dumb guy 686 question

J

joe sacco

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2011
Messages
92
Reaction score
49
I just picked up a 7 shot 4" 686 with the lock, unfired but probably about 4-5 years old. I have two questions:

1. I've seen references to the "yoke screw problem" what is this? Not the screw, but the problem?

2. I believe the hammer and trigger are MIM parts. Is this a potential problem? Has anyone experienced breakage or damage of the MIM parts?

Thanks in advance, Best, Joe
 
Register to hide this ad
MIM parts are here to stay....just like the lock. I think I have ran across one thread where someone broke a trigger, but that does not indicate it is or is not a real problem.

I'd also like to hear about a 686 Yoke Screw Problem.....have not seen any posting, or heard about any issues....yet. Mine is an early ND and just came home from S&W after the "M" upgrade. Nothing was done in or around the Yoke Screw during the recent upgrade.
 
Ditto snubbie's response; I've not seen anything about a yoke screw problem here or anywhere else. I have the same model as yours from around 2002; no problem with the MIM parts, and I haven't seen anyone report a problem with them on this forum. They are supposed to be more uniform in specs/dimensions than the forged ones, and I believe this to be the case from experience with my Smiths.

The only reason I don't like them is the appearance, especially the hollowed-out trigger, which reminds me of a Daisy Red Ryder BB gun. But I only have one model that way, and it is strictly a defensive tool; so it doesn't matter much.

Andy
 
Pertaining to the yoke screw, there have been reports that it's failed for those shooting in action competitions such as IDPA. The cause seems to be "push to release" speed loaders because when trying to shave 1/10th's of a second a considerable amount of force is transferred to the cylinder and yoke. Basically, if you hammer on the cylinder enough the yoke screw will shear or the button it works against will develop a groove.

As forthe MIM parts, in nearly 3 years on this forum I've seen just 2 posts about a failure of an MIM part. In the first case the hammer spur snapped off the hammer when the revolver was dropped on concrete. In the second case the hammer spur again failed, however in this case it was reported by the poster as being caused by many thousands of dry fire cycles without the use of snap caps. When you dry fire without snap caps the hammer strikes the frame of the gun with each pull of the trigger, which is why I ALWAYS use snap caps when dry firing.

IMO there isn't any issue with the MIM parts and I actually prefer them. As for why, the MIM parts are so consistent in size that no additional fitting is required for an action tuning, so it takes about half as long to do an action tuning on an MIM gun compared to those with the older forged lockwork.
 
joe....no such thing as a stupid question. We are all here to learn.

I think scooter pretty much summed-up and stamped-out any fears you may have.
 
scooter123 said:
Pertaining to the yoke screw, there have been reports that it's failed for those shooting in action competitions such as IDPA. The cause seems to be "push to release" speed loaders because when trying to shave 1/10th's of a second a considerable amount of force is transferred to the cylinder and yoke. Basically, if you hammer on the cylinder enough the yoke screw will shear or the button it works against will develop a groove.
Click to expand...
I've had 4 different IDPA shooters tell me that it happened to them. I haven't heard of it happening to K-frames.
 
I believe the "fix" is to convert the yoke screw to the "older" style solid screw, and modify the yoke groove to accept it. (New and improved isn't always better.) I have no problems with my 1982 model 686.
 
Thank you one and all. Questions answered, I'm a happy guy.

Best, Joe
 
H Richard said:
I believe the "fix" is to convert the yoke screw to the "older" style solid screw, and modify the yoke groove to accept it. (New and improved isn't always better.) I have no problems with my 1982 model 686.
Click to expand...

Would you do that by machining a groove in the angled "button" and then fitting a new screw with a solid body end to fit in the groove? I have never had any problems with the new system, but have always been amazed at the inginuity of the screw design and that it seemed to work so well.
 
I subscribe to the school....if-it-ain't-broke-don't-fix-it. The screw/spring/plunger system should work forever under normal shooting conditions as it takes up any wear in that connection, be it ever so small.

I only see a need to machine a stronger screw with a larger bearing surface, if it was needed, like suggested above in post #5 under competitive shooting situations. MOST of us will never have the need to do that.
 
snubbiefan said:
I subscribe to the school....if-it-ain't-broke-don't-fix-it. The screw/spring/plunger system should work forever under normal shooting conditions as it takes up any wear in that connection, be it ever so small.
Click to expand...
I would believe that if it weren't for the fact that 4 out of the 7 IDPA shooters that I know who shoot 686s have had the cylinder come off. That percentage is just too high for me to write it off as due to unusual circumstances.
 
I would certainly agree that if the failure-rate is close to 60% among competitive shooters....one would have to solve the problem. If Joe is a competitive shooter, then he needs to worry about that. If not, he probably never will.

I can do nothing but agree that the little plunger is not all that substantial and I can certainly see that if it gets hammered, it won't hold up. I just doubt if the casual shooter will ever have a problem with it.
 
snubbiefan said:
I would certainly agree that if the failure-rate is close to 60% among competitive shooters....one would have to solve the problem. If Joe is a competitive shooter, then he needs to worry about that. If not, he probably never will.

I can do nothing but agree that the little plunger is not all that substantial and I can certainly see that if it gets hammered, it won't hold up. I just doubt if the casual shooter will ever have a problem with it.
Click to expand...

I think that pretty well sums it up. If you plan on shooting in competition it's an area that will need to be addressed because it has caused failures. I'll also note that a 7 shot revolver is NOT a good choice for the current competitions because only 6 rounds may be loaded. This means that "clocking" the cylinder at each reload will slow down the shooter enough to effect scoring.

Two solutions are available. One, due to the design the groove in the post on the yoke can be re-cut to a square contour and then a 4mm screw can be fitted to that cut to basically duplicate the older design, however the current 4mm screw is slightly larger in diameter than the screw that was used in the older K frames that used the older design, so by a small margin the 686 will be stronger after it's been modified than an older K frame. Second option is to step up in shooting class to ESR and shoot with moon clips after having the cylinder converted to use moon clips. However, factory 357 Magnums will have more recoil than the 45 ACP so you'll either have to reload custom loads that meet the minimum for power factor in ESR or face competing with 625 shooters who have an advantage by shooting a milder caliber.

Since it is a 7 shooter that's being discussed, I don't think it's likely it will ever be used as a competition gun. In range use or for Home Defense the new design yoke retention screw has NOT been a problem and it does eliminate the requirement to have the screw perfectly fitted to minimize End Shake. Bascially, it's an excellent design for normal Civilian use and not a problem in that application. However, I would suggest that the only speed loaders used in this application be the twist to release types because the push to release speed loaders might cause problems after 10 or 20 years.
 
M1911-66 said:
I would believe that if it weren't for the fact that 4 out of the 7 IDPA shooters that I know who shoot 686s have had the cylinder come off. That percentage is just too high for me to write it off as due to unusual circumstances.
Click to expand...

That is interesting. I would imagine that since the yoke screw now has a spring loaded plunger system that enough force could easily dislodge the yoke. Does anyone make a solid replacement screw for this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BabaBlueJay
586/686 Compendium
2
Replies
26
Views
3K
Engine49guy
Engine49guy
JHW
  • Locked
Sold/Withdrawn Smith Wesson MODEL 686-4 PLUS Pre-Lock Pre-Mim 7-shot Snub Nose + a box
Replies
2
Views
2K
sabashimon
sabashimon
JHW
  • Locked
WITHDRAWN Pre-Lock: 1998 686-5 7-Shot MOUNTAIN GUN LNIB,66-5 3.25 Hi Viz LNIB
Replies
1
Views
3K
JHW
JHW
JHW
  • Locked
Sold/Withdrawn REDUCED Smith and Wesson Model 63-3 Boxed 1995 Pre-Lock PRE-MIM 4in ROUND BUTT
Replies
4
Views
3K
JHW
JHW
JHW
  • Locked
SOLD LOCALLY 1980 Smith Wesson Model 60 No Dash Stainless Pinned Complete
Replies
2
Views
2K
JHW
JHW

Latest posts

Back
Top