I am going to be purchasing a .357 soon. It is going to be a Smith, so don't worry about that. However, I am torn between the 586 and the 686. I am partial to bluing and wood. Here is the question-aside from the aesthetic differences, are there differences in function between the 586 and 686? Accuracy, trigger, tightness (anything else). I appreciate it and await your replies. Just to make it interesting, I encourage you to throw in your $.02 concerning S&W revolvers being superior or interior to other makes.
S&W 586 and 686
- Thread starter deacon8
- Start date
- Status
RON in PA
Member
Basically the same gun, I have both and there are no real differences except for blued steel vrs. stainless.
I'm partial to S&W, but Ruger makes very good revolvers. The GP100, which is the equivalent of the 686/586 is excellent. Some would argue that it is more rugged than a Smith, but I think that it is splitting hairs.
I'm partial to S&W, but Ruger makes very good revolvers. The GP100, which is the equivalent of the 686/586 is excellent. Some would argue that it is more rugged than a Smith, but I think that it is splitting hairs.
LTR shooter
Member
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2008
- Messages
- 468
Then try to find a 586 would be my suggestion. Either will be a fine revolver.
In practicality of buying, you will find more choices with the 686. Many more were built. Like you, I also prefer the aesthetics of blue vs stainless (both came with wood grips, btw, before the mid 90s when all got rubber).
S&W has always been consistent about engineering and machining their blue vs. steel models so that they perform the same, that's why they give them different model numbers - the procedures are different enough to justify it.
I am not going to bash other makes, but over the years I've bought one Ruger revolver, one Colt Revolver, and over 20 S&Ws. One brand just made me go back and back. All are reliable, all are well made. It comes down to what kind of aesthetics, design features, and variations interest you. S&W is the one that did it for me.
My last comment is I see you are in Idaho. I bring it up as that climate raises the question of how you want to use the gun. I am in WA, and if it's for HD, target work, competition, etc., then it doesn't matter which you choose. But if you are going to carry it a lot year-round, or use it/carry it outdoors in winter, a 686 makes a whole lot more sense. Even with the stainless, you still need to get the grips off once or twice a year to get moisture out from underneath if you've had it in high humidity/very wet conditions for periods. I've seen 686's rusted under the rubber pachmayr grips from not venting after getting really wet and humid (surface oxidation only, not gut-eating rust). A good way to protect against this, stainless or blue, is to wax your gun, just like your car. Some use simple paste waxes, which work well. Renaissance Wax works a bit better from my experience, but it is more expensive initially (but a canister of it goes much further than a paste wax, so it's a wash in the end). By my estimate, a $16 container of Renaissance Wax will do about 250 to 300 handgun applications, or about $.06 per application.
Hope this helps some.
S&W has always been consistent about engineering and machining their blue vs. steel models so that they perform the same, that's why they give them different model numbers - the procedures are different enough to justify it.
I am not going to bash other makes, but over the years I've bought one Ruger revolver, one Colt Revolver, and over 20 S&Ws. One brand just made me go back and back. All are reliable, all are well made. It comes down to what kind of aesthetics, design features, and variations interest you. S&W is the one that did it for me.
My last comment is I see you are in Idaho. I bring it up as that climate raises the question of how you want to use the gun. I am in WA, and if it's for HD, target work, competition, etc., then it doesn't matter which you choose. But if you are going to carry it a lot year-round, or use it/carry it outdoors in winter, a 686 makes a whole lot more sense. Even with the stainless, you still need to get the grips off once or twice a year to get moisture out from underneath if you've had it in high humidity/very wet conditions for periods. I've seen 686's rusted under the rubber pachmayr grips from not venting after getting really wet and humid (surface oxidation only, not gut-eating rust). A good way to protect against this, stainless or blue, is to wax your gun, just like your car. Some use simple paste waxes, which work well. Renaissance Wax works a bit better from my experience, but it is more expensive initially (but a canister of it goes much further than a paste wax, so it's a wash in the end). By my estimate, a $16 container of Renaissance Wax will do about 250 to 300 handgun applications, or about $.06 per application.
Hope this helps some.
I have both a 586 and 686 (and a 581, a bit different animal) and assuming that the 686 is a six shot find the 586/686 to be virtually identical in terms of function. That said, the finish gives the gun a very different look. I am always torn between the beauty of stainless steel versus blued and often land on the side of stainless in favor of a more durable finish. There are more options for refinishing a stainless gun from home fixes all the way to professionally applied bead blasts. Re-bluing is becoming a lost art with fewer doing it than there used to be with the added option of painting, which I just can't get behind with revolvers.
But, it's all just a matter of aesthetics and I have really come to enjoy the look of wear to a well used blued revolver.
But, it's all just a matter of aesthetics and I have really come to enjoy the look of wear to a well used blued revolver.
Brian Williams
Moderator Emeritus
Stainless steel just has no soul.
easyrider604
Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2008
- Messages
- 735
Perhaps it is just me, but I like the "feel" of the 586 more than that of the 686.
When the hammer drops, I can feel and hear a difference in the vibes and the "tink" of carbon steel vs stainless. Somehow, carbon steel sends a message that it is more solid and robust.
Even the felt recoil of my 586 feels more pleasurable and satisfying. So between feel and the appeal of the blued finish, I'd take a 586 over a 686 anytime.
When the hammer drops, I can feel and hear a difference in the vibes and the "tink" of carbon steel vs stainless. Somehow, carbon steel sends a message that it is more solid and robust.
Even the felt recoil of my 586 feels more pleasurable and satisfying. So between feel and the appeal of the blued finish, I'd take a 586 over a 686 anytime.
- Status
