S&W 686 it's hard to beat

shoebox1.1 said:
I get my no dash In a couple days! I got the stocks all done for it and a holster. I can’t wait
Click to expand...
Nice looking setup
Rock185 said:
The L-frames are long time favorites of mine. I started carrying a 586 soon after they were introduced 40+ years ago. A succession of 686s followed, i.e., no-dash guns, -3,-4,-5s,a -6 SSR, a Mountain Gun, etc. Down to two now. A no-dash and -5 that I intend to hang on to..
View attachment 1150441
Click to expand...
The grips on the top one looks great
PzGren said:
I find the 686 with a six inch barrel to balance well and absorb recoil. Among the S&W .357 revolvers with six inch barrel, I prefer it over the 19 and 27.

View attachment 1150723
Click to expand...
Almost too nice looking to carry
 
Rodfac said:
…

StrawHat....To answer your question: the holster in my post #27 is one that I made up especially for my 686, as I found its fully lugged bbl. was a bit too big for my M-66/19 holsters. It's my version of the old Tom Threepersons type of open top, & fitted tightly enough that a keeper strap or thong isn't necessary.
Click to expand...


Thank you, I remember now. Your rendition is very close to the father of the ThreePersons. Supposedly, Tom took the Sunday scabbard and trimmed away everything that was not necessary to hold the sidearm. What was left is what is called by his name. The parent holster had a similar welt stack and loop to hold the sidearm and position the scabbard on the belt.

Your looks very nice. I wish you had a shop.

Kevin
 
Last edited:
Kind words, Straw, thx...I've also made versions that have a half flap and no cross strap...saves some weight that way, but not much. I don't think the original Tom 3's had a retaining strap or loop...but could be dead wrong about that.

I do know that Bill Jordan's Border Patrol holster had some drop to it, about 2" IIRC, which positions the gun butt half way between wrist and elbow & it also had a retaining strap/and snap. In his book, No 2nd Place Winner, Jordan advocated carrying the gun without the strap buttoned...preferring to secure the gun only when a pursuit etc. was anticipated.
I fit holsters to the gun as tight as I can get them, knowing that the leather will, over time, loosen up to some extent. But the only one I've subsequently fitted a strap to was a model 60 holster I made back in '95...it'd stayed plenty tight enough through 25+ years.

Sorry for the thread divergence, guys...lots of great looking 686's here...thx to all who've shared. Rod
 
Last edited:
StrawHat said:
Unless I am mistaken, the L frame weighs the same as the N frame but has a smaller grip. I prefer the N frame.
Click to expand...

Everything else being equal, the N frame will always be heavier than an equivalent L-frame ( the N-frame is bigger), even if, as murf explained, only slightly. The L-frame revolver shares the same grip dimensions as the K-frame.
 
I just picked one up. A 686-6, and unfortunately, it has that damnable internal lock which I've made it a point to avoid, but this one had a 5" barrel with partial underlug, which I've only ever seen one other time (and that gun also had Ahrends grips like this, making me wonder if Smith & Wesson didn't offer them with this variant). I think I will probably replace the fiber optic sight with a gold bead -- this one isn't terribly good at gathering light -- it only seems bright when you're standing directly under a light fixture -- and I have gold beads on a couple of my other guns and really like them. Also unfortunate is the rear sight; I don't know if this came from the factory like this or not, but the sight is a V notch, which I have never seen on an S&W revolver. I don't like it. Every S&W adjustable revolver sight I have ever seen is a square notch, sometimes with a white outline, and sometimes without. I will put a square notch on if I must; it will be better than this V. But I'd really like a U notch like the one on the Wilson Combat sights I put on my new Python, only I can't find anyone making such a rear sight for the S&W revolver.
Smith-and-Wesson-686-6.jpg
 
Billy Shears said:
Also unfortunate is the rear sight; I don't know if this came from the factory like this or not, but the sight is a V notch, which I have never seen on an S&W revolver. I don't like it.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't like it either and I too wonder if it's from the factory. My guess is that the V notch is intended for fast shooting in a self-defense scenario, much like rifles have them to stop charging, dangerous game where speed, not precision, is needed to acquire a sight picture.
 
Billy Shears said:
I just picked one up. A 686-6, and unfortunately, it has that damnable internal lock which I've made it a point to avoid, but this one had a 5" barrel with partial underlug, which I've only ever seen one other time (and that gun also had Ahrends grips like this, making me wonder if Smith & Wesson didn't offer them with this variant). I think I will probably replace the fiber optic sight with a gold bead -- this one isn't terribly good at gathering light -- it only seems bright when you're standing directly under a light fixture -- and I have gold beads on a couple of my other guns and really like them. Also unfortunate is the rear sight; I don't know if this came from the factory like this or not, but the sight is a V notch, which I have never seen on an S&W revolver. I don't like it. Every S&W adjustable revolver sight I have ever seen is a square notch, sometimes with a white outline, and sometimes without. I will put a square notch on if I must; it will be better than this V. But I'd really like a U notch like the one on the Wilson Combat sights I put on my new Python, only I can't find anyone making such a rear sight for the S&W revolver.
View attachment 1153537
Click to expand...
That looks great! I would prefer the gold bead on such an elegant machine :)
 
Don't like adjustable sights on a carry piece. They had a bunch of those back in the 80s that would lock up right out of the box. Smith fixed them all, never took one apart to diagnose the problem.
 
I have owned three L-frame S&W'S.
The first was a 681 stainless steel revolver with a 4 inch barrel and fixed sights. I was unhappy with the issue model 13, a K-frame revolver which was nice to carry, but just too fragile for sustained .357 use. My agency had one crack the forcing cone when we were issued 125 grain .357 ammo instead of the usual 110 grain.357 ammo.
I had the action smoothed and carried it for a while, but it was a heavy gun. I eventually sent it to MAGNA PORT and that made it very easy to shoot the 110 grain ammo we were then issuing and I could also qualify with the 125 grain which my agency was desperate to get rid of. I was given 12 boxes of REMINGTON 125 grain .357 for practice so they could empty the armory!
I still have it and shoot it every once in a while.
I also bought a nickeled 581 as a companion piece, but it did not have as smooth a trigger, so I sold it to a co-worker who loves nickled guns.
I then bought a 6 inch model 686 which I was not interested in until I noticed the slots on either side of the front sight. Yes, it was MAGNA-PORTED and it had an action job as well. I said I would think about and drove off and an hour later called the gun shop to ask them to hold it for me. It shoots very well and the heavy barrel and ports really soak up the recoil. The last time I took it to the range, I shot my RUGER Security Six with a 4 inch barrel and the 686 and it was night and day in the ease of shooting .357 ammo.
The bad news is that it is as heavy as a brick. I would never want to pack it in a holser, which is one reason I like the RUGER Six serries. It is a much easier to pack gun without the weaknesses of the K-frame guns.

Jim
 
I like all of the Smith K, L, and N frames, but the L frame is my favorite to shoot. I have a no-dash 586 and 686. This particular 686 has the best action and trigger of any handgun I've ever fondled, including some early Pythons that a couple of friends have. I acquired it back in the early/mid 1980s and did a very mild "action job" on it back then, but the only thing I recall doing for sure was to re-profile the main spring, reduce the trigger rebound spring, and to reduce the diameter of the firing pin tip by about 25% to help make it reliably light off all primers despite the lighter action. I don't remember if I stoned any of the contact surfaces, but I don't think I did -- it was already very smooth and nice. The S/A trigger pull is 2.3#, D/A is 6.5#, and there is zero stacking throughout the D/A pull. It is a great gun to shoot. The 586 has a lightened spring kit in it and has a great action, but the result isn't quite as perfect to my tastes as the 686. I've tried various grips on all of my Smith & Wesson revolvers but prefer the feel of the old-school Pachmayrs on this particular 686. It's strange, being that the 586 and 686 are the same gun except for barrel length, but for some reason I prefer shooting the 586 with the Pachmayr Gripper style grips instead of the style that's on the 686 (though I made the photo below with the original wood grips installed).

FAJ88lB.jpg
 
Last edited:
index.php

Billy Shears said:
I just picked one up. A 686-6, and unfortunately, it has that damnable internal lock which I've made it a point to avoid, but this one had a 5" barrel with partial underlug...
Click to expand...
This is the first time I hade seen 5" 686 with partial underlug. Did they make any 6", same style? When I see 7.5" and even 8-3/8" barrels with only full underlug, on already heavy barrel, I have to ask "WHY?"

Why S&W doesn't offer 6" or longer barrel 586/686, with barrel profile like on 19/66 or 27? Heck, they already have lighter, slimmer barrels on some 629 and 25!

Such heavy, full lug barrel on my 686-6, 6", is the main reason why I am going eventually to sell it.

I was thinking about 66, but that flat spot on the bottom of the aft side of the barrel, prone to cracking (even frame) https://waguns.org/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=59338 , https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/s-w-model-66-and-cracking-forcing-cones.554994/ , was turn off.
 
Last edited:
Onty... I don't know if they ever made the 686 with a partial underlug barrel in any other length. The only other one I've ever seen (in a photograph) looked identical to this -- same fiber optic front sight, and same Ahrend's grips, which makes me think those were factory installed. I know that was a different gun though, because the wood grain pattern on the grips was different. I really prefer the look of the gun with the partial underlug. Aesthetically, Colt just does the full underlug better, and with this gun's untapered bull barrel, and 5" barrel length, I think it balances just right as is, and still has all the weight needed to soak up magnum recoil and keep the gun from being unpleasant to shoot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

357smallbore
  • Locked
S&W 686 and then the rest
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
nofendertom
N
C
  • Locked
S&w 686
Replies
23
Views
1K
madcratebuilder
M
357smallbore
S&W 686 and the GP100
2
Replies
46
Views
2K
AzShooter1
AzShooter1
Confederate
  • Locked
The Better Gun: Colt Python or S&W 686?
2 3 4 5
Replies
110
Views
26K
SwampWolf
S
357smallbore
  • Locked
Original GP100 and 686 (no dash)
Replies
20
Views
863
Obturation
Obturation
Back
Top