_activeTab=9
Check out the S&W line of cleaning products and compare to MPro7.

If you enjoyed reading about "S&W 686-6 5" Barrel" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!