|
|
|
03-17-2012, 11:48 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Mid-Missouri, USA
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
|
|
586 v 686
How is the 586 different from the 686?
|
03-17-2012, 11:51 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 30
Likes: 34
Liked 8 Times in 5 Posts
|
|
586 is carbon steel and 686 is stainless steel.
|
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
|
|
03-17-2012, 11:52 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Jonesboro, GA
Posts: 2,198
Likes: 1,769
Liked 1,581 Times in 447 Posts
|
|
586 also comes in nickel.
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
03-17-2012, 12:13 PM
|
|
Moderator
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 26,247
Likes: 1,073
Liked 19,286 Times in 9,419 Posts
|
|
Good information above. There are a few 586 variations that were not made in a 686 and vice versa. Also, the 586 went out of production but was recently reintroduced, in 4 and 6":
Classics Revolvers - Smith & Wesson
and the L-Comp:
Product: Model 586 L-Comp
__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220
|
03-17-2012, 04:00 PM
|
Banned
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 2,026
Likes: 5
Liked 388 Times in 273 Posts
|
|
586 and 686 are the same basic gun. Difference really is frame construction alloy and finish.
586 - carbon steel frame, finished in blue or nickel
686 - stainless steel frame and finish
Barrel lengths 2 1/2", 3", 5", 6", 8 3/8". Most common ones are 4" and 6".
686+ = 7 round cylinder version of the 686
The 586 went out of production a while back, but supposedly they made a run of them recently in the "classics" line. I also dont think they made a 586+ in 7 round cylinder, although I could be wrong.
The 581 and 681 are fixed sights version of the 586 and 686. Similar to the differences between a model 13/65 and model 19/66 in the K frame world.
There was also some 586 and 686 chambered specifically for 38 special, although I have no idea why this was done.
|
The Following 5 Users Like Post:
|
|
03-17-2012, 04:08 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: central florida
Posts: 337
Likes: 3
Liked 84 Times in 42 Posts
|
|
blued or stainless. that is it.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
03-17-2012, 05:42 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,233
Likes: 573
Liked 631 Times in 300 Posts
|
|
Hi Alpha,
I have said it before and will say it again,
First and foremost the 586 was built a lot better than the 686
Second, the trigger on the 586 is a lot smoother than the 686
The carbon steel on the 586 was more durable than the 686 stainless in abrasion areas like the hand & ratchet teeth, among other things. Workmanship was better on the 586's than on current 686 variants, and they had no mim parts and no locks just to say a few things.
Eric
|
03-18-2012, 07:57 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Hillsdale, Mi.
Posts: 7,523
Likes: 7,077
Liked 7,135 Times in 2,960 Posts
|
|
All I can say, is that I went from uninformed to impressed. I made a trade a few weeks ago for a 586. Knew very little about them. I did know about the recall. ( mine has not been done, a no dash) It is a 4", and feels great in my hand. I am not a good shooter, but can shoot steel targets single action at approx. 30 yards. This 586, and my 28 no dash are my favorite shooters! Bob
|
03-18-2012, 08:00 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 223
Likes: 16
Liked 41 Times in 31 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by gumpys
Hi Alpha,
I have said it before and will say it again,
First and foremost the 586 was built a lot better than the 686
Second, the trigger on the 586 is a lot smoother than the 686
The carbon steel on the 586 was more durable than the 686 stainless in abrasion areas like the hand & ratchet teeth, among other things. Workmanship was better on the 586's than on current 686 variants, and they had no mim parts and no locks just to say a few things.
Eric
|
If the 586 is that much better than a 686 then I am going to check the very next one out I see.
I have a 686-1 and Love this fantastic Revolver. It is still tight, as I bought it with very few rounds fired, but I think the workmanship is great.
Finding a 586 is the hard part, so perhaps Eric is right. I have Never seen one.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
03-18-2012, 08:30 AM
|
Banned
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 2,026
Likes: 5
Liked 388 Times in 273 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by gumpys
Hi Alpha,
I have said it before and will say it again,
First and foremost the 586 was built a lot better than the 686
Second, the trigger on the 586 is a lot smoother than the 686
The carbon steel on the 586 was more durable than the 686 stainless in abrasion areas like the hand & ratchet teeth, among other things. Workmanship was better on the 586's than on current 686 variants, and they had no mim parts and no locks just to say a few things.
|
I'm not so sure about this. You take a 586 and 686 of the same era, and it should be of equal capability. I never noticed the action being smoother on a 586.
The current run of 586's do have locks, MIM, transfer bar, etc. Sounds like you are comparing a brand new 686 to a early 586, which isnt an entirely fair comparison. Compare a 586-1 to a 686-1.
|
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
|
|
03-18-2012, 10:51 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Montana
Posts: 1,056
Likes: 568
Liked 587 Times in 186 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by nipster
I'm not so sure about this. You take a 586 and 686 of the same era, and it should be of equal capability. I never noticed the action being smoother on a 586.
The current run of 586's do have locks, MIM, transfer bar, etc. Sounds like you are comparing a brand new 686 to a early 586, which isnt an entirely fair comparison. Compare a 586-1 to a 686-1.
|
You are correct.
There can not be any difference in a 586 and a 686 of the same era. They are the same gun only different metal construction. One might notice a difference if one or the other happened to be fitted by a assembler who didn't care as much. That is all.
John
|
03-18-2012, 11:11 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: NC
Posts: 302
Likes: 50
Liked 127 Times in 53 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by gumpys
Hi Alpha,
I have said it before and will say it again,
First and foremost the 586 was built a lot better than the 686
Second, the trigger on the 586 is a lot smoother than the 686
The carbon steel on the 586 was more durable than the 686 stainless in abrasion areas like the hand & ratchet teeth, among other things. Workmanship was better on the 586's than on current 686 variants, and they had no mim parts and no locks just to say a few things.
Eric
|
gumpys...you are either a clever jokester, or you have one of your screws VERY LOOSE!!
__________________
Mark
|
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
|
|
03-18-2012, 11:49 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,233
Likes: 573
Liked 631 Times in 300 Posts
|
|
I am talking about early 586's guys, not the new production ones. MacA evidentally you dont know much about the 586's.
Eric
|
03-18-2012, 12:53 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The Great Midwest
Posts: 2,541
Likes: 1,716
Liked 2,374 Times in 1,003 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by gumpys
Hi Alpha,
I have said it before and will say it again,
First and foremost the 586 was built a lot better than the 686
Second, the trigger on the 586 is a lot smoother than the 686
The carbon steel on the 586 was more durable than the 686 stainless in abrasion areas like the hand & ratchet teeth, among other things. Workmanship was better on the 586's than on current 686 variants, and they had no mim parts and no locks just to say a few things.
Eric
|
Better trigger and construction? I am no expert and only own one 686 but it has the best trigger of all of my revolvers...mostly 66's and a 19 (not a lot better, but enough to tell). If the 586 is better than the 686 I'm in the market for one! My guess would be, as posted above, that it has to do with the particular gun...some are just a little better than others. But, I have not owned a slew of L frames to compare...my K's are very consistent and I would be pressed to tell one from another with a blindfold but I bet I could pick out the 686! That's a good idea...I will do the blindfold test! Problem with that is I could pick out the 686 on weight alone...
|
03-18-2012, 01:02 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Central New Mexico
Posts: 2,675
Likes: 1,179
Liked 1,116 Times in 409 Posts
|
|
All very good points here, except for Gumpy with whom I respectfully disagree.
If you intend to carry a lot in a holster, either concealed or in the field the stainless M686 is the way to go. Unless you just like the blue or nickel in which case carry the M586.
S&W made a special run of M686s in a "matte black" stainless, I think in both 4 and 6 inch barrels. I do not know if the 4 inch barrels had roundbutts.
They also made a special run of matte blue/black M586s in 4 inch (and maybe 6 inch). The M586 in matte blue/black 4 inch has a roundbutt. An EXCELLENT handling sixgun, better than the 4 inch squarebutts which handle superb.
I think the later M686s have a roundbutt however they also may have the lock. That and MIM parts turns people off. Me...I'm not so sure yet.
__________________
Have guns...will shoot'em.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
03-18-2012, 01:03 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Carmen, Idaho
Posts: 4,292
Likes: 5,570
Liked 3,588 Times in 1,298 Posts
|
|
I prefer blue over stainless guns. Just an aesthetics thing for me.
That said, I have a 6" 586-1 that has one of the most fabulous triggers I have felt, other than my '49 Colt OMS.
Model 14-6 over M586-1
__________________
Memory of Randy Freas-Rimfired
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
03-18-2012, 01:10 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: NC
Posts: 302
Likes: 50
Liked 127 Times in 53 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by gumpys
I am talking about early 586's guys, not the new production ones. MacA evidentally you dont know much about the 586's.
Eric
|
The OP asked "How is the 586 different from the 686?" He didn't specify anything about comparing the old 586s to the new model 686s. Your answers didn't specify the difference either, until one of your last comments.
I have owned both a 586 no dash and a 586-1, and currently have two 686 no dash models. The specific versions are virtually identical with the exception of the frame materials. They both are excellent L frame revolvers.
Your comments made no sense whatsoever, so I assumed you were joking. That is why I put the smiley face up. If indeed you were serious , then please accept my apology! My "screw loose" comment was inappropriate, and I'll just say we can "agree to disagree"! Peace!
__________________
Mark
Last edited by MacA; 03-18-2012 at 01:12 PM.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
03-18-2012, 04:41 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Location: S.F. Bay Area
Posts: 3,504
Likes: 527
Liked 3,814 Times in 1,243 Posts
|
|
I sold this.
Then I used the money to buy this.
Straight across swap for me and I got the better end of the deal IMO.
Reason for my trade, tool marks and burrs on the 686 which I have found consistently on older stainless Smiths. Apparently carbon steel is easier to work and therefore finished to a higher degree of refinement.
Actions are identical and all dimensions are as well, so it's aesthetics that determine a favorite. In my case I prefer a finer finish of the metal. Burrs around the forcing cone, tool marks around the ejector rod shroud, top strap and recoil shield do not affect function, but I prefer revolvers without them.
Additionally, IMO and this is totally subjective, blued steel revolvers feel different when firing. Probably no way to quantify that and perhaps it's absolutely a figment of my imagination, but it's real enough to me.
|
The Following 8 Users Like Post:
|
|
03-18-2012, 06:01 PM
|
Banned
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 2,026
Likes: 5
Liked 388 Times in 273 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snapping Twig
Reason for my trade, tool marks and burrs on the 686 which I have found consistently on older stainless Smiths. Apparently carbon steel is easier to work and therefore finished to a higher degree of refinement.
Actions are identical and all dimensions are as well, so it's aesthetics that determine a favorite. In my case I prefer a finer finish of the metal. Burrs around the forcing cone, tool marks around the ejector rod shroud, top strap and recoil shield do not affect function, but I prefer revolvers without them.
|
I dont necessarily agree with your conclusion but I have no way of proving either way. Look at the flip side. I dont think there is any doubt that stainless handguns are MUCH easier to keep looking good and to clean. You dont have to worry about holster rub ruining your finish, you dont really need to worry about rust and I think that at the end of the day, a stainless will hold up better in the long run if you shoot it alot.
I'm not going to comment on your statement about which shoots better. I think that's completely subjective.
|
03-18-2012, 06:33 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Montana
Posts: 1,056
Likes: 568
Liked 587 Times in 186 Posts
|
|
As biased as grumpys comment on the 586 being better than the 686...
Snapping Twig's comment on the 586 and 686 is one of the most objective comments I have seen on this forum. Thanks!
John
|
03-18-2012, 10:42 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,233
Likes: 573
Liked 631 Times in 300 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jspick
As biased as grumpys comment on the 586 being better than the 686...
Snapping Twig's comment on the 586 and 686 is one of the most objective comments I have seen on this forum. Thanks!
John
|
Your comment jprick is your opinion, and I got mine. I respect your opinion, just stating what I have come across. I have owned and still own several of each and clearly think you have not handled many 586's to know what you are talking about.
Eric
|
03-18-2012, 11:05 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 2,164
Likes: 2
Liked 117 Times in 85 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by gumpys
Hi Alpha,
I have said it before and will say it again,
First and foremost the 586 was built a lot better than the 686
Second, the trigger on the 586 is a lot smoother than the 686
The carbon steel on the 586 was more durable than the 686 stainless in abrasion areas like the hand & ratchet teeth, among other things. Workmanship was better on the 586's than on current 686 variants, and they had no mim parts and no locks just to say a few things.
Eric
|
I'll second this succint and concise evaluation of the differences!
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
03-21-2012, 10:53 PM
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,479
Likes: 18
Liked 530 Times in 243 Posts
|
|
I like the Classic 586, I hope they make them with Round Butt grip frames!
|
03-22-2012, 04:43 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: R.T. P, area NC
Posts: 9,689
Likes: 29,800
Liked 23,104 Times in 5,816 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mickey D
I prefer blue over stainless guns. Just an aesthetics thing for me.
That said, I have a 6" 586-1 that has one of the most fabulous triggers I have felt, other than my '49 Colt OMS.
Model 14-6 over M586-1
|
Mickey, I assume you're serving shaken not stirred, and gin not vodka.
Last edited by old bear; 03-22-2012 at 04:55 PM.
Reason: Sp.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
03-22-2012, 10:29 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Pike county pa
Posts: 695
Likes: 407
Liked 271 Times in 128 Posts
|
|
I have an older 586 and a newer 686+. They are both fine guns. My 686+ would be my SHTF gun. I've put 1,000's of rounds through both with out a hiccup. I would trust my life with both of them.
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
03-22-2012, 01:17 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Utah
Posts: 129
Likes: 10
Liked 102 Times in 44 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snapping Twig
|
Great looking guns, both of them, but clearly the blue gun is the better of the two -- because it's, well, blue.
Vern
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
03-22-2012, 11:46 PM
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: OR
Posts: 3,358
Likes: 5,528
Liked 1,037 Times in 351 Posts
|
|
Mickey D, What brand of grips is your 586 wearing? They're beautiful.
Jerry
|
03-23-2012, 09:06 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2
Likes: 1
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
I have a pre-lock 686 6" and a 586+. I got the 586 when S&W brought them back a few years ago. Both are favorites of mine but I prefer the 686 because the trigger is so much smoother than the 586.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
03-23-2012, 09:25 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 275
Likes: 1
Liked 36 Times in 23 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by gumpys
Your comment jprick is your opinion, and I got mine. I respect your opinion, just stating what I have come across. I have owned and still own several of each and clearly think you have not handled many 586's to know what you are talking about.
Eric
|
It's "jspick" not "jprick", LOL.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
03-23-2012, 10:06 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Montana
Posts: 1,056
Likes: 568
Liked 587 Times in 186 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by youngda9
It's "jspick" not "jprick", LOL.
|
I noticed that too! I figured he was just trying to antagonize me! LOL
What makes one gun smoother than the next is the trigger and hammer. Knowing why and how to achive that is knowledge. And those that don't will say such things as one model is better built than the next. This has been an interesting read.
John
|
03-23-2012, 03:19 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,233
Likes: 573
Liked 631 Times in 300 Posts
|
|
Hi John,
Kinda like I noticed you did grumpys instead of gumpys, lol .
Eric
|
03-23-2012, 03:57 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Montana
Posts: 1,056
Likes: 568
Liked 587 Times in 186 Posts
|
|
LOL Really, I thought is was "grumpys"!!! LOL
I never looked specificlly at your forum name. I guess since you always have a grumpy tone to your posts I assumed it was that!!LOL
Now that I know mispelled my forum name on purpose and that tells me a lot about who you are!
John
|
03-23-2012, 04:20 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 1,526
Likes: 2,068
Liked 1,588 Times in 469 Posts
|
|
I'll wade in and agree with the majority here that I've never noticed a difference in quality between 586s and pre-lock, pre-MIM 686s. You could argue about the more recent 686s but the early ones were/are great IMO.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
03-23-2012, 04:33 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,665
Likes: 117
Liked 1,120 Times in 511 Posts
|
|
My 686 was every bit the equal of my 586. For utility use the 686 was the choice. BUT blue steel and Wood trumps stainless and rubber for looks any day.
My last 686 was a MIM parts gun. Grumpy, in a blind comparison I would challenge you to tell the difference between it and a 586.
|
03-23-2012, 05:47 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,233
Likes: 573
Liked 631 Times in 300 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jspick
LOL Really, I thought is was "grumpys"!!! LOL
I never looked specificlly at your forum name. I guess since you always have a grumpy tone to your posts I assumed it was that!!LOL
Now that I know mispelled my forum name on purpose and that tells me a lot about who you are!
John
|
Good for you, and that means what to me ? Also, I do not know where you get the grumpy tone from, maybe because your input on subjects that you have no idea what you are talking about
Eric
Eric
|
03-23-2012, 06:20 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Montana
Posts: 1,056
Likes: 568
Liked 587 Times in 186 Posts
|
|
I don't know what I am talking about??? REALLY?
I'm not the one who said a 586 was made better than a 686!!!!LOL
That is the best one liner I have read here. LOL LOL
John
|
01-04-2015, 04:33 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Virginia
Posts: 122
Likes: 245
Liked 68 Times in 36 Posts
|
|
This thread was really helpful. Trying to decide between a 586 and a 686 S&W revolver 4" and the comments here were really informative. Already have a 686-3 best gun I ever shot. Like the old school square butt and it's a rare blackened over SS. Good job S & W ... blame Eastwood!
|
01-04-2015, 07:35 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: South Central Texas
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 2,688
Liked 1,114 Times in 501 Posts
|
|
I bought my 686-NO dash back in August 1986. Ya'll need to settle this amongst ya-selvez... 'cuz I am never sellin' my 686 4"... "Nuf said...
|
01-04-2015, 09:09 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,429
Likes: 1,112
Liked 5,174 Times in 1,584 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by gumpys
Hi Alpha,
I have said it before and will say it again,
First and foremost the 586 was built a lot better than the 686
Second, the trigger on the 586 is a lot smoother than the 686
The carbon steel on the 586 was more durable than the 686 stainless in abrasion areas like the hand & ratchet teeth, among other things. Workmanship was better on the 586's than on current 686 variants, and they had no mim parts and no locks just to say a few things.
Eric
|
Where did you come up with this information?
|
01-05-2015, 06:58 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 17,944
Likes: 7,947
Liked 26,142 Times in 8,798 Posts
|
|
Unless I intend on carrying a specific gun, I always choose the Blued model over the Stainless. In general I find Blued guns to be a bit smoother, less reflective if shot in bright sunlight, and I just like the way they look. The only Stainless guns I own are my dedicated carry guns - - - M60-7, M65, M63. The rest are all Blued with a few "Cowboy Guns" in Nickel for good measure.
That said, if you intend on taking your gun out often and exposing it to the weather, Stainless (M686) is the way to go.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
01-06-2015, 02:57 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 58
Likes: 1
Liked 14 Times in 7 Posts
|
|
Two months ago I bought a no dash 686 with a 105.14mm barrel - it is supposed to be 4". The gun is legal up here. It is a former US Custom Service revolver as evidenced by the CS above the serial number of the gun. It has oddly enough adjustable rear sights.
I use the gun as back up to my GP-100 for IDPA SSR Division. Neither revolver gives anything up to the other. Both have excellent triggers and sights. The 686 is exactly one ounce heavier with Hogue rubber grips on the gun.
The 686 no dash is miles ahead of the new 686 Smith is now putting out regarding overall finish.
Take Care
Bob
|
01-06-2015, 05:11 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: South Louisiana
Posts: 5,346
Likes: 11,606
Liked 9,020 Times in 3,193 Posts
|
|
Guys, this thread was necro'd from almost 3 years ago.
|
08-07-2015, 08:19 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 71
Likes: 43
Liked 114 Times in 19 Posts
|
|
Really ?????
Quote:
Originally Posted by gumpys
I am talking about early 586's guys, not the new production ones. MacA evidentally you dont know much about the 586's.
Eric
|
So to be clear, you are saying that a 586 no dash is much better made than a 686 no dash or for that matter a 686-1 ?
Please tell us how a 586 made around the same time as a 686 of the same era is superior ?
|
08-07-2015, 08:41 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 307
Likes: 489
Liked 325 Times in 93 Posts
|
|
Kemper , it's a dead thread.
Look at the datetime stamps.
|
08-19-2015, 03:38 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 84
Likes: 146
Liked 140 Times in 45 Posts
|
|
May be a dead thread but the 586 and 686 are both awesome revolvers. Best shooting hand guns I own. Best looking too.
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
08-19-2015, 07:57 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: (outside) Charleston, SC
Posts: 31,054
Likes: 41,760
Liked 29,328 Times in 13,858 Posts
|
|
Then I'll say this.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by gumpys
Hi Alpha,
I have said it before and will say it again,
First and foremost the 586 was built a lot better than the 686
Second, the trigger on the 586 is a lot smoother than the 686
The carbon steel on the 586 was more durable than the 686 stainless in abrasion areas like the hand & ratchet teeth, among other things. Workmanship was better on the 586's than on current 686 variants, and they had no mim parts and no locks just to say a few things.
Eric
|
I have a 686 no dash from the early 80s. I humbly disagree with your assessment. They were/are the same gun in different materials. If the current 686s have MIM parts, so do the 586s. The workmanship is also identical with examples from the same time period. And the 686s didn't have locks until other guns got locks. I have a beautiful specimen with a perfect trigger. I don't want to get a 'trigger job' because it would probably mess it up. It's that good. And i Stain. Steel abrades, then bluing wears off.
__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"
Last edited by rwsmith; 08-19-2015 at 09:16 AM.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
08-19-2015, 09:35 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: A Burb of the Burgh
Posts: 14,821
Likes: 1,714
Liked 19,939 Times in 8,817 Posts
|
|
Basicly the same gun if the dash numbers match...........
I take my 4" 686 on my walks into Penn's Woods
I'd take my 4" 586 to a BBQ............my 1996 586-6 (IIRC) is a round butt,pre MIM with hammer mounted firing pin....wears a set of Spegel Extended Boot Grips in Birdseye Maple....... it would hold its own w/ a "Snake"at any BBQ from Massachusetts to Texas.
Last edited by BAM-BAM; 08-19-2015 at 09:39 AM.
|
08-19-2015, 10:34 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,540
Likes: 320
Liked 810 Times in 402 Posts
|
|
So this is a comparison of stainless vs. carbon steel thread now?
In general terms, stainless is tougher and more abrasion resistant. The nickel and chromium in stainless is tough and gummy to machine compared to carbon steel. As a result, it is much easier to get a good finish on carbon steel, and cutting speeds are higher.
|
08-19-2015, 02:32 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Hillsdale, Mi.
Posts: 7,523
Likes: 7,077
Liked 7,135 Times in 2,960 Posts
|
|
This is another thread that has been around quite a while. I made a post on it 03-2012. But since then I added a 686-3. They get along well together, but don't go to the range at the same time. Bob
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
08-19-2015, 03:30 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Matsu Valley, Alaska
Posts: 881
Likes: 146
Liked 1,003 Times in 349 Posts
|
|
The 686 is a K Frame the 586 is an L Frame. There are production differences that make the 586 L version a bit stouter such as a reinforced forcing cone, beefed up frame, full-length barrel underlug, and non-counterbored cylinder. Also, in the Talo special edition currently being sold, most if not all of the 686 MIM parts have been replaced by forged steel as you can tell from the trigger and hammer below. This latter point is also true of the current Talo .44 Magnum snubbie.
Generally speaking, in the extra-tuned 586 L-Comp versions, I have handled two of those and they have superior action to 686's, and that 586 feels closer to a Performance Center 627 of which I own two of the latter as well as a PC 629. No surprise there as the current S&W website brags that the 586 L-Comp's action is Performance Center tuned. ( Product: Model 586 L-Comp); and, that Talo 586 will run you North of $1,000 if you can find one new.
The current S&W Talo 586 is a 7-Shot with a 3" ported barrel moon clip ready with tritium front site on the S&W web page (pictured below).
Last edited by dwever; 08-19-2015 at 03:54 PM.
|
|
|
Tags
|
581, 586, 681, 686, classics, colt, concealed, ejector, k frame, l frame, lock, m686, model 19, model 686, round butt, shroud, smith & wesson, smith and wesson |
Posting Rules
|
|
|
|
|