Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Firearms Forum' started by sakecover, Jan 19, 2020.
Hands down the most useful folder I have ever owned. The blade shape is extremely useful.
Agreed. Useful as a very good description. I've carried one almost every day since the came out.
Just a range gun / possible self-defense gun. The 4" really sounds like the best option.
The old ones are usually a good buy and won't depreciate the minute you walk away with it. Just learn the telling signs of mechanical wear before buying.
-5 and earlier have no lock
-4 and earlier have forged parts and a hammer nose instead of internal firing pin.
-1 and some -2 have a floating hand, which some shooters don't like.
No dash and -1 have a hammer nose bushing recall. Those "fixed" by S&W will have a "M" stamp next to the model number in the inside of the frame that meets the crane.
I've found -3 and -4 are the best of breed. There are some very few 7 shot -4s out there.
Still a great handgun today, with the -6, if you can get past the lower build quality and hillary hole.
You really feel like they are lower quality today?
The 80s and early 90s guns were still often considered LE duty weapons and had a higher QC, though still not perfect. However, by mid to late 90s once revolvers were almost completely outside the LE sphere, and popularity took a dive, all manufacturers pretty much let things slide.
Not to mention forged vs MIM, but the actual effects of that for the end user are arguable.
I'd think that a new 686 would likely be just as fine a shooter as a vintage one in general.
But again, it is important to know what issues to look for with revolvers, both new production and (especially) used.
I have three 686Ps, 4", Pro Series 5" (slab side) and 6"; all three have been carried at one time or another. All three are well made and have first shot accuracy at distance. The 4" and 5" have PC triggers, supurb reset for pushing split times in defensive situations. The new 686s have round butts which conceal better with aftermarket grips than square butts of some models.
The new M19/66s are very strong compared to the older models and would make great choices if one prefers 6-shot cylinders.
FWIW, I go back to the early '70s and preferred carrying the 19s compared to the 28s.
I have a 4” 686 (6 shot) and I agree with the above.
I have one that's probably 17-18 years old that I've shot the hell out of. Shoots quite well.
686-6 shot. It has the lock. I don't really care.
SA trigger pull is damn near perfect.
I had a 4" 686+. It had light strikes when I got it new, had to fiddle with the tension. Otherwise, it was a nice gun, very accurate. Sadly, K and L frames don't fit my hand very well. The "hump" on the grip makes it uncomfortable for me. I much prefer the Ruger GP100 grip, so I sold the 686.
I bought an L-Frame shortly after they were introduced, and have owned several since. I prefer the 4", 6-shot guns. But I currently have a 4", 6 or 7-shot, 686.
I consider the 686s in general to be very practical, durable revolvers for most any purpose a .357 revolver might be put to.
Whatever you choose, be sure to examine it carefully before buying. There have been many reports of barrels improperly installed with the front sight tilted. (One such gun, a new SW 610, was sent to the Revolver Guy as a T and E gun.)
Other reports show where there was a visible gap between the back of the barrel shroud and the front of the frame. Bring your feeler gauge to test the B/C gap and ensure that it is within your specs and equal on both sides. When it comes to new revolvers these days, remember that you are the quality control inspector.
I have the 3” 7shot and love it