silicosys4
Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2012
- Messages
- 4,502
I haven't seen a nice USED 686 for this price in a while. I wonder if they are expecting a shipment of no-lock 686's soon....
-
Possible Downtime Alert
I am working to migrate THR from the current cluster to a new one. I would like to get this done before the weekend, but it's unclear what the timeframe will be, as testing is still ongoing. As I am writing this the new (rebuilt) host is doing a burn-in to ensure that everything will keep running under load.
When the migration happens users will see a Cloudflare message indicatating it cannot connect to the server. This is expected, and depending on how the migration goes this may last from 30 minutes to 3 hours - I won't know more until testing the various migration options is complete and I have finalized the plan.
More information is available in this thread.
As always, thanks so much for your patience.
PSA: $650 Clearance sale on S&W 686's
- Thread starter silicosys4
- Start date
That's what I was thinking. I know Lipsey's is coming out with a no lock 686 Mountain Gun, but I hadn't heard if S&W was finally dropping the lock. Sure, you can remove it or ignore it, but it's just stupid and unnecessary. If S&W did finally drop the locks, I'd go on a revolver buying spree.
jeff-10
Member
Lol, the no lock's are going to murder the price of S&W revolvers manufactured for the last two decades. I saw an interesting stat that revolver sales in the US are increasing but S&W is in third place in sales. Behind Ruger and Taurus. Wonder if this changes that.
TTv2
Member
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2016
- Messages
- 5,713
Smith's problems with the revolver sales are they're not price competitive with Taurus and don't have the "tank" moniker that Ruger's have. Oddballs like those who frequent gun forums may love all the classics that S&W is doing lately, but the average gun buyer who buys a revolver is looking for a small frame snub and we know Taurus wins on price, but I suspect that the LCR's trigger is winning buyers over compared to the J frame.
I don't think locks and Hilary Holes are causing people to buy other options.
Speedo66
Member
Noted that the photo doesn’t show the side with the hole, excellent price though.
I bought a 586 as a duty gun in 1982, $247.95, great revolver, long gone.
I bought a 586 as a duty gun in 1982, $247.95, great revolver, long gone.
armoredman
Member
If I knew it had no lock, I'd sell blood plasma to get that. As it is, it's a great price, but with a Hillary Hole, I can control my urge to buy much better.
My thoughts exactly.
S&W switched to showing the non-lock side years ago. I'm immediately suspicious when the product photo shows that side of the gun. The older ones with no locks show the side with the cylinder release. Some people will angle the photo to obscure the lock when selling used guns. I will not buy one without a clear photo of that area.
The budget buyer or new gun owner may not know about internal locks, but if they did, they might think twice. One can get used or new no-lock J-frames fairly easily. Some Taurus revolvers also have locks. I'm not sure about the older ones. I'm glad Ruger did not jump on the lock bandwagon with S&W and Taurus.
I don't want a lock on my life-saving device that can fail at the worst moment. Short of SAO guns like the 1911, I'm not even a fan of manual safeties on semi-auto handguns. The fewer things that can go wrong in a potentially life-saving moment in a fraction of a second, the better.
Without revisiting the politics around the Hillary hole, they should have dumped that garbage two years after it was introduced. It was useless in any measurement almost immediately.
I like, shoot, own, and carry S&W revolvers. When Im shopping it’s the first thing I look for and it is a hard pass when a gun has one. The gun would have to be free.
Glad I sold my 686+ and 586 with the hole awhile back for decent money. It was not the lock that bothered me, it was the out of the box trigger compared to the new Colts out of the box. Just a matter of preference. I do have a couple of older S&W no locks I'll keep...
Homerboy
Member
Since I don’t carry a revolver anymore, although I do occasionally carry my 640 in .38, when I buy a revolver it’s for pride of ownership, and no firing pin in the hammer and especially the lock in the frame, don’t inspire that pride of ownership. They may work just fine, but since they’re only getting shot at the range occasionally, I’m not dropping $700 for a revolver with the lock. I can deal with the frame mounted firing pin, but the lock just ruins the appearance of the revolver for me.
And the pictures not showing the lock is always a sign the gun has one.
And the pictures not showing the lock is always a sign the gun has one.
Homerboy
Member
Since I don’t carry a revolver anymore, although I do occasionally carry my 640 in .38, when I buy a revolver it’s for pride of ownership, and no firing pin in the hammer and especially the lock in the frame, don’t inspire that pride of ownership. They may work just fine, but since they’re only getting shot at the range occasionally, I’m not dropping $700 for a revolver with the lock. I can deal with the frame mounted firing pin, but the lock just ruins the appearance of the revolver for me.
And the pictures not showing the lock is always a sign the gun has one.
And the pictures not showing the lock is always a sign the gun has one.
bigpower491
Member
I for one could care less about the lock, especially after the way my 586-8 shoots. That's a deal right there, and if i didn't have a bunch of other things going on, I'd be jumping on this
Miami_JBT
Member
Taurus owns I think 42% of the entire US revolver market.
Same. I'm not a collector, and my primary match gun was a 4" 686-6. After about 80K rounds of rapid DA shooting and thousands of speedloader reloads on the clock, it still functioned perfectly. I relegated it to backup status only when I stumbled on another minty & low-mileage 4" 686-5. I agree it's an unnecessary part that could theoretically fail, so all else equal, I'd take the pre-lock -5 variant over the -6, but compared to some of the other and real S&W QA/QC issues to look out for, The Lock is pretty low on the list for me if I were looking for a shooter.
someguy2800
Member
Since I would love to pick up some cheap Hillary specials, that would be fine by me. The lock is very easily removed anyway.
Here's hoping the cost of lock era mountain guns and 69's falls dramatically so I can buy them!
That's the thing, I've been looking for a budget friendly, no-frills, US made, j-frame sized revolver for EDC when off duty. I even figured I would look into Charter Arms. When I saw what some of the classic used Smith J frames sold for on Gunbroker (with quite a few looking to be in decent shape), I abandoned research into anything else.
pharmer
Member
I like PSA, bought many "Daily Deals". That said; $650 purchase+ 7.5% tax=$ 48.75, $20 shipping, $40 FFL ($35+$5 BGC)= $758.75 OTD. Still a good price but not good enough. Joe
Pat Riot
Contributing Member
If you look up the S&W SKU #164222 you will see it’s a 686 model with the dreaded Lock.
I’m not a revolver guy by any stretch of the imagination, but even I’m tempted by that price.
Targa
Member
My thoughts as well.
OP
OP
silicosys4
Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2012
- Messages
- 4,502
A few weeks before I posted $650 deal, I paid $50 for a LNIB 686-3.
Would I still have done the same knowing the deal was coming?
Absolutely.
Just for the wood target grips, though there are a few other things about the older guns I prefer such as the roll marks, cylinder release, hard chromed trigger/hammer, and the separate cylinder stop.
Would I still have done the same knowing the deal was coming?
Absolutely.
Just for the wood target grips, though there are a few other things about the older guns I prefer such as the roll marks, cylinder release, hard chromed trigger/hammer, and the separate cylinder stop.
Last edited:
