Which S&W .357? 66/686/620

[S&W-DK]

I'm considering purchasing a .357 revolver, and have been offered a second hand Model 66 by one of my colleagues. I'll be trying it out on Friday! While I'm waiting, I've also been scouting out the market here (in Denmark) and have found a couple of other options.

First of all is the Model 686, of which I've found numerous second hand examples in my price range (about 3000 Danish kroner, or about 600 USD). I've tried a couple of these in the past, and really like them.

Another thought, is the Model 620, which I've seen new at a dealer for 5200 DKr (slightly over 1000 USD). I quite like the idea of a new gun, as everything I've got so far has been second hand...... I haven't seen one of these in the flesh, and know very little about them. What are they like? Anyone here got any experience with these revolvers?

Thanks in advance for your help.

Jeff

 

[model17]

S&W .357

Hello Jeff & Welcome. IMHO you can't go wrong with your selections, but I'd go with the 686 if I was in your place.

 

[Decker]

From a collectability standpoint, the 66 is more tempting, especially if it's in premium condition. The 66 is no longer made, and the Combat Magnum (as it's called) is a great pistol all around.

If shooting "a lot" is your intent, then either the 686 or the 620 might serve you better as they are both the larger L frame revolvers.

Personally, if I stumbled across a deal on a nice 66, I'd have a hard time turning it down. Either of the other two are more easily available, so there would be no rush to get either of them.
The 686 and 620 are essentially the same pistol except that the 686 is full-underlug and the 620 isn't (so it's a little lighter if the same barrel length). For that reason, and the fact that they are .357 revolvers, the 686 will help a little more to lessen the felt recoil. If you intend to shoot it a lot, that would be a plus.

So my vote is to grab the 66 while you have the chance, and then shop for one of the other two (my preference is toward the 686) when you build up your cash stash again.

 

[tstrenuous10]

686. Had one and wish I still did. Only reason I have a 66 is I traded for a 367 magnum revolver and found out it's a 66.

 

[PA Reb]

In my opinion, the 66 is one of S&W's best of all time. If the one you are test firing is in nice condition / working order and the price is right, I'd jump all over it!

 

[scooter123]

IMO, the answer to your question should be determined by what you intend to do with the new gun.

For action shooting with 38 spl. the model 66 will have the best balance. However, it's light enough that this may be a disadvantage if you're shooting 357 Magnums in an action shooting match. In addition, the K frames have a history of being a bit borderline for heavy use of the 357 Magnum. If you're planning on shooting a lot of Magnums, the 686 will prove a superior choice.

If you plan on taking up precision shooting, IMO the 620 is the best choice. To be brief, the tensioned barrel on the 620 can provide accuracy that a one piece barrel can't match. I recently mounted a scope on my 620 and it yielded a 0.88 inch (22mm) group at 50 yards (metres) from a sandbag rest with a very common and cheap American Eagle 38 spl.. IMO in the hands of an exceptional shooter, the 620 is capable of shooting 1/2 inch (12.7mm) or less at 50 yards (metres). I've also found that my 620 is VERY insensitive to ammunition variables, meaning it's very accurate with any ammo I've tried in it. About the only potential negative is that it doesn't have the muzzle heavy balance of the 686, so there is more muzzle flip when shooting 357 Magnums, about equal to that of the model 66.

 

[hamr56]

I would go with the 686. It is built really well and has enough weight when shooting 357 mag rounds it won't bother you. By the way I own three 686s and swear by them.

 

[.357magger]

A question if I may?

Is the 686 a pre lock variant? If so, that too would be a "no longer made" model and may be attractive for that reason alone, same as the 66. Also, is the 686 a 7 shot variant?

Of the three you mentioned, I'd choose the 686 hands down. I carried both 66's and 686s for years and years as a LEO and while carrying the 66 was more pleasant due to lighter weight, when shooting became the issue the 686 was capable of being much more accurate that ANY one can hold and also capable of shooting any sane magnum or non magnum loading you care to use. Just a more versatile tool imo.

620? Won't comment as I've never owned one except to say that I find the forward weight of the full lugs to be very stable in firing, more so than the half lugs. So again imo the 686 wins.

Just my .02. Welcome to the forum, please post pics when you secure your prize so we can all ooooh and aaaaah over it.

 

[Garybock]

686

I own two S&W 686 revolvers. I have a 4 inch and a 3 inch model. Both are awesome. The 4 inch model is excellent to shoot, a big large to carry. The 3 inch model is excellent and I've started using it as a carry weapon in the winter. Good luck.

 

[whoisavner]

both are great but I favor the 66, just the partial lug is more my style.

 

[hd28cw]

All depends on barrel lenghts for me....if the guns primary use is ccw (short barrel 2"-3") i'd say the 66. for target shooting or home defense I'd go with the 686 or the 620 and the have the 7 shot cylinder option to boot!!.
I have a 66 2.5" and a 686 4" love them both...

 

[williamlayton]

You did not mention the model 28---which is my personal favorite.
It may not be available to you though.
Blessings

 

[S&W-DK]

Hi again everyone,
Thanks for all your input so far. I tried the 66 yesterday, and was quite impressed with it. It had a really nice trigger pull, both on single and double action, and it shot pretty well especially with magnum loads.

One possible negative point though. I haven't got much revolver experience, but it seemed to have a slight timing/lock issue. If you cocked it slowly the cylinder didn't rotate fully into place, then if you touched the cylinder it clicked into place. This actually sounds worse than it looked, as the amount of movement involved was minimal, but it still troubled me somewhat. Cocking it normally the cylinder went into place and locked up as it should.

Does this sound like a problem I should walk away from?

I forgot to say that I'll be buying the revolver purely for target use, so I'm looking to get one with a 4" or 6" barrel.

 

[snubbiefan]

I have a 686 ND, but what if man could snag a low-mileage 66 3-inch barrel for $450 (firing pin in the hammer). That sound pretty good? I'm serious....tell me if that is a good price. I am just thinking it is and I can lay my hands on one right now.

 

[.357magger]

I have a 686 ND, but what if man could snag a low-mileage 66 3-inch barrel for $450 (firing pin in the hammer). That sound pretty good? I'm serious....tell me if that is a good price. I am just thinking it is and I can lay my hands on one right now.

If you could snag a 66 3 inch for $450.00, provided it's pre lock, it would be an OUTSTANDING price imo. And I'd even overlook a couple of warts or scabs at that price too. Not like you can't polish out a LOT of issues on stainless.

Just my .02.

 

[.357magger]

Hi again everyone,
Thanks for all your input so far. I tried the 66 yesterday, and was quite impressed with it. It had a really nice trigger pull, both on single and double action, and it shot pretty well especially with magnum loads.

One possible negative point though. I haven't got much revolver experience, but it seemed to have a slight timing/lock issue. If you cocked it slowly the cylinder didn't rotate fully into place, then if you touched the cylinder it clicked into place. This actually sounds worse than it looked, as the amount of movement involved was minimal, but it still troubled me somewhat. Cocking it normally the cylinder went into place and locked up as it should.

Does this sound like a problem I should walk away from?

I forgot to say that I'll be buying the revolver purely for target use, so I'm looking to get one with a 4" or 6" barrel.

Are you saying that when the cylinder rotates into battery, it's not fully seated just before firing? That you manually have to "coax" the cylinder to lock? If that's the case I would definately walk away or ask for a substantial discount.

Many will have slight, and I mean slight, movement when locked into battery but it shouldn't be that you have to physically seat the cylinder at all. That is precisely what the crane should be doing. And while I'm speaking somewhat out of ignorance as I can't see precisely what you are describing, at worst this could be a safety issue.

 

[snubbiefan]

magger....definitely a NL. I think they went to the pin-in-the-frame around 1998-1999 or so, but a lot of you guys out there know more about who-done-what-when.

Sounds to me like I need to buy it. $450...no tax....no transfer fee ....no shipping and legally purchased.

 

[.357magger]

magger....definitely a NL. I think they went to the pin-in-the-frame around 1998-1999 or so, but a lot of you guys out there know more about who-done-what-when.

Sounds to me like I need to buy it. $450...no tax....no transfer fee ....no shipping and legally purchased.

I'll give you $500 for it right now.

 

[S&W-DK]

Are you saying that when the cylinder rotates into battery, it's not fully seated just before firing? That you manually have to "coax" the cylinder to lock? If that's the case I would definately walk away or ask for a substantial discount.

Many will have slight, and I mean slight, movement when locked into battery but it shouldn't be that you have to physically seat the cylinder at all. That is precisely what the crane should be doing. And while I'm speaking somewhat out of ignorance as I can't see precisely what you are describing, at worst this could be a safety issue.

Yes, that's exactly what I mean, but it's only if you cock it very slowly it happens.

 

[snubbiefan]

magger....this guy is a real good friend of mine and had $550 on the gun as his price-tag, but he does not deal with many Smiths. He sells guns to me with no tax, fees or anything other than a bill-of-sale.

Can't beat that, but I expect I will be hanging on to this one.