686
Model 27
Model 66
Model 19

How do they compare? What's the differences between them?

686 L frame stainless steel
27 N frame carbon steel (blued or nickle)
66 K frame stainless steel
19 K frame carbon steel (blued or nickle)
Models 66 and 19 are virtually the same gun except for metal type
Model 27 is the original heavy frame .357 magnum
Model 686 is a "blend" so to speak of both N and K frames
My favorite is the model 27 but the 686 makes a lot of sense

I posted this in the wrong section. Can a mod delete this?

Thank you for the helpful response 27 Man

Let me start by saying I own at least one of all of them.

First: The model 27 is the King of the S&W line (in MHO) Well built, accurate and the gun that started it all. N-frame gun, large and heavy.

Second: The 686 Everything you could ask for in a 357. Durable, again accurate, Lite enough to carry every day and tough enough to shoot any reasonable load every day, all day. L-frame gun Smaller than the N but heavier than a K-frame

Third: 66/19, I lump these together because except for the stainless vs. carbon steel these are the same gun. Again they are accurate, easy to carry and great to shoot and to my mind the near perfect platform for an everyday carry, 357. I'm not going to get into the lite bullet discussion because it is often discussed and cussed. K-frame guns. Lite but strong enough to shoot 357 and still be reasonably durable.

As I said, I own 1 or more of all four plus a couple of 28s(which are just 27s without the fine finish) And while I love my K-frames, If I could only own 1 357 platform it would be one of my 686 guns.

What 27 Man said.

In addition, I'd add that "best" is a very subjective assessment.

I will, however, say this:
The Model 27 was S&W's flagship revolver for a very long time. For fit, finish and craftsmanship it was unsurpassed. As mentioned, that line started in 1935 with the Registered Magnum. It was reintroduced, with internal improvements, after the war as the postwar .357 Magnum and became the Model 27 in 1958. By that time, it only had 4 frame screws but it was still the top of the line. It remains the only S&W revolver with the finely checkered top strap and it had superb polishing with a beautiful bright blue finish. So, one could readily say it was the "best." Even the longest running variant, the Model 27-2, was a superb revolver, surviving the less than consistent QC of the Bangor Punta era. You really don't have a reasonably complete collection of N frame Smiths if you don't have a .357 Magnum/Model 27 of some sort.

The others are all good guns, but the .357 Magnum/Model 27 is the standout.

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

It does not need to be deleted. Why would it not be in the correct category? Sure, it mentions the 686 which was not introduced until 1980, but all the others were in production before that. I say just leave it alone.

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

Which one has the best trigger pull?

I have had or still have all of the one's listed.

As far as I'm concerned, the M27 is the best.
This is the only M27 I own right now.

__________________
Only difference Fool/Mule-ears

The Smith & Wesson.

+1
What he said.
I'll add that I actually prefer the blue 586 but that's nothing against the 686.
And although I prefer the N followed by the L frame, I also enjoy the K and even the J in .357. What other caliber spans all 4 frame sizes?
ETA:
They all have their pluses. For carry, the K & J wins hands down but for shooting either at the range or hunting, etc., I prefer the N followed by the L.

For me, and I have at least one of each, the 686 is my least favorite. My 4"'weighs almost exactly as much as my 627, but is quite muzzle heavy. I'd like to see one made again without the full under lug. My all around favorite is the 19/66. They are all great guns, matter of personal preference as to weight and balance.

The others have explained the differences so I won't bother to show my un-expertise with that.

I don't think there is a "best." Just a favorite. I've owned a number of S&W's 357 in both "N" and "K" frames. I've recently cut my collection back to just one example for each cartridge I reload for. The 357 I kept, was a "N-frame" Model 28-2.

__________________
John 3:16 .

The 27 was always the top of the S&W line.

The 686 is a service revolver not in the same league as the 27 and came after P&R dropped so lacking panache.

The 66 and 19 are essentially identical save the material.

__________________
No life story has happy end.

I just bought my first S&W 19 in the 4” and I hope it was the right decision. The 686 looked more formidable but the difference in oz for me made a difference. They didn’t have the 66 so went with the 19 brand new and considering buying a preowned 66-1 in the 4 “ pinned and recessed cause I like the stainless steel.

They are All outstanding ....none better then the other. Its becoming Proficient with what you own.

I strongly disagree with those who think the L frame is the best of the bunch. Sorry, the L frame is a ******* child that while very good is really neither fish nor fowl. It has the grip of the K frame and the weight of the N frame. I had all of them. The L was preferred for competition and it certainly helped me bring home trophy after trophy but for carry, the K was King. For pure brute strength, the N frame ruled but it was a heavy piece to carry.

Which one is best? Tell me how you intend to use it and I will give you advice.

Kevin

__________________
Unshared knowledge is wasted.

I'd like to say the 27 BUT i only have these two

Attached Images

IMG_1270.jpg (110.4 KB, 94 views)

So we decided to resurrect a thread from October, 2015? Strange . . .

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

If one plans on shooting a lot of
full-house .357s, then the L-frames
or N-frames make sense.

But if like so many, many most shooting
will be confined to .38 Specials, plus P or
otherwise, then the 19/66s make more
sense. Pluse they are lighter, handier to
pack.

Because I like to shoot double action, I
find the N-frames just a bit too big, less
confortable.

So, in DA shooting it's the L-frames or the
K-frames.

__________________
Ubi Est Mea

I've been thinking about a new 19 as well. How is the quality of the finish / blueing on the new one? I saw a post somewhere about the finish on the frame/barrel/cylinder not matching.

One point that many miss is that N-frames wear timing sooner. More mass for the hand to move.
Never thought of that, but read it in an article by, I think, Massad Ayoob.

I've owned all frame sizes, never had a timing problem except on new guns with QC problems.

It's not really a fair assessment.

The 686, 66, and the 19 will all feel about the same, shoot the same, and generally have the same feel in action. If you are used to a 66 or 19, you may find the 686 to feel heavier, or be front heavy.

A N frame is a different beast. The heft will feel close, but the actions on them feel way smoother. Their weight tends to lessen felt recoil, and some of them are just perfectly balanced. A 5" N frame is just about the most perfect revolver you could shoot.

Like this Model 27-2? I agree!

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

Amazing what people do when they're in quarantine.

I own, or have owned, more than one of each. All superb revolvers; but IMO, this 686-4 is the finest revolver ( of any brand ) I've ever owned. I just noticed the date of this thread.

__________________
John

I'll start with the 1963 4" M19-2 that I sold. I never did warm up to it for some reason. For some reason it wasn't a very good shooter for me. I never did shoot my 6" M19-2 before selling it.

I enjoy shooting my 6" M66-1. Maybe because it was my brothers service revolver and he had S&W do some trigger work and install a smooth target trigger.

I also sold my LNIB 4" 686 and my 5" 686-6+ and kept my 6" 686 which is the best shooting and IMO the most accurate handgun that I own.



Not long ago I had seven pre, 27 and 27-2s from 3.5" to 8 3/8". Sold all of them except my 5" 27-2 due to sentimental reasons and kept this 6.5" 1960 M27. My most favorite of them all.

The rear sight blade was damaged when I got it so I had a good friend replace it with a w/o blade.

The I asked George Dye of Salt Lake Collectibles if he could find me a nice set of Coke Bottle grips for it. He far exceeded my expectations with what I consider the perfect set. They are like band new.

__________________
Kenny
Endeavor to persevere.

I wouldn't argue with that at all, and would love to add a M27 to my "herd". But, I do have a M28-2 which is close enough I suppose. Like the difference between the base model car with roll-up windows and no a/c versus the LTD version with all the bells and whistles. They both have the 427 up front, though.

Didn't notice, but what the hey, it's not a bad subject to rehash.

How many rounds would one have to put through a gun before it started wearing enough to affect the timing? How much difference in this issue than a K-frame with the same round count?

I should live long enough to shoot my S&W's enough to wear them out. I can't speak for the newer stuff, none of mine are newer than 1979.

I've never warmed up to the idea of the L-frame. I don't like the look of the full barrel underlug, for one thing. Looks too front heavy, and too much like a Colt. I also don't want any of S&W's stuff made after 1980. Maybe I'm missing a few good models to own, but I have plenty of other types past that date.

All this time and nobody brought up either the 13 or 65?

... A couple of my favorite “working” .357’s


featured: (13-4, 19-4, 65-3, 66-5, 686-6+)

Attached Images

9795C611-32BC-4E6A-ACEE-8D10CA9B1232.jpg (50.2 KB, 31 views)

My 5" 686-6 came from the factory with a 1/2 lug.
I think its a very nice looking L frame.

__________________
Kenny
Endeavor to persevere.

I love this!

That's like asking guys which is better, blondes or brunettes!

Jokes aside, they're so different you have to ask yourself what, exactly, are you going to do with them.

I have never owned a M66 but I have owned 3 or 4 M19s, 4" and 2.5". They're wonderful guns, will handle any .357 load I ever tried, but they're not necessarily the strongest tool in the shed. But for an easy shooting, packing pistol, K frame .357s are hard to beat. Since the main difference between a M19 and a M66 is blued steel versus stainless that's more a matter of taste as far as I am concerned, unless you're on a boat, in which case stainless is the better choice.

A M27 is a tank. Omitting the obvious with respect to the checkering, and other luxury items, it's an N frame tank. If you're any kind of recoil sensitive this is the gun that tames all of the .357 Magnum recoil you can find. But if you're thinking about carrying it, well, just remember it's tank, and damned hard to conceal.

So, that leaves the M686. Barrel length is always a factor and you don't say what your purpose is but the M686 will handle every .357 Magnum you feed it and in almost any barrel size except 6" it's not impossible to conceal and certainly not too difficult to carry.

When you just love revolvers it's always hard to say which is best or your favorite but until my twin brother gets his hands on my 3" M 686+ I think it's the winner here.

He does want it soooooo badly!!!

This M19 is no longer with me but it's a stunning gun:



This M27 Classic, as modified, is so wonderful it's hard to describe but it IS a tank!



These M686+s are way up on my favorite list:

2.5"



3"



4"



That full underlug, I dunno, it's just so racy looking to me!

The best? VERY personal, very, very personal!

__________________
Come and take it!!

Redheads

__________________
Kenny
Endeavor to persevere.

IMO the 4" 686 is the best all around utility/duty/general purpose .357 one can own.

For concealed carry..... aka carry all day every day ...... but shot rarely if ever ( outside the range/qualification) I prefer a 2 1/2 or 3 inch 19/66/65/13.

I have a couple of 4" N-frames 27/28s..... great guns.... but I prefer the grip frame/trigger reach of the K and L frames ...... which are the same.

686-4+
27
686
66/19

__________________
213th FBINA

The fatal flaw (IMO) of the 27 is the short cylinder. I guess really it’s not a huge deal, still a very nice gun, but...

The point about what you will use the gun for is the central issue, as far as I’m concerned. In my own case, the Model 19 is always going to be at the top of the list. I normally shoot .357s. They are a long way from full-charge .357s, but they are nothing to sneeze at, either. (Usually 160 gr. lead bullets and 13.0 grs. #2400.) “I think” they are easy enough on the gun that I don’t fret about shooting them. Sometimes I will load the same bullets a bit lighter, in the 1000 FPS range, but still in .357 brass.

The 19 seems to handle both cartridges without overstressing the gun. I was always told, “Keep it clean!” I think doing that saves a lot of wear and tear on any revolver, but particularly the Combat Magnum.

The point about the difference in the double-action pulls of K- and N-frame gun’s is another good one. I have never seen an N-frame in the same class with a really well-tuned K-frame. As to the L-frame, I do like the 586 (or 686) a lot, and they are undeniably more pleasant to fire than the K-frame guns, but if I could only have one S&W .357 it would always be a Model 19.

Obviously by now the OP has figured out there are a lot of opinions and biases when it comes to K versus L versus N frame .357s. Here's my $0.02:

I own both 4" and 6" Model 19s, as well as a 3" Model 13, a 2 1/2" Model 66 and a 6" Model 66. They are all wonderful shooting revolvers, along with my 4" Model 15 and 6" Model 14.








I also own 2 1/2" and 3" Model 686+ revolvers. They are also very nice shooting revolvers.

Someone early in the thread said the L frame as a ******* that combined the grip of the K frame with the N frame. He's wrong on that. The K and L frame do share the same grip frame, however the N frame is considerably larger than the L frame. In fact, the L frame is only slightly larger than the K frame and only slightly heavier.

With the same barrel length the weight difference is around 3 oz. and the dimensions are close enough that an L frame will fit (snugly) in most leather K frame holsters.

Not the very minor size difference between the 2 1/2" Model 66 and the 2 1/2" Model 686+:



That extra weight does make them slightly more comfortable with full power .357 Magnum loads, but the major advantage is that it was designed for a steady diet of .357 Magnum where the Model 19, Model 13 and Model 66 were not. It was in essence S&W's response to the frame cracking issues in the Model 19 and a response to the Ruger Speed, Service/Police and Security Six revolvers which were more durable and not much larger than the K frame.

Note the similarity in size for the Security Six and Speed Six on the left and the K and L frames on the right:



I don't currently own any N frame revolvers and the reason for that is pretty simple. The trigger reach on the N frame is long and in my case just a bit too long for a good DA trigger pull.

In contrast, the Ruger Red Hawk has a slightly shorter trigger reach than the N frame and with proper grip selection it's short enough to work for me. Thus no N frames in my safe as if it's in my safe, it's a working gun that gets shot.

As an aside, in the K/L frame category the Ruger GP-100 uses a peg style grip frame which means the trigger reach isn't an issue for women, teens, etc with really small hands as it will accommodate a much smaller grip. I'm not a GP-100 fan, as I prefer both the K and L frame and the previous Speed/Service/Security Six pistols to the GP-100, but it's an option.

I know this post doesn't address OP question directly. But I had to ask; who here doesn't agree that the Model K38/15 is one of the finest revolvers ever made. ??

__________________
John

I've owned all the listed models, in either 2.5" (66, 686), 3" (686), 3.5" (27-1), 4" (66, 686, 27-2), 5" (27-2) and 6" in the Model 66.

For all around use, my absolute favorite is the 4" Model 66. A tuned K frame trigger is like no other size and this size gun, if I could only have one, would be it. It can do it all, easily.

Just my $.02. YMMV.

My 4" 66 No Dash, with trigger work the same as by my Dept Armorer back in the day.

Attached Images

20200527_183951.jpg (219.0 KB, 16 views)

I agree with the Model 66 but to me the 6” balances better. Especially with VZ grips.

I said the L was the illegitimate child of the K and N frame combining the grip frame of the K with the weight of an N frame. Working from memory, the Model 19 weighed about 35 ounces, the 686 about 45 ounces and the 27 about 46 ounces. All with 4” barrels and unloaded.

If anyone can scale their revolvers, unloaded, same length, please correct me if I am wrong. I no longer have any 357 Magnum revolvers.

I can not comment on holsters as mine are formed to the revolver and not buckets that accept whatever is about the same size.

Kevin

__________________
Unshared knowledge is wasted.

686 all the way. 'L' frame is the best size for 357MAG.

Had a 6” 66-1 for many years, it was the most accurate revolver in my collection. Made a mistake and sold it !!

There is no "best". They all have plusses and minuses.

The only possible answer is to get one of each, possibly two.

Pass the popcorn. This may never end.

In my opinion there are two .357 revolvers that really stand out in the S&W lineup.

The first of these is the original P&R Model 66. It's light enough to be a fine carry gun, it fits the hand well, strong enough to withstand sufficient .357 loads to last a lifetime for most people, and with the stainless steel setup, very resistant to the elements. It's a superb all-around revolver and fine enough to be an object of art.



But the king of them all has to be the Model 27 - the original P&R guns and their predecessor, the .357 Magnum. This gun is the epitome of elegance. Classic high-polish bluing or sparkling nickel plating. Checkered top strap. Rugged enough to last a lifetime with whatever you choose to feed it. Butter-smooth action. It's the best of the best.



The Model 27 from the classic era is getting a bit pricey now, so a lesser-finished gun that's otherwise exactly the same, the Model 28 Highway Patrolman, is equally strong and rugged. Even these are seeing quite an escalation in pricing. I have owned this one since 1967, and it's still fully as good as it ever was.



These are my personal picks. And I will just say it: to me, the more modern guns with the manufacturing shortcuts and the ugly hole in no way compare with the elegance of the older guns. They may be fully as functional, but for me, they do not engender any significant pride of ownership.

John

__________________
- Cogito, ergo armatus sum -

Actually, S&W did make a 686 without a full lug AND with a tapered barrel it was the 686 Mtn Gun. They are hard to find. I have owned or do own all the 357s. Of them all, the 686 Mtn Gun is the one I would never part with. I suspect other owners feel the same probably the reason they are hard to find !!

__________________
SWCA 3417 HF 642 NRA-TC

I have multiple 586/686/19 in different barrel lengths, they are all great.

My favorite S&W revolver?

28-2 4" Highway Patrolman

Basically a plain Jane 27.

Of all the Smiths I have, this one is the one I shoot best with.

Although the 4006TSW CHP pistol is becoming a close second.

As you all know, Smiths are like potato chips.

You can't have just one.

__________________
BTDT, Got The T-Shirt

I too own examples of our four referenced revolvers. My personal favorite is a Pre-Model 27 with a 3 & 1/2" barrel of 1950 vintage. The only slight negative about any of them is the weight of the stainless steel of my 4" barreled Model 686-1.

I hate the thought of ever parting with any of them.

FWIW, with regard to S&W .357s, I have owned 2 M19s (a 2.5" and a 4"), a 2.5" 686PC, and a 3.5" M27.

I traded the 686 away, never liked it.

I still have the M19s, but if I were to downgrade from the M629 I carry, I'd reach for the 3.5" M27. I've been thinking about selling the M19s to profit a bit from the current insanity, but that M27 is going nowhere.

There's just something about the way an N frame feels in my hand; it feels right. And honestly it's just as easy to conceal an N frame as K frame IMO. The M27 is a bit heaver than the others, but with a good, tight gun belt and OWB pancake holster I don't notice it personally. If I want to carry a smaller 357, I reach for my 2" Kimber K6S or 2" Chiappa Rhino.

If I sell the M19s, the only K or L frames I have left are my 4" M10 HB and my very nice 2" M12. I shoot the M10 better than just about any gun I own, so it's staying, but maybe the M12 should move along as well...

I guess my point is if you are willing to accept a compromised 357, I'd go with a J frame sized gun like the Rhino or K6S, because they can do everything a K/L frame 357 snubby can do but smaller, and, in the case of the Rhino, the smaller gun is actually much easier to shoot than a K/L frame. If I am not willing to compromise and want the best 357 platform, the M27 wins hands down over all comers.

I'm not a big shooter but my brother was and for many years .357s were his favorite.

He just about had one of everything and this was the one that he competed with, a 1983 6" 686.

It wore Hogue Monogrips, a High Patridge front sight and a Millet rear sight.

The nicest trigger that I have ever felt. SA all you have to do is get your finger close to the smooth target trigger and BANG!! Bullseye.

I'm by far more accurate with this pistol and all the others.

Unless of course its a rabbit on the run then I'll take my M28-2.

I would have to think, best pistol for what purpose?

__________________
Kenny
Endeavor to persevere.

If I was going to shoot zombies, and wanted to look good doing it, I would pick this nickel 27-2.