Smith & Wesson 2 piece barrel 620 Wave of the future?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
5,687
Location
Delaware home of tax free shopping
I have gotten the bug to buy another smith revolver in .357, or possibly a single action ruger or a stampede in .357. I'm toying with the idea of getting a 6" 686+ because I like my 4" 686+ pre agreement model from 1999 so much.

Any hoo I read about the new 620 which is an L frame with a half underlug instead of the full underlug barrel found on the 686. I noticed that it has a 2 piece barrel and is stainless steel. So I called S&W to ask about this 2 piece barrel and had a nice conversation with ther Customer service person. He explained that the outter barrel is cast and the inner barrel is forged steel and broach rifled. This is the design found on the lightweight titanium/ scandium snubbies and on the new 500 series x-frames. It has the advantage for them of lessening the number of machining set ups and helping them keep the manufacturing process costs low. It also may make for a more accurate barrel because the barrel is tensioned, like the Dan Wessons made in the 1980s.

He also told me that they are thinking of going to this design feature on all of their revolvers in the future. HMMM

Well I'm not sure if that is a good thing or not. so I'm thinking; get a 6" 686+ or 686 now while the entire barrel is still forged, rather than just the insert.

My 1999 686+ has the ECR rifling (eletrochemical rifling, similar to EDM) its very accurate and the mirror finish and lack of tooling marks make it easy to clean. The CS rep mentioned that at the moment they have discontinued this process because it is less expensive to do the tension barrel set up but they may be using the ECR/EDM method in the future to make the inserts. The tension barrel allows them to make a long rifled pipe and then cut it to length and insert it in different barrel lengths and styles using the outer cast sleeve, and elimiates different machining setups (much like frame mounted firing pins did away with different hammers)

Very interesting, HMM maybe I should just look for an older smith because I dont want to be a guinea pig again, but then again a 6" 620 without the underlug in 7 shot may be worth waiting for. OTOH my local shop has a 6" 686 six shot nib for $529, a 4" 620 7 shot for $529, as well. Also tempting is a LNIB 6" 629 if I wanted to add the the 44 mag collection (I have a ruger super blackhawk and red hawk already) made just before the key lock was added for $529.



What do you all think ?????
 
I have a S&W 6" six shot model 686, and its a tack driver. ;)
This is one purchase I've never regretted. Only modification made
to it was the installation of WOLFF springs; with the 13 lb. trigger
return spring. Now, its slick as a newborn babys butt. :D

FWIW, $529 is what we sell 'em for NIB.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
 
Not in my future. I'll continue to buy up old production but am not sold on a concept that failed Wesson Arms years back. ( Just this week I watached a guy try to sell a 4 barreled DW cased set for $300 and get turned away. ) This might make for a cheaper to produce revolver but I'm not buying it's a better one.
My 2 cents,
 
Another problem with this production technique is that if you want to shorten the barrel (say, from 4" to 3", to make the gun shorter for CCW purposes), you're SOL. Shortening it removes the front tension point, so it can't be done. The only way would be to install a whole new barrel and shroud - assuming that S&W actually makes one in the desired length.
 
Another problem with this production technique is that if you want to shorten the barrel (say, from 4" to 3", to make the gun shorter for CCW purposes), you're SOL. Shortening it removes the front tension point, so it can't be done. The only way would be to install a whole new barrel and shroud - assuming that S&W actually makes one in the desired length.

Actually I think ist more cost effective, and probably less risky, now even with the fully forged barrels, to just sell the gun with the longer barrel and buy one with a shorter barrel, assuming that they make the configuration you want, or buy an older smith and have a custom gunsmith, or S&W make the conversion.

I cant really blame S&W for trying to keep the manufacturing costs down, because they have to compete with other companies like Taurus, and Springfield Armory that save costs by using cheaper foreign labor. S&W is still employing american workers to make all of their offerings. We should give them some credit for that anyway. :)
 
What some enterprising company needs to do is to start making after market interchangeable barrels and shrouds for the new S&Ws.

Or offer a service to cut the barrel, rethread the muzzle and shorten the shroud.

This way you could get a S&W in any length you wish.



But what I suspect will really happen is that S&W will continue to cut corners on barrel manufacturing and just use the lifetime warranty to replace those cheaper barrels that get shot very much. :(

The bean counters policy of "it's cheaper to fix it if they complain than to make it right the first time" seems to have prevailed. :banghead:
 
I for one and anxious to see exactly how this pans out. I am not going to offer an opinion until I have some experience to back it up.
"This is the design found on the lightweight titanium/ scandium snubbies and on the new 500 series x-frames. "
From everything I have heard, the 500 revolvers are very accurate. I haven't heard of any problems with longevity either and if any revolver cartridge was going to put the gun through it's paces, the 500 would do it.
Wouldn't it be amazing if someone did invent a new better mousetrap ?
 
I have to agree with you 444, but like I said I dont want to spend $529 to be the guinea pig on this one. :)

Its interesting that the CS rep I talked to mentioned that the design was doing well on the 500 revolvers also, I imagine they are doing the same thing on the new model 460 2300 fps jobber as well.
 
Well I'm not sure if that is a good thing or not. so I'm thinking; get a 6" 686+ or 686 now while the entire barrel is still forged, rather than just the insert.

I just purchased a used 6" 686-3 and I couldnt be happier. These things are awesome and I think you should pick one up. I almost always suffer a little buyers remorse after a big purchase (for me guns = big purchase) but, not-so with this one. I just keep looking at it and smiling. the long 686 is such a solid gun that I think a two-piece bbl would really mess up the feel of it.
 
I'm not blaming S&W for trying to cut their production costs, but that doesn't mean I'm interested in buying any of these. They probably shoot real well and will run just fine! But I guess I'm just old fashioned and like my Smiths the way they used to be (NO locks, NO MIM, firing pin on the hammer)...

Hopefully lots of new S&W buyers will be wowed by these "wave of the future" guns and leave the dwindling supply of classic S&W's on the used market to those of us who prefer them! ;-)=

Master... I think it's a right fine idea for you to go and git yersef one a them new 620's! I'll bet they're the "wave of the future"!

In the meantime, I'm waiting for the 686-4 +1 (7-shot) 2.5" I just bought to arrive at my FFL. It's just a used, fuddy-duddy gun though, firing pin on the hammer, no internal lock, no MIM... but I'll suffer through! :rolleyes:
 
I doubt that I will be buying any of the news ones, simply because I own plenty of the old ones that I don't shoot enough as it is. But, I was far more upset about the lock than I am about any of this stuff. For all I know, this stuff we are talking about here is better than what I already have. The lock is a step down IMO, no matter what.
 
What some enterprising company needs to do is to start making after market interchangeable barrels and shrouds for the new S&Ws.

His name is Jack Weigand, he already does it for the L frames currently produced. Or correction he used to do it it seems that this is on closeout, so maybe there was not much demand.

http://www.jackweigand.com/interchangeL.html ;)
 
FWIW I believe these new barrels are more widespread than Smith & Wesson claims. A friend of mine bought a new model 66 last fall and I noticed that it had a two piece barrel on. Thanks for the FYI on the construction, I was wondering how the were going about that.
 
In S&W's, I believe that I'll just look for good used ones, made the traditional way.

I hope Ruger doesn't foul its nest by "improving" the GP-100.

Lone Star
 
IMO the two-piece, tensioned barrel is an improvement, especially on high-intensity calibers. Replacing a barrel with a shot-out forcing cone is MUCH cheaper to do than on an old style gun, and anyone shooting the .460 much will take out the forcing cone.

My 500s are all tack-drivers, and I think the tensioned barrel is part of the reason.

JR
 
concept that failed Wesson Arms years back.
The concept didn't fail Dan Wesson. Even though you may not reconize DW if you look in the record books for the Silhoulette shooters you will see that DW dominated in those games. The business failed when the parent company wasted all of the assets of DW on other companies they owned then dumped DW as they were no longer profitable.
 
the tensioned barrel is not new, cheap technology. It is an old idea, proven to have great merit by DW, volquartsen, and other manufacturers both here and abroad. If that guy still has a cased set for $300, have him email me. I will buy it. [email protected]. I paid $600 for my last 4-barrel, cased m15-2 set in .357 and I am still dancing like a school girl about it a year later. I hope DW, monson, mass. made guns remain misunderstood and under appreciated until I can get my hands on a .44 mag. cased set! regards to all.
 
Well I took delivery of the 6" 686 6 shot yesterday, the action feels excellent just as good as my 5 year old 686 plus. I will be taking it out for a test drive later today. I did a little better than the asking price of $529 NIB and here in DE we dont have a state transfer fee or any sales tax, so the price is the price.

My new 686 appears to have the ECR/EDM rifling which is a very good thing, since it imparts a mirror finish and will make the barrel much easier to clean than a conventionally rifled barrel. The only minor annoyance is the key locking hole but, I can live with that, since it hasn't caused any problem on my 642 carry gun.

I own about 8 s&w revolvers and this is only the second one bought NIB, even my 686+ was preowned and sold by the original owner to me at a considerable discount after they fired a box of ammo and decided .357 mag was not for them, and the gunstore where they bought it offered them $250 ;) .
 
I don't know much about the differences in barrels that this conversation deals with. There are a few things that I do know though. First, I really like the concept of the 619 and 620. Long overdue in my opinion. Second, I have no problem with the new style barrels as a cost cutting measure as long as there is no quality cutting. Those 2 things do not have to go hand in hand and too often that connection is assumed. Third, I heard someone say it would make cutting the barrel down impossible. That might be relevant to some but to the vast majority, including me, that is irrevelant. If you are one of those people who likes to have the barrel cut, I understand not wanting to buy it. And, it always seems that any change is looked at with scorn until it has proven itself. Many people won't buy S&W because of the lock. Fair enough. I think it's ugly and unnecessary. But if I had let that stop me from buying, I would have cheated myself out of one of the nicest shooting guns I've ever owned (686+ 5", hi viz). I remember when I was in college and the 686's came out. I had a number of friends and acquaintances cry bloody murder "butt ugly, completely lost the grace and elegance of the K and N frames". "Better suited for a hammer with all that metal under the barrel", etc, etc. I'll wait until I see one and feel it. If I like it I'll buy it. If I like shooting it, I'll keep it. If not I'll sell it.
 
I was at the Ruger site today to look up the number for customer service as I had sent in my MK512 (deep tool mark circumference of bore) and noticed the Alaskan. The image shows what seems to be a 2 piece barrel. Correct or not?
 
Not the same thing.
A Super Redhawk has two inches of barrel threads in that frame extension.
The Alaskan just bobs the barrel flush with the end of the extension, but it's a conventional barrel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top