Personal opinion of S&W 686 compared to "K" frame

[christcorp]

I know this is a subjective opinion. I know that there will be some that will totally disagree. That's all OK. This is just my observation.

I have/had and/or shot numerous "K" frame S&W. Mostly model 19, 13, and 10. I really wanted to pick up a model 686 "L" frame while I was at a gun show today. I was looking at trading/selling a model 13 or a model 10 towards a 686. I found 3 686's and 1 586. The 586 and 2 of the 686 were pre-safety lock. All 3 of the 686 were very beautiful looking SS. The 586 was a very good looking blue. All looked great. I was ready to do some wheeling and dealing. Got to the point where some trading and buying was going to happen. The 1 686 I fell in loved with looked great. I ask the seller to remove the tie wrap on the cylinder so I could inspect it.

Everything look very nice. Until I started checking out the trigger pull. It seemed very stiff. Especially compared to my model 13 and 10. Single action wasn't that bad, but double action was almost uncomfortable. (My perception). I thought it was the gun, so I said I'll think about it. Went and checked the other 3 guns. The 586 wasn't as bad, but all 3 of the 686's had the same type of trigger pull. Not BAD mind you, just not anything like the "K" frames I have or have shot.

Having never shot an "L" frame, I thought it would be nice to have. Especially with the controversy over shooting 357 too much out of a "K" frame. After realing that as long as you shoot 158g 357, you can shoot as much as you want. You only have to be a little concerned if you want to do a lot of 125-130g. For self defense, no biggie. Add to that the trigger pull of the 686 and 586, and let's just say that I didn't get an "L" frame today. Nor will I probably unless some great deal comes up.

I know trigger jobs and such can be done, by I don't want to "Have" to do that. The 686 and 586 are definitely fine guns. I just think I like my "K" frame model 13, 19, and 10 better. Later... Mike....

 

[frankt]

I am a big fan of the K frames also. I have a 10, 19 and a 66. All are older guns and have that "buttery" smooth S&W trigger pull. For tatget practice,Concealed carry or home defense there is really no reason to go to a L frame.

By being conservative with your +ps, a K frame will last near forever.

However for shooting IDPA, I went with an L frame 686 4". I wanted the heavier frame and barrel for recoil control and also the fact that at 6 or 7 hundred rounds a month I figured it might hold up to the battering a little better.
It's trigger pull has not been worked on but has smoothed up nicely but not as good as the K frames I have. I have never felt it needed a trigger job either.

 

[def4pos8]

I never warmed to the 686 because of balance. The full underlug is just too heavy. Thankfully, I learned of this via a 6-inch Model 317. My Models 66 & 67 are just right and am searching for one of the older K-frame .22s so that I can enjoy indoor bullseye matches without the revolver trying to fall out of my hand all the time!

Now, if I ever stumble upon a 696, I'd buy one of those L-frame .44s in a heartbeat!!

 

[Gator]

You might want to think twice about trading away your model 13, they are very desirable now. Especially the 3"!

 

[christcorp]

Very desirable implies that someone would want it. In which case, it doesn't mean anything unless you sell or trade it. Sort of like when people talk about their house going up in value or their investments. The value going up doesn't mean anything unless you sell it. Got to love watching "Antique Roadshow" when someone brings some antique they have wanting to know what it's worth. Then they find out it's worth like $30,000 and they say something "STUPID" like; I'm going to keep this forever and pass it down to my children. That's great and all, but then it's NOT WORTH $30,000. It's only WORTH something if you sell it or trade for a certain value.

All that aside, I have decided that having had the chance to shoot a 686 after the gun show; and having shot some Rugers and Taurus; none of them feel as good, especially in the trigger pull as the model 13 or 19. Just my opinion. I have quite a few guns. If I keep the model 13, it will be because I like it BETTER than anything else available at the time. If I find a gun that feels more comfortable with a better trigger and is more accurate, then I will consider trading or selling the model 13. Until that time, this is one of the best feeling guns I have. Just like my SigSauer P220. It is the BEST 45acp I have ever shot. Probably the best semi-auto I have ever shot. There is no reason in the world to ever get rid of it. It doesn't matter what it's valued at. I'll never be that poor where I will have to sell any of my guns, and being I don't believe that there is a better semi than the P220, there would never be a reason to get rid of it.

No, I think I will probably be holding onto this model 13 for quite a while. I really wanted an "L" frame because I thought they were better and filled a niche. But after playing with the 4 at the gun show and shooting a 686 afterwards, in my opinion they aren't better. That's just my opinion. Later... Mike....

 

[DrLaw]

I used K-frames and one N-frame on duty for a few years. Then when the L-frame came out, I just happened to be living in gun-friendly Oklahoma City where a gun shop ran a Father's Day Special on all sorts of guns, including an UZI!!! One of the guns was a nickle L-frame 586 4" for a mere $200.00. I got one.

So far it has been my only L-frame. It took some getting used to as it just did not have the traditional look of a Smith.

However, it became my secondary go-to gun for our local pistol league here. It shoots great, that underlug provides some weight to control it more so than my K-frames do, and I find it just as accurate if not more so than my K-frames, due to the weight to control the recoil.

(To answer the obvious question, my go-to gun is a S&W 25-5 in .45 Colt. Bigger holes mean more chances to get over the scoring lines)

If you have a chance to get an L-frame, go for it, but don't trade that Model 13 to do it. Or, if you feel it needs a new home, just send it to me and I will give it a good home! By the way, triggers can always be tweaked with the addition of Wolf Springs and some honing.

The Doc is out now.

 

[S&Wfan]

Christcorp, I concur with your assessment, and I'm glad you got to find this out for yourself.

IMHO, the K frames . . . the 4" and especially the 3" variety, just "point" better and come onto the target quicker.

The "L" frame was just a reaction to try to keep up with the newer, and beefier Ruger and Colt wheelguns that came out in the 80's, just before the wheelgun fell out of law enforcement favor for the bottom-feeding jam-o-matics anyway.

The buzz back then was that folks would "shoot loose" their K frames with lots of hot .357 rounds in the lighter bullet weights of 125 grains and below. This was particularly a problem with the brutal 110 grain flame-throwing ammo of that day that is rough on any .357 anyway.

However, it takes a TON of really hot, lightweight ammo to shoot a K-frame loose and this isn't a concern today like it was to the very active handgun competitors of the '70s and '80s who might shoot hundreds of hot loads per day in routine practice with a .357! For no one else was there really a problem in the first place with a modern K frame .357!

Ya can't beat the feel, balance, swing and pointability of a nice K frame. The pregnant 686, with it's slightly higher bore axis just ain't got it vs. the K frames to me . . . and I've long sold off my 686.

The only L frame I own today is my Performance Center 646 4" barrel in .40S&W with it's skeletonized barrel to aid in faster multiple target acquisition for competition use. I STILL don't like the way it points vs. the K frames either! Even THIS one doesn't point and feel as good as a K frame! . . .

Bravo on your decision to keep your M13.



I've been shooting this 1984 M65-3 for many, many years now . . . with zero troubles and thousands of rounds downrange. It is still very tight . . . literally like new!

Naturally, I shoot most of my practice rounds using lightly charged handloads with all my firearms too . . . for you don't want to wear ANY 'em out before their time anyway!

T.

 

[Brian Williams]

I have had a 586 and have shot a nice 686. I took the underlug off my 586 and it was a great gun, kind of like a 19 on steroids. But I prefer fixed sights. I would like to find a 581 and remove the underlug and\or shorten the barrel to 3". It would be like a model 10/13 on steroids. I would then have the barrel dovetailed for the front sight so I could put in a drift adjustable front sight w/gold bead. I would also have it round butted.

Really, my go to gun is a custom S&W 65 with a pencil barrel installed. I prefer a K frame but would like the above 581 to shoot the living daylights out of.

 

[Golddog]

As I've said in another thread here, I've owned dozens of K's and L's. The K carries more comfortably; the L is easier to shoot well, thanks to the steadying effect of the full lug and its ability to diminish the recoil of magnums.

Trigger smoothness varies from gun to gun and has nothing to do with frame size. I've had equally good (and mediocre) DA triggers out of the box in both frames. I usually get a mild trigger job done on my revolvers, anyway. (SA pulls have been uniformly excellent on every one of the hundreds of Smith revolvers I've shot.)

 

[Noxx]

I guess this is a vivid lesson in personal feel and preference. I love the triggers on both of my 686's. The DA is in fact quite heavy, but I don't find it troublesome, and the SA action is nothing short of brilliant, imho. Of the handguns I own, I am most accurate at range with the 4" 686, with only a P220 coming close.

 

[christcorp]

Thank you to everyone for their opinions. That is what this thread was all about. There definitely is no wrong or right on this one. However, there are plenty of people who have similar qualities and characteristics. For them, these opinions will aid them is feeling that their opinion is also OK to have.

Also, please don't misunderstand that I thought that the 686 or 585 in any way had a "BAD" trigger pull. "OH MY GOD"!!! That's like saying that there actually IS such a thing as a BAD S&W. No way!!! The trigger pull on the 586 and 686 were not bad. Just not as good as the OLD STYLE double digit series like the 13. 19, 65, and 66. Not bad at all, just no comparison. I mean, it's not like we are comparing a S&W trigger new out of the box with a Ruger. (No need to flame. I like Ruger also, just that OUT OF THE BOX, most people agree that the trigger pull isn't a S&W).

Anyway, as pointed out, the "K" and the "L" frame are both fine guns. By far I am not a "Little" guy. At 5'11" and 210lbs, I can shoot the "K", "L", and "N" frames without a problem. Granted, I haven't had the pleasure of shooting a newer 357 like the 386 or 620, but to me there isn't a better feeling and balanced 357 than an older "K" frame modem 13,19,65, or 66. (I personally like fixed sites). Anyway, great opinions here. Later....Mike.....