So, I bought this 686 yesterday

CajunBass

CajunBass

Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2005
Messages
7,290
Location
North Chesterfield, Virginia
Well, not really "yesterday," I just got it out of layaway yesterday. It's hard to believe, as long as the 686 has been around, and as many guns as I've had over the years, I've never owned one. I think it was as much marching to a different drummer as anything else. I mean everybody and his cousin has a 686 and sings the praises of them, so I have to be the one guy over there all by himself with something different. Then finally a month or so ago, I saw one with a 4" barrel, most I see have longer or shorter, neither of which really interest me, but I do have a weak spot for a revolver with a 4" barrel.

This one was sort of "meah" looking, as I think most SS guns all. The finish was sort of dull, with the big blank right side plate, with the small S&W logo on the left side. You know, just putting the regular size logo, on the right side would have gone a long way toward making this gun look "right" I believe. There were also a lot f fine scratches, like someone had used a Scotch-Brite pad to try to clean it. It's a -6 so it has all the "bad" stuff. MIM parts, frame mounted firing pin, internal lock, and ugly rubber grips, none of which really bug me a bit.

I got it home, and got out the Flitz and cleaned it. One light buffing with that bought back the shine. Some of the scratches are still there, but I'm reluctant to Flitz it any more. I don't want a mirror finish, just a clean one. A couple of coats of Ren Wax, and the old girl started to look presentable in polite company. Not as nice as my Pythons, but nice. No idea how old it is, the SN isn't "in the book" but the -6 came out 2001, so that's the ballpark.

image_50409217.JPG

image_50402817.JPG

The camera makes it look worse that it does in the real world. And I take really lousy pictures with my phone.

I find the ugly, rubber grips to be quite comfortable, but still I've got a nice set of Altamont "Ropers" for a round butt K-frame I've never use, so I put them on. Naw. They just don't look right, so the ugly rubber ones went back on. I might look for something else, but I'll shoot these first. Who knows? Maybe I'll like them.

Holding it side by side with the Colt Python (2020), the Python wins hands down on looks. The finish is better, the grips are better, the Colt has that beautiful vent rib. On the down side the Colt has that grooved trigger, the S&W's is smooth. Win for S&W there. Now, I can't tell which trigger is "better," at least not in DA. S/A the edge goes to S&W, but I almost never use SA, so "big deal" to me. If you handed them to me blindfolded I don't think I could tell you which was which (at least not yet) just by the trigger. The grips of course would give it away anyway. Loaded with 125 grain 357 dummy loads, they both weigh the same. They have the same style of sights, except the Colt's rear does not have a white outline as the S&W does. The Colt's cylinder does turn the wrong way and the cylinder release is backward. (I'm still a S&W guy at heart). ;)

I'm looking forward to going to the range this weekend where I'll shoot both. I really don't expect there to be much difference in the way they shoot.
 
Last edited:
CajunBass said:
Well,… I have to be the one guy over there all by himself with something different.
Click to expand...

Not really. I had a 4” dash one and a 6” no dash that I used in PPC competition. The were very good for that purpose.

I tried to carry the 4” on duty and gave it a fair chance but ended up back to the K frame on my duty belt. When I stopped shooting competitively, I sold both. They were neither fish nor fowl, not as handy as the K frame nor as solid as the N frame. I have not missed them.

Hopefully, you find them to your liking. But if not, you are not alone!

Kevin
 
The current rubber grips on S&Ws are not ugly.

And they are super functional.

For everyone's hands, maybe not. But for
most, surely.

And their shape is perfect for double action
shooting--evenly shaped top to bottom.
DA guru Bill Jordan might even approve.
Ditto for Jerry Miculek. :)

(Some think they might even mimic the 1911
for comfort and utility.)
 
UncleEd said:
The current rubber grips on S&Ws are not ugly.

And they are super functional.

For everyone's hands, maybe not. But for
most, surely.

And their shape is perfect for double action
shooting--evenly shaped top to bottom.
DA guru Bill Jordan might even approve.
Ditto for Jerry Miculek. :)

(Some think they might even mimic the 1911
for comfort and utility.)
Click to expand...
Well, I said they were quite functional. But I spend a lot more time looking at my guns than I do actually shooting them. I doubt I'll change 'em though,

As the old song says...I've seen your wife, and she is ugly. Yea...she's ugly, but she sure can cook.

I suspect these grips can cook. ;) :)
 
looks like service grade, a good shooter. those scratches almost look like someone took rubbing compound to the finish and then sold it when they realized that was not the right thing to do.
 
Nice pistol @CajunBass.

My wife bought a 4” 586-0 when the L-frames first came out. She shoots it well but does not let me shoot it.

30-35 years later, I bought my first 686, an 8-3/8” version. Great pistol.

The fit and finish on my 686 is not quite as nice as my new production Python, but the trigger is better and I can shoot it better.
 
Congratulations. 686s are a nice gun. My wife and I both love hers. She has some interesting grips. They were magna grips, but I removed the checkering, thinning them, and removed the length so they do not go past the butt. Sized them to fit her hands, but they actually fit me okay, and probably a little better than the magnas which were just a touch large for me.
 
Bazoo said:
Congratulations. 686s are a nice gun. My wife and I both love hers. She has some interesting grips. They were magna grips, but I removed the checkering, thinning them, and removed the length so they do not go past the butt. Sized them to fit her hands, but they actually fit me okay, and probably a little better than the magnas which were just a touch large for me.
Click to expand...
I think you may be mistaken. Magnas do not extend past the butt of the grip frame. Here is an image,

IMG_0710.jpeg

Target stocks are much fuller and do extend past the grip frame and behind the triggerguard.

IMG_1140.jpeg

I modified the Targets to better fit my hand.

IMG_1086.jpeg

Removed the checkering, thinned them and cut them flush to the butt. They fit my hand well.

Kevin
 
Back in the day, I did the same thing you did with a set of factory coke bottle target grips on an old 4" Model 29 I had. Got the old pocket knife out and cut them down to fit. Cut and filed the target trigger down and bobbed the hammer too. Even ended up parkerizing the gun to boot. All in all, it worked out pretty good too.

Of course I sold it off for something else I just had to have and cant even remember what that was now. 🙄

And now seeing what those grips go for these days too...... 😲
 
One of my favorite guns, I really like the 686s and have had a number of them. Since I stopped shooting competitively I sold all my guns. Gave most to my son. I'm now shooting .22s and bought a 617 with the same features as the 686.

Yours look good and I think you will find it to be a keeper. You can shoot light loads for target and .357s for self defense which is a big plus. Good luck with it and good shooting.

Steven
 
firedawg60 said:
I wished a company would make stocks just like this. I am not confident in my woodworking disability to butcher up an otherwise nice set.
Click to expand...
What I found was those stocks I carved were very close to the Magna stocks with a grip adapter.

IMG_3933.jpeg

IMG_0710.jpeg

Those are both Tyler T grips but older drip adapters work also, Mershon, Pachmyar, or S&W.

Kevin
 
Regarding a Colt vs. a S&W, accuracy can depend on the
bullet and weight as each gun has a different twist rate.

But for all practical purposes, the differences might be nil.

IIRC one of the major gun magazines did a test years back with
a Python, a Model 586 and a Dan Wesson. From a Ransom
Rest, the results for five rounds each at 100 yards were miniscule.

The DW won, beating the Python by a tiny fraction of an inch.
And the Python beat the S&W, also by a very tiny fraction.
 
Good pickup! I really like the 686. Back around 2002-3, I carried my 4” 7-shot + model for several months while recovering from a thumb injury..

It got scratched a bit working graveyard and carried in a swivel holster, so I had it bead blasted. Its a bit utilitarian looking, but it shoots lights out so I dont mind.

IMG_0644.jpeg IMG_0645.jpeg

Stay safe.
 
Appearance really shouldn't matter, but I never liked the looks of the full length underlug, and therefore, of the 686.

I read in a book by Massad Ayoob that the 686 was the same size as a Colt OM or Puyhon, and was slightly intrigued. Then a neighbor came over with a blue no-dash 686 that he had acquired from a friend who had carried it while he was a probationary LEO and was not permitted to carry a semi-auto. Smooth, beautiful, well-balanced.... I had to have one.

By chance, a few weeks later I stopped to refuel in a small town and saw a gun store across the road. I went in, and lo and behold, I sat a 686+ with a five inch barrel and a tapered underlug. I didn't need it, but I wanted it.

When I got home. I called El Paso Saddlery and ordered a Tom Threepersons holster for it. Great combination.

Unfortunately, a belt revolver does not meet my needs for concealed carry. I carry a semiautomatic, OWB, under my shirt tail.

I am so far past my prime that I do not use the revolver. Someone will enjoy it someday.
 
Kleanbore said:
Appearance really shouldn't matter, but I never liked the looks of the full length underlug, and therefore, of the 686.
Click to expand...
Appearance always matters. That underlug is probably the main reason I've never been interested in the 5/686 series of guns. Oddly enough I don't mind it on the Colt Python. It looks "right" on the Python. I guess I've grown used to it on the 686 now. I still don't "like" it, but it's there and ain't going nowhere.

I also don't care for unfluted cylinders and won't buy one. Others love them. Again there is an exception. On the Ruger Super Blackhawk and the little Bearcat they look normal. I have owned both in the past and never thought about it.

I'm a little odd.
 
CajunBass said:
I'm a little odd.
Click to expand...
OK, you're a "little odd." Based on previous responses such as in a thread
on the S&W Combat Masterpiece (and references to the Combat Magnum)
you're a K-frame kind of guy. That's withstanding flirtations with the Python.
Think of that 686 as a down payment in the future for another K-frame, perhaps
a Model 66 (a snubby?). :evil:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Best S&W 686 target grips?
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
Tinman357
T
dh1633pm
S&W 686 Wood Grips
Replies
22
Views
1K
dh1633pm
dh1633pm
Confederate
  • Locked
The Better Gun: Colt Python or S&W 686?
2 3 4 5
Replies
110
Views
26K
SwampWolf
S
Mr. Mosin
  • Locked
Colt Python vs S&W 686/Ruger GP100
2 3 4 5
Replies
101
Views
15K
labnoti
L
T
  • Locked
Looking for best 686 SSR grips
2
Replies
28
Views
5K
9mmepiphany
9mmepiphany
Back
Top