Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > >

Notices

S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present All NON-PINNED Barrels, the L-Frames, and the New Era Revolvers


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 02-03-2020, 10:35 AM
BB57's Avatar
BB57 BB57 is offline
Member
60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686  
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: NC
Posts: 2,716
Likes: 1,636
Liked 6,625 Times in 1,863 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lrrifleman View Post
.../

/...My personal belief is that you should practice with what you carry. That would mean a healthy diet of magnums, which leads to the forcing cone issues with the K frame 357s (13, 19, 65, & 66). Therefore, I opted for the 686+, viewing it as a bigger version of my 36-6.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContinentalOp View Post
That's only an issue if you're using 125gr and lighter full-power loads (i.e., 125gr @ 1450fps). Mid-range magnum loads or heavier bullets are fine.

And there's nothing wrong with using lower power ammo for most of your practice, as long as you still shoot full-power loads periodically to maintain proficiency. That's what I've done with my revolvers and haven't experienced any issues with it.
I've posted on it in depth before, but there's more to it than just the bullet weight. It's the 125 gr bullets that get the bad press for forcing cone cracks, while 110 grain bullets are never implicated, and heavier bullets are also not associated with forcing cone cracks.

The big internet myth, a carryover from the older gun rag myth, is that the short 125 gr bullet allows gas to by pass it in the cylinder and pre-heat the forcing cone before the bullet gets there. Thermodynamically speaking that theory doesn't wash as there is not enough plasma or time involved to heat the forcing cone significantly before the bullet gets there. And if that were true, 110 grain and 90 grain loads would have that problem in spades.

The critical difference is the powder used and the amount of powder used in 90 and 110 grain loads, versus 125 gr loads and 158 gr loads.

The light 90 and 110 grain loads do not use slow burning colloidal ball powders, instead they use medium burning powders. Those powder charges are lighter by weight and are generally not large grain abrasive colloidal ball powders.

Slow burning colloidal ball powders are the norm for 125 grain and 158 grain loads, the difference is that the lighter 125 gr load will use 21-22 grains of powder, compared to 15-16 grains for a 158 grain load. That equates to about 40% more plasma and partially burned powder flowing through the forcing cone with each shot.

That extra 40% greater powder charge is also additional heat working on the forcing cone behind the bullet, and it's 40% more mass and 40% more abrasive partially burnt powder flowing over the forcing cone. Over a large number of rounds, it makes a big difference. Even without the loads running hotter and accelerating the forcing cone erosion, it's still 40% more powder and plasma mass flowing over the forcing cone with 40% more erosion per shot. It's harder to calculate how much acceleration the extra heat adds, but the 125 gr loads using slow burning colloidal ball powders probably produce twice the erosion per shot as a 158 gr load using the same powder.

Given the very high round counts usually needed to get enough erosion to initiate a forcing cone crack in a K frame .357 Magnum with 125 grain (which still occurs in an exceedingly small percentage of K frame .357s), you'd need twice the round count to get the same effect with 158 gr bullets. By that time the revolver will have almost inevitably been fired with at least some 125 gr rounds and a if a crack occurs they'll get the blame. When it's really the colloidal ball powder doing the damage.

The 125 gr bullets however took the rap as they came along about the same time that colloidal ball powders started to be popular in the .357 Magnum (and of course they use more of it). And, that occured at the same time police departments started getting sued for under training officers and switched from practicing with .38 Special and reserving .357 Magnum for duty use, to using .357 Magnum for practice as well.

So you now had 125 gr bullets powered by large charges of colloidal ball powders being used all of the time in Model 19s that were designed to primarily shoot .38 Special with occasional firing of .357 Magnum loads - which when designed used medium burn rate flake powders.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #52  
Old 02-03-2020, 03:34 PM
Mongo1958's Avatar
Mongo1958 Mongo1958 is offline
Member
60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686  
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 142
Likes: 148
Liked 67 Times in 30 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CH4 View Post
I have and carry all three. Of the 3 you mention, I find the 66 a good compromise for size and capacity. The 7 shot 686 plus helps justify the difference in its weight and size; however, it’s hard to beat a 5 shot J Frame for ease of carry. For me it comes down to what I am wearing, mood and where I am going to be hanging out.
yup, me too. EDIT: regarding clothing and mood.

Last edited by Mongo1958; 02-05-2020 at 05:14 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #53  
Old 02-04-2020, 04:13 AM
Mongo1958's Avatar
Mongo1958 Mongo1958 is offline
Member
60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686  
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 142
Likes: 148
Liked 67 Times in 30 Posts
Default

Called S&W yesterday to ask questions about the 66. Got put on hold twice for 15+ minutes each time. I got the feeling that I was calling a government office of some kind. What a waist of time. I was a bit pissed.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #54  
Old 02-04-2020, 08:01 AM
shocker's Avatar
shocker shocker is offline
Member
60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686  
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,019
Likes: 335
Liked 813 Times in 414 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mongo1958 View Post
I was looking at the new 66 in the SW web site and the extractor in not held in place like my 686 and my 629. How is the extractor stability affected with out it being locked in place? Additionally, it has a 2 piece barrel. In my mind the new 66 has been cheapened too much. Am I wrong? I'm going to Academy to look at it and compare with the 686.
Take a look at this video. Concerns the new 19 Classic, but that has the same design features as the new 66.
YouTube
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #55  
Old 02-04-2020, 05:50 PM
Mongo1958's Avatar
Mongo1958 Mongo1958 is offline
Member
60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686  
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 142
Likes: 148
Liked 67 Times in 30 Posts
Default

YouTube
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 02-04-2020, 06:21 PM
Mongo1958's Avatar
Mongo1958 Mongo1958 is offline
Member
60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686  
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 142
Likes: 148
Liked 67 Times in 30 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shocker View Post
Take a look at this video. Concerns the new 19 Classic, but that has the same design features as the new 66.
YouTube
Shocker, it's a bit ironic that I just ordered the 66 from grabagun and then found your video. All of my concerns have been answered. I kept swinging back and forth from a 686 to a Ruger and then back to the 66. Even though it's after the fact, it only enforced what I've learned. I know the 66 will be a fun and a reliable weapon to ad to my arsenal of freedom. I shall up load some picks soon.

Last edited by Mongo1958; 02-05-2020 at 05:12 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 02-06-2020, 03:57 PM
CAJUNLAWYER's Avatar
CAJUNLAWYER CAJUNLAWYER is offline
Member
60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686  
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: On da Bayou Teche
Posts: 14,513
Likes: 9,460
Liked 33,026 Times in 6,248 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shocker View Post
Take a look at this video. Concerns the new 19 Classic, but that has the same design features as the new 66.
YouTube
kinda makes ya want to throw away all those ore lock, pre mim, P&R, one piece barrel, hammer mounted firing pin revolvers don't it???
__________________
Forum consigliere
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 02-06-2020, 04:04 PM
shocker's Avatar
shocker shocker is offline
Member
60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686  
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,019
Likes: 335
Liked 813 Times in 414 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CAJUNLAWYER View Post
kinda makes ya want to throw away all those ore lock, pre mim, P&R, one piece barrel, hammer mounted firing pin revolvers don't it???
It's not a firing pin, it's a hammer nose. You would know that if you watched the video.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #59  
Old 02-06-2020, 04:59 PM
Mongo1958's Avatar
Mongo1958 Mongo1958 is offline
Member
60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686  
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 142
Likes: 148
Liked 67 Times in 30 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shocker View Post
Take a look at this video. Concerns the new 19 Classic, but that has the same design features as the new 66.
YouTube
I saw that video as well. I ordered the 66 on Monday from GAG. 😄
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 02-06-2020, 05:01 PM
Mongo1958's Avatar
Mongo1958 Mongo1958 is offline
Member
60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686  
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 142
Likes: 148
Liked 67 Times in 30 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shocker View Post
It's not a firing pin, it's a hammer nose. You would know that if you watched the video.
ha ha ha...no
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 02-06-2020, 05:43 PM
notsofast notsofast is offline
Member
60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686  
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: above ground, under water
Posts: 627
Likes: 445
Liked 427 Times in 196 Posts
Default

I have them all (60, 66, & snub L frame) and for carry purposes I most often go with the 60
If I had none and was going to buy one for carry, it would be a 2.5 66
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 02-06-2020, 06:58 PM
snakebitten snakebitten is offline
Member
60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686  
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Lone Star State
Posts: 5
Likes: 4
Liked 3 Times in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mongo1958 View Post
Hi,
I'd like your opinions please.
One of my favorite guns is my 6" 686+ -4. I've been thinking about a carry revolver so naturally I've been looking at the smaller 686's.
I've also been looking at the 60 and the 66. So I guess I'm asking you what would be the best revolver for carry purposes. I understand it's all subjective. I'm leaning towards a S&W 686 deluxe 3" barrel. Still the 60 and 66 have their appeal.
Thanks in advance
Bought my 66 6" new, early 1980's, great handgun, shorter barrel would be a nice carry.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 02-09-2020, 05:28 AM
Mongo1958's Avatar
Mongo1958 Mongo1958 is offline
Member
60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686  
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 142
Likes: 148
Liked 67 Times in 30 Posts
Default

Well just dang...
I wish I found this thread before I purchased the 66. I pick up the gun tomorrow.

Issues with my 66-8 2.75"
Issues with my 66-8 2.75"
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 02-11-2020, 04:57 PM
HorizontalMike's Avatar
HorizontalMike HorizontalMike is offline
US Veteran
60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686  
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: South Central Texas
Posts: 734
Likes: 1,185
Liked 622 Times in 269 Posts
Default

I purchased my first 4in 686ND back in August 1986. Bought another because I didn't want to wear out my favorite 6-shooter. Fast forward ~40yr or so... I bought a 627 2- 5/8in Performance Center revolver.

After some adjustments and such, I love it! LOADED, it weighs within 0.5oz the same as my LOADED 4in 686ND. In other words I can get 8-shots vs 6-shots at the same weight. My chronos are less than 100fps off, so I have had to seriously reconsider...

I was confused... then I started playing with those "plastic" pistols. Oh... Kay-rapp! more thing to consider!
Hayyy..eelp! I'zz got the S&W fever/virus!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #65  
Old 02-11-2020, 10:56 PM
Mehutch's Avatar
Mehutch Mehutch is offline
Member
60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686 60, 66, or 686  
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Seattle Washington
Posts: 663
Likes: 3,002
Liked 2,467 Times in 512 Posts
Default

My carry guns,



or

Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:46 AM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.42 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
S-W Forum, LLC 2000-2020
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)