Model 19 classic or 586 or 686?

Howdy

I went with a Model 19-3.

About 40 years ago.






Still have the box and all the goodies.

I would go with the L frame Model 686. Built to handle a steady diet of .357s (something the K frame Model 19 doesn't do well with over time), it would make for a great addition to your revolver collection.

The 686-0 and early -1 had a recall for firing pin and bushing; some brands of ammo were extruding primers enough to bind the cylinder rotation.
One that has been corrected will have an "M" stamp. The last I could google, Smith would still make the change for free but that was not recent. I'd be sure of that before I bought.

I'd probably grab the -0. I can only speak to mine, but my no dash (with M stamp) has the absolute best trigger of the 20+ S&W's I've owned. I know a few others have similar results. The next runner up was a 681-2, I think those early L frames really got something right.

Also, not every Smith subject to the recall needed it. If your gun isn't effected by primer flow like my 681 was I wouldn't bother. If a couple boxes of the old school 125gr Federal doesn't cause an issue, you should be good to go.

I will throw out there that I have been really happy with my 5” Performance Center 686 plus. Yes, it has the lock and the funny looking cylinder release, but I like the unfluted 7 round cylinder cut for moon clips. And that funny looking release actually works pretty well for us left handed people.

Here's my no dash:


And just to prove I'm not biased, here's my M19's:


Unless it's going to spend real time in a holster, I'd go with the 686. Even if it does spend time in a holster and you're wanting to shoot full bore 357's I'd go with the 686.

S&W 681, but then I prefer fixed sights.

A version of the L frame either blued or stainless. Theres so many actual "classic" model 19s and even 686s for me to want the lock. But if NIB is the way you want them I'd get the larger frame for more .357 comfort. I'm surely the newer renditions of the 19 may be stronger in the forcing cone area than their predecessors but I feel the L frame is better at soaking up the recoil in general. If your mainly going to shoot .38s then the point is moot.

Congrats. You made the choice I would have made.
I prefer the pre lock guns. I do realize that lock models may be every bit as good as the older guns but they are ugly & I resent what the lock stands for, the litigation crazy society we live in.

I have a M686-2 and it's absolutely a great revolver. The -2 is the same as the recalled guns with the "M" stamp only the repairs have been done in the factory before shipping instead of being recalled.

^ Nice!

jdavis123 said:

View attachment 842430

Click to expand...

Gah, why did you have to show me that!???!! Now I want one!

At $600-ish, that 686- is going a bit cheaper than around here. I have the same 686-M, and wouldn't sell it for $800.

As for the backyard range, i also have one, but only to 75yds. I have the same problem, it seems I have trouble finding time to shoot.

I sold my L frames and GP 100's after picking up an older N frame model 28. Bought the 28 used for less than I sold the others for. An even stronger gun than the L frames, it is actually lighter by 1/2 oz than the L frames, and close enough in size to fit in the same holsters. If I wanted something smaller I'd go K frame. Not enough difference in size between the L and N frame guns.

It's funny, I don't even have any N frame Smiffs. I keep watching them go up in price; the M27's have gone flat stupid, while the M28's are still relatively reasonable- at least when compared to the 27's.

I like the K-frame the best, but then I rarely shoot any 357 through them. Most of my K's are .38Spl. I think the K is superbly sized for the 38Spl, the mistake made was trying to hot-rod the things.

I was going to say a 686+ for that seventh shot... but you've bought your gun already .

Let us know how it shoots!

Stay safe.

ontarget said:

I did handle a 686+ but it just didn't feel right. Maybe just the difference in grips.

Click to expand...

That could be, I think the current factory grips are some of the worst ones made. Even the Houges are much better.

I prefer good, properly sized wood grips but can tolerate most of the aftermarket rubber ones and older factory wood stocks. Those two- piece plastic factory ones though are just awful in my opinion.

gotboostvr said:

That could be, I think the current factory grips are some of the worst ones made. Even the Houges are much better.

I prefer good, properly sized wood grips but can tolerate most of the aftermarket rubber ones and older factory wood stocks. Those two- piece plastic factory ones though are just awful in my opinion.

Click to expand...

S&W's rubber grips are pretty bad. They look OK, just suck to shoot with, and especially with the heavier recoiling guns.

The biggest problem for me with the factory rubber grips is, the cover the backstrap, which puts my trigger finger in the wrong place on the trigger, and the way the panels come together at the back, they form a dull, knife edge at the seam, which just focuses the recoil into the edge, which focuses it right into the palm of your hand.

I prefer the grips to leave the backstrap exposed. My finger is in the right spot on the trigger, and the recoil is spread across the frame and back of the grips.

For shooting, I think the Hogue rubber grips are pretty hard to beat. They arent pretty, but they are very shootable.

I use their "Bantams" for the snubbies, and the full size RB-SB conversions for the 4" guns.