Wouldn't that be a model 66? The full length lug is the sole reason (aesthetically) that I like the 586/686.But why can't the 586 and 686 come with a half-lug barrel option? Ruger does it with their GP100.
I'm aware of that, though my reply doesn't make that very clear. My point to "nuclear meltdown's" post was that the model 66 is available for someone desiring a S&W .357 magnum without a full length lug.The 66 is a k frame the 586 is a l frame
The lugged barrels are great when you’re shootin’...
But why can't the 586 and 686 come with a half-lug barrel option?
I agree, I like the looks of the half-lug much better. I do have two 686's though (a 4 inch 686-1 and 3 inch 686-6 plus) and I really like them.But why can't the 586 and 686 come with a half-lug barrel option? Ruger does it with their GP100.
I have been wanting a 681 for some time now and I like the simplicity of the fixed sights. I have two 4 inch model 65's (65-1 & 65-2) and I like the fixed sights. The 65-1 has been my carry gun most days for the last 6 months or so. Prior to that it was my 3 inch 686+.Fixed sights on combat handguns, Smith&Wesson's 581-681 are the Ultimate Combat Magnums.
I carried a 681 on duty when I worked for the INS in Miami in the 1990's. It was a superior gun to the issue model 13's we were given. It was easier to shoot with heavy loads and I had the gun MAGNA PORTED and a trigger slick done after switching to HOGUE rubber grips. I even tried it with BIANCHI Lightning grips, but they did not fit my hand as well. I still have it. The only complaint was at the end of a the day, it was heavy and seemed a LOT HEAVIER than the model 13 with it's 3 inch barrel and round butt.
I bought a nickeled 581 for a house gun because the price was right and then later bought a 586 with a six inch barrel when I looked in the display case and noticed it had already been MAGNA PORTED. I tried the trigger and had to buy it. It was just perfect for a double action, even if the gun was long and heavy with the 6 inch barrel. I still have that one as well. The K-frame was just not up to a steady diet of .357 magnums, while the L-frame could be shot all day with them.
The only problem that the L-frame ever had, as far as I was concerned, was the weight. I wish S&W would consider a scandium 696 with a 5 inch barrel or bring out a a . 41 Special. I think a 10m.m. would be fine if someone brough out a 10m.m. AUTO-RIM round. I just do not like the moon clips.
Jim
A 4" full-lug barrel on a square-butt frame to balance it? Yes, yes please very much!
Yes it does. I specifically wanted the fixed sight version. I only carried one load for duty. I could 'hold off' for wadcutters when having fun.Didn't the 581 have fixed sights?
I went out of my way for the same reasons.
I coulda saved alot of time picking up a newer RB, but specifically wanted a SQ. The only reason I stupidly moved my 681-1 on was because I wanted adjustable sights. The balance was perfect. The only gun that's had a better trigger is the 686-0 I replaced it with.
Nice! I've never fired a Model 27 but I absolutely prefer handling and shooting the 586 and 686 more than the Pythons that I've fired. My 686 action and trigger is a work of art. I don't know how it ended up so light and perfect (I just lightened the springs about 30-something years ago, didn't stone the parts or anything), but it's head and shoulders above any other revolver I've handled.It is my opinion, unpopular as that may be, that the S&W Model 586 is the best double action to come down the pike yet. Prefer it over the vaunted Model 27 and the Colt Python.
View attachment 810334
View attachment 810335
Bob Wright