First off I'm not here to bash these guns. I obviously like them as I bought one.

I bought a brand new 686 with a 6 inch barrel on a Friday. On Saturday I shoot 50 rounds of 38 special and a handful of magnums. The gun shot and functioned well. Once I got home to clean it I noticed a crack right under the barrel.

Monday morning it was on the way to Smith. They were very polite once they realized I wasn't talking about the side cover. The guy said he never heard of a 686 frame breaking. They replaced the frame and will send it to my ffl dealer since it has a new serial number now. Today is a month and they promised it will most likely ship next week. Several reps have said they are very busy.

Was this really a fluke? Does anyone here have a high round count through one of these? I bought this gun to shoot and not be a safe queen. I have honestly been debating on trading it for a GP 100 when it gets back. I just really like the look and feel of the Smith better but don't want to go down this road again.

Should I trade it or give it another chance?

I have heard of the occasional issue with a Model 19 but I don't ever recall a 686 or 586 cracking that I can recall although I am honestly not a fan of the new guns compared to the older stuff, although the 686 would be hardly considered a classic. I know of a guy who has a 4 inch early 686, can't even guess the round count. I had one once and I shot it a lot and bought it used, never an issue.

__________________
Vaya con Dios

The L frame was the solution to problems with forcing cone cracks in K frame .357 Magnum revolvers.

The L frame is a little larger to allow the barrel diameter at the threads to be increased to .562", compared to .540" in the K-frame, and the deeper frame eliminates the need for a clearance cut for the crane at the bottom of the barrel, and it was the thin spot in the forcing cone that was the most common location for forcing cone cracks.

That's a long way of saying that cracked forcing cones were a low frequency problem in K frame .357s, but cracked frames weren't ever a problem with the K-frame. The slightly thicker L frame (.838" at the barrel and .658" at the thumb latch, compared to .820 and .656 respectively for the K-frame) is even less likely to have any cracking issues.

You just got a very rare bad one.

Give it another chance. Pretty hard to warm up to a GP100 once you've had a S&W.

A cracked frame under the barrel may be due to overtightening the barrel in assembly. This has been discussed recently on the Smith-Wesson forum. I'm assuming the OP actually meant the frame [as described] rather than the barrel.

FWIW, a 4" 686 was my last revolver that I carried on duty before auto pistols were approved. I still have the 686-1 and it has had a few thousand rounds, mostly .357s go down the tube with absolutely no problem. I still carry it as a bug some times when I hunt or woods walk and it has never been a problem or had any issues. What you describe is the first such issue I have heard of. I suggest you look that new one over when you get it, shoot it and I think all your Ruger thoughts will fade away. Those 586-686s are real good guns.

Bless you. I wanted a 686 bad and several years ago bought one. It was 4" barrel version. I put it in a holster on my hip and immediately decided I would never carry that bulky and heavy thing. Needless to say, any 686s I use are at the range only and carried in a bag.

To the OP, I would give it another chance.

Never even heard of a frame cracking on a 686 before.

I think you're either too weight sensitive or had the wrong gun belt. You need a sturdy belt and holster of the right design to minimize that weight.


I'm baffled by where this frame crack was. Can you post a photo?


BTW, that "side cover" is called the sideplate.

I've shot several 686s multi-thousands of rounds in competition, both for the "run and gun" sports and for accuracy without drama. One has so many rounds through it that the rifling just forward of the forcing cone is pretty much gone for about 1/4". Still shoots well enough for DA work.

Like the folk above, never considered the 686 anything but heavy duty gear!

I had to send my 929 in for repair. They needed to replace it instead of being able to fix the problem. After one month I started getting anxious for my gun. I called Customer Service and was told it would be 2 more weeks.

When it didn't show up I sent and E-mail and called again. I thought the service rep was pulling my leg after my third attempt to get my new gun.

All in all, I sent 4 E-mails and 5 more phone calls. I kept asking for the supervisor, then their supervisor all the way up until I got out of the service department and into the corporate office.

Corporate was able to get the gun to me in two days.

You need to talk to the right person. But when I got my new 929 there were absolutely no problems with it.

^^^^^ This ^^^^^^

Photo's showing a couple of instances of this occurring have been posted on this forum since I joined.

I agree. I can't speak to the 4" version but my 2 1/2" 686+ fully loaded with 7 rounds weighs right at 40 oz.

That 40 oz compares to:

2 3/4" Speed Six, 38 oz;
3" Model 13, 36.7 oz;
2 1/2" Model 66, 36 oz;
3" SP101, 29.6 oz; and
3" Model 60, 26 oz.

With a good double thickness leather gun belt and a good IWB holster I don't notice the extra 10 to 14 oz of the Model 66, Model 13, Speed Six or 686 when carrying them, but I sure notice the lack of that 10-14 oz when shooting a Model 60 with .357 Magnum loads and the 30 oz SP101 isn't much better.

Here is a picture of the crack. It was actually in the frame. The overtightning of the barrel does make sense.

Attached Images

IMG_0386.jpg (31.6 KB, 1036 views)

I'm guessing the barrel was over torqued. Looking at the line on the barrel where it meets the frame sure doesn't look lined up. Give S&W the chance to make it right. I bought a 2 month old 686 from a guy that was supposed to have a box shot out of it. Ran great till I shot full on magnums and the cylinder would lock up. Probably why I got it so cheap! S&W sent a return tag and about 2 weeks later I got it back. About 2K rounds now, half full magnum and no problems.

This is A LOT of lead!

My 617 that I used in Steel Challenge competition for years developed a crack under the barrel. I had a new gun in fifteen days from S&W.

I have a Python...No cracks

As they say, pictures, or it didn't happen.

All the ones I saw were aluminum J-frames, not L-frames.

Well I asked for pictures... I'm shocked, I really am. That has to be a rare occurrence.

A little epoxy and it'll be just fine...

Was buying .38 Spl. jacketed ammo by the case starting in the late '90s and ran that revolver HARD up through 2003 or 4. Did pretty well with it down at Ft. Benning, mostly. Ammo was cheap then! Was also shooting IHMSA at the time, which has become my favorite way to burn powder, but have transitioned to bigger bores and non-jacketed bullets to a large degree. Have some newish 686s for the long range game as well, but they much prefer jacketed rounds.

Quite surprised to see the OP's frame crack, wondering if there isn't some other cause than over tightening of the barrel. Have some other ideas, but without a hands-on exam, it's probably pointless to speculate. (Having been swapping barrels since high school in the early '80s I've probably seen more disassembled S&Ws of all vintages than the average bear. Not as many a factory folk or full time revolversmiths by a long shot, though!)

Obviously it was a fault in the metal. I've NEVER heard of a 686 cracking under normal use, even heavy normal use. That's what it is built for. Definitely give it another try. I LOVE my 686 and I'm not alone.

PS: I've shot very hot to nearly max loads for years and mine still looks nearly new.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

We can all carry what we want. It's not the weight. I can carry a full size 1911 no problem.

duct tape.

I carried a 5" 1911 a long time ago as well as a Hi Power for several years. The 686 is easier - and a lot less bulky - to carry than either of those pistols.

In fact, I put the 686 at about the same level as a CZ 75 Compact.

Revolvers are deceptive as while the overall length, width, height dimensions might be similar to a semi-auto or even slightly wider, the width in a revolver is only at the cylinder, while the grip, and barrel are thinner and have a lot less volume.

A google search on the OP's thread title, "686 cracked frame", finds enough instances to show that L-frame ejector slot cracking is not a particularly rare occurrence.
This reviewer of the 686 Competitor, made a video that shows the same crack, at 3:45 in.

Let's not get too excited or over state the case...

I googled "S&W 686 frame crack and got 23,000 hits, but only about a dozen on the first 2 pages were relevant to a cracked frame on a 686, and the lower probability hits below that did not appear to be relevant at all.

I also suspect some of those relevant posts are the same OP complaining about the crack in multiple forums.

But even assuming we have an actual dozen reported cracked frames, S&W has been making the L frame 686 since 1980, and while I'm not sure how many they have made in the last 36 years, but if we assume 10,000 per year, that puts 360,000 of them out there, and 12 cracked frame of 360,000 revolvers is a .003 percent failure rate. That's 3 out of every ten thousand revolvers.

Let's also say I'm, wrong or that only 1/3rd of cracks get reported, so the number is really 36, rather than 12. That's still only 1 in a 1000 686s that crack (and that seems really high given the low number of reports).

Looking at it differently, if S&W had only made 12 L frame 686's ever, we'd consider the 686 to be extremely rare. If we triple that to 36, the statement is still true - collectors would be snapping them at 5 figure prices.

In that regard cracked frames in a 686, while obviously not unheard of, are in fact extremely rare.

It's rare enough that they are probably due to a very rare manufacturing defect, such as massive over torquing or due to an extremely rare inclusion in the metal that in concert with normal torque and stress causes a crack to form.

BB57, I didn't mean it was a statistically significant number. I feel that if a 10 second google search of a problem yields multiple occurrence's of my problem on the first page, then I have an answer, and need look no further.
To me, a rare problem is one that first rear's its head on the 25th page of responses to a google search term, or not at all.

Or, improper technique in trying to remove the barrel without supporting it with a frame jig.
Steve

Last year I bought a S&W 686+ Talo exclusive with the 3" bbl. It is S&W #150713. Once it arrived (Bought from Davidson's GOG), I gave it to my brother who is a retired LEO who was a range officer at his dept. and also a huge gun enthusiast. He wanted to look it over closely and check the action to see if it would help to have it tuned a bit. Well, he noticed almost immediately a crack about 3/4" above where the serial # is stamped. Since I had not even put a single round through it yet we had to assume either it cracked from the two shots S&W did for testing or was a manufacturing defect (over torque on the bbl assembly). I called Smith and went through the normal process to send it off to them. Once they had a chance to look it over they called me and said they were sending me a new gun. A few weeks later it arrived and all has been good with the replacement thus far. Although I am disappointed that I would even have received a gun with a frame crack I am appreciative with how easy it was to deal with the return and replacement. I have since bought a 686+ #178029 with the 4"bbl and both of these are more fun to shoot than my Ruger GP100 Match Champion. Yeah...they got the IL but I for one am glad Smith is still making revolvers and will continue to add to my collection (although I hope to find some older discontinued models such as a model 66 or K frame in general). I don't have the picture posting dialed in so anyone interested in seeing a picture of the crack in my 686 just PM me. My crack was almost in the same identical spot to the picture posted earlier by Macinaw.

I wouldn't trade any of my S&Ws for a Python, especially my 686s.

And I agree with Texas Star and others about the 4" 686 in a holster. I got D&D Leather (Dave Workman) to make me a holster for my 4" and I carried it all day on a quality 1.5" leather belt whilst chasing feral hogs, and then at a poker game at the same ranch (I have great friends!), and it never got my attention particularly.

Thanks for the input. My gun is supposed to be at my ffl Friday. Smith won't really say if it's a new gun or my parts on a new frame. I don't care either way, I'm just ready to have my gun back. I will post back once I get it and run some rounds through it.

I would if in comparable condition

Off topic I know but, my one and only experience with Pythons wasn't good. I had a hard time with opening their cylinder and dealer wanted me to wait while he sent it back to factory, this was decades before we had all the tracking we have now.
Steve

Why would we make cracks about you having a Python? You should be pitied because it's obvious you don't know any better!

Froggie

Green Frog, ??? Please let's not turn this into the Presidential debates?
Steve

Let's please not get trolled by this off-topic off-forum comment.

Posted for Randy...

Gun made it back to my ffl on Friday. I got out this afternoon and shoot 100 rounds. It performed flawlessly. Smith replaced the frame, barrel and put a new grip on it because the other one would not tighten up. Im happy with the work they did as it looks better than it ever did. It appears they test fired all cylinders and the barrel fits really well.

Now that it's back in my hands I'm going to give it another chance. I still like the looks of the Smith better than the GP-100. The trigger in my opinion is also better for me in the 686.

Im glad Smith stood behind their product, I just wish they would have moved it through faster than five weeks. I had already paid for mine and I still can't help but feel they were more interested in sending out new guns over replacing mine.

Glad to hear you got your repaired 686 back and shot it some. Now enjoy yourself and shoot it a bunch more. I have a good buddy who has a no dash 686 and it's a nice weapon and fun to shoot. But I rather my N frame 27's personally.

Was this due to the firing pin/bushing recall??? Did they stamp an 'm' after the model number?

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

I have a 686....No cracks.


I'm sure that there were zero defective Pythons.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

Soon the annoyance and aggravation will fade into a distant memory, but the appreciation of that fine firearm will remain.

I'm glad your all settled and enjoying that fine firearm.

Hello guys, I just received this 686-6 plus after purchasing used online. The gun arrived today and when I opened the box I found this. Obviously, I contacted the seller with these pics and I'll see how that goes.
My question is... does anyone know if this would be under any warranty? or if not can it be fixed?
Keep in mind I'm in Canada and not sure about my options with this. Have a look at the pics. I appreciate any feedback.

Attached Images

	PXL_20230310_153029680.jpg (59.1 KB, 172 views)
	PXL_20230310_153052094.MP.jpg (34.9 KB, 151 views)

Nothing wrong with that gun that I can see.
Don't confuse the sideplate - frame line as a crack, it ain't.

As mod29 said, that's the sideplate seam and NOT a crack.

__________________
"I also cook."

Thank you, guys!! That is a big relief.

It's my first revolver and I thought it was cracked.

This is great to hear.

Happens all the time. Welcome to the forum.

Sent from my motorola one 5G using Tapatalk

__________________
Slava Ukraini!

I wonder if these cracks are caused by ham handed barrel fitment. N, K and J framed S&W's have been around for many decades with barrels fitted and indexed with a combination of compressed thread fit and pin. Eliminating the pin makes the compression fit critical. An assembler might be tempted to over-torque a barrel to get it clocked in. Repeated disassemblies to fit a barrel without a pin might go wrong. Other than M-19's cracking from magnum loads, has anyone ever heard of a P&R frame cracking?