Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

19/66 vs 586/686

Discussion in 'Handguns: Revolvers' started by CCantu357, Nov 27, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. CCantu357

    CCantu357 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2007
    Messages:
    50
    I know its an old question but what yall think is the better revolver? I will say this my grandfather was policeman for 27 years, and said the Model 66 was superior to the 686, as far as police work went. I can say for myself the K-frame sure does clear leather faster than the L. That full lug barrel points down, the Combat Magnum lines up straight!
     
  2. Lucky Derby

    Lucky Derby Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,142
    Location:
    Colorado Rockies
    Hard to go wrong with either one. If it is to be carried a lot, the edge would go to the K frame. If it is to be shot a lot with light, fast magnum loads the edge goes to the L frame.
    If I were a cop carrying a revolver, I would carry the 19/66, just like my dad did for most of his career until he was forced to go to a Sig P226.
     
  3. Boxhead

    Boxhead Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    600
    Location:
    Bouncing between Geoje Korea, The Texas Hill Count
    I do not like the added weight of the lugged barrels on any Smith's. No need, so my 586 went down the road and the 66 remains.
     
  4. Hapworth

    Hapworth Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Messages:
    370
    Which versions with what load and for what purpose?

    You've got barrels 2.5" out to 8". Various loads in .38 or .357. Combat, self defensive, target play. Concealed carry or open.

    No one configuration will adequately, equally cover all...

    Since concealed carry and self defense are my interests, and because I think .38 serves better than .357...2.5" Model 66.
     
  5. Hondo 60
    • Contributing Member

    Hondo 60 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    5,366
    Location:
    Manitowoc, WI
    I have a 65-2 (P&R'd)
    The adjustable sights, for some reason, don't appeal to me.

    All the above mentioned guns are fine examples.
    I guess If I could only have one it'd be the 586.
    I like blued over stainless.
    And the 19/66s have been known to crack the forcing cone under very narrow circumstances.
    So I'd rather be safe than sorry.
     
  6. 2zulu1

    2zulu1 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2011
    Messages:
    1,089
    Location:
    Arizona
    I have carried the M28, M19 and M66 back the day. I like to shoot what I carry and since I live in a very rural environment, the L/N frames have significant advantages over K-frames.

    I really like the new 686Ps and M327 TRR8 (scandium N-frame @35oz) and they get a steady diet of handloaded 357mag ammunition at the range. Both models balance very well for me and the under lug assists with split times on target.

    It hasn't been my experience that the M19/66 "clear leather" faster than an under lug 686 or Python.
     
  7. Guillermo

    Guillermo member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Messages:
    6,346
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    I totally concur with Boxhead.

    We have a couple of 686s and the heavy underlug is unnecessary.

    Of course the 19/66 are lighter guns and can't stand up to a constant pounding of heavy loads like the L frames can. But they handle better.

    So as mentioned, if you want to concealed carry, the K frame is best.
    A range toy or open carry or nightstand gun, or a gun that you shoot hotter loads out of, the L frame would serve you better.
     
  8. cougar1717

    cougar1717 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Messages:
    762
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    Personally, I think a 4" 66 balances better than a 4" 686. As others have said, there are other considerations.
     
  9. MrBorland

    MrBorland Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2007
    Messages:
    4,361
    Location:
    NC

    "Better" is subjective - the "better" gun is the one you'll shoot better under the your given conditions. "Clearing leather" faster is a very small part of that equation (besides, kydex is faster than leather ;))

    For overall weight and balance, it's hard to beat a 4" k-frame. The thing is, though, when things really speed up, I shoot and reload my 4" 686 L-frame better, so it, rather than my 66, is my 1st choice for match shooting.
     
  10. skidder

    skidder Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2011
    Messages:
    1,115
    Location:
    Montana
    Great advice from my fellow member and I tend to agree with the two scenarios: carry and heavy shooting.
    I currently own several Six Series and one k-frame and for a good reason. I've hiked hundreds of miles in the back country for the last 25 years and when you're on a 20 mile hike to a glacier lake, the ounces have a way of turning into pounds. The very reason I like the Six Series.... you get the heavy shooting and carry in one complete k-frame package.
     
  11. wanderinwalker

    wanderinwalker Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2003
    Messages:
    1,990
    Location:
    SW NH
    Neither is truly "better" than the other in my mind. They each have their advantages and disadvantages, depending on the use.

    My 4" 19 is clearly lighter and more svelte than my 4" 586. The K-frame also came with a Milt Sparks belt holster (I want to order one for the L-frame soon) so it's far more likely to "go for a walk" with me.

    The L-frame is more likely to get picked for shooting magnums or just generally getting used at the range. The extra beef makes it more comfortable with hot ammo and really dampens .38 Specials.

    I'm glad I have both and would be hard pressed to pick a favorite. An N-frame is on the to-get list, along with a K-frame .38. Though if a 2.5" K or L frame turns up.... :eek:
     
  12. clang

    clang Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2005
    Messages:
    638
    I've weighed my guns:
    4" 686 - 39 oz
    4" 66 - 36 oz
    Not really that big of a difference, but the K frame does feel more svelte.
     
  13. roaddog28

    roaddog28 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Messages:
    632
    Location:
    Escondido, CA
    As you can see most of the members here are choosing the 19/66 versus the L series revolver. Reason, the 19/66 is simply the best handling, points better and carries better than the 586/686. In my opinion the best revolver S&W ever made. And don't be scared away about the 19/66 not being able to handle 357 magnums. If a person uses common sense, stays with 140 gr or heavier ammo, the 19/66 will out last the owner in most cases.

    You can always buy the 19 or 66 first then later get a 586/686.
    Good luck,
    Howard
     
  14. wanderinwalker

    wanderinwalker Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2003
    Messages:
    1,990
    Location:
    SW NH
    Two quick points:

    1) All of my S&Ws have come to me used, the three I have (K-357, K-22 and L-357) are older than me and they are not P&R-ed. I have no doubt if I use the 19 as hard as I've used my Glock 17 it will need serious attention long before I pass it down.

    2) Agreed, get the K first then an L. And an N. And one of each barrel length and caliber. The more the merrier! I did get the 19 first and landed on the 586 while thinking about getting a Ruger GP-100 because I wanted a .357 that would take all of the .357 I can make for at least the next 50 years. (No, I expect if I keep using the 586 for hard and fast DA shooting it's going to need work before being passed down as well.)
     
  15. WoodchuckAssassin

    WoodchuckAssassin Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    654
    Location:
    Lynchburg, VA
    This is another one of those "Ford vs. Chevy" sorta questions. Personally, I own and shoot a 686 quite well, but then again I've never shot the other models you mentioned. There is NO wrong answer on this one!
     
  16. BYJO4

    BYJO4 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Messages:
    1,776
    They are both great revolvers and I own both. Over the years, I have come to like the extra weight of the 686 and now prefer it over my 66.
     
  17. Brian Williams

    Brian Williams Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,863
    Location:
    Kampong Cham, Cambodia
    I wonder if S&W made the 5/686 with a shrouded ejector rod instead of the heavy underlug, how many of them would they sell. I made a 586 into a shrouded rod by grinding off the under lug in front of the Ejector rod lock lug. It was a real sweet pointer and would still be in my care but I needed another project to finish. I would love to take a 581 and remove the underlug to replicate a model 10/13.
     
  18. 45_auto

    45_auto Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,168
    Location:
    Southern Louisiana
    Looks like you can pick up a new 4" 686 barrel for about $100 on Gunbroker. It would be pretty easy to stick one in the mill and turn it into a shrouded ejector. Might be something to play with over Christmas when we're off for a couple of weeks.
     
  19. MrBorland

    MrBorland Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2007
    Messages:
    4,361
    Location:
    NC
    They made a limited run of 686 Mountain Guns. Might be quicker, easier and cheaper to modify a standard 686, though.

    [​IMG]
     
  20. mdauben

    mdauben Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2011
    Messages:
    2,163
    Location:
    Huntville, AL
    For conceled carry, using .38 or mild .357 loads, a short-barrel 66 would be an excellent choice. I'd be worried about the known weakness in the forcing cone when using hot .357 loads, however, and the virtual impossibility of repairing such damage these days.

    For open carry or home defence, using hot .357 loads, a four inch 686 is my first choice. Personally I find the full lug makes the gun easier to aim and softens recoil.
     
  21. Thaddeus Jones

    Thaddeus Jones Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,011
    The 66 is my pick, pre lock of course. ;)

    Make mine a 3 inch barrel 66 please. Faster handling and less bulky than the L-frame. A joy to shoot and carry. :)

    Second choice, for me, is the model 19.
     
  22. Guillermo

    Guillermo member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Messages:
    6,346
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    Of course Thaddeus would have a pre-lock gun.

    He is smart and goes not call injection molded parts "advances in metallurgy" any more than particle board is an "advances in wood products"
     
  23. 2zulu1

    2zulu1 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2011
    Messages:
    1,089
    Location:
    Arizona
    The bottom line is the M19/66 models are not strong enough to shoot a steady diet of factory magnum ammunition, one of the reasons why the L-frames were very popular from their inception. With a 3oz heavier weight than the 36oz K-frame, the L-frame was/is a more comfortable carry than the heavier N-frames.

    Some of us remember when Python (underlug) barrels were attached to Smith frames because the underlug barrel was considered to be more accurate. It's rather ironic that the 38oz Python is considered to be a comfortable carry and the 39oz 686 isn't.

    http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...rResults=&useFilter=&identifier=1354137611653
     
  24. grptelli

    grptelli Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2012
    Messages:
    48
    Dumb question- when did they stop producing model 19 and 66?


    Posted from Thehighroad.org App for Android
     
  25. Checkman

    Checkman member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    Messages:
    1,884
    Location:
    Idaho
    The Model 19 stopped in 98/99 and the Model 66 went out of production on 2004/05. They are missed.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page