When S&W originally discontinued the 6-shot K-framed Model 66 in 2005 with the 66-07 being the final engineering change at that time, it was ostensibly replaced by the Model 620 in the same year.
Smith & Wesson Model 619 & 620 - Wikipedia
Smith & Wesson Model 19 - Wikipedia
The M620 was a 7-shot, L-frame gun having a 4", half-lug, "non-compromised" forcing cone, two-piece barrel praised for its accuracy. Despite the accurate shooting, the 620 was a major face-plant by S&W, and lasted only a few years before it, too, was discontinued. It seems suspicion/controversy over the durability of the relatively-new-to-S&W two-piece barrel was the primary reason the new gun was not accepted by the S&W community.
I've got a 620, and I love it - super accurate, good balance, functions perfect, lots of fun to shoot. While .357Mag L-frames are absolutely fantastic guns, personally, I am not a fan of the overwhelmingly ubiquitous full-lug 686 guns. The aesthetics and balance of that full-lug just don't fit my ideas of what makes a great revolver. Obviously, this is JMHO, but I know there are many others who feel the same. I know not all 686's have a full lug, but half-lug 686's are not common and go for a high price when they do go on the market. (I know, because a 686 Mountain Gun, which has a half-lug, burned a big hole in my gun budget when it came up on Gunbroker). In my mind, the half-lug 620 solves this quite substantial flaw of the 686. In other words, not only is the 620 a very worthy replacement for the 66, but for the large number of half-lug lovers, it is a better gun than the highly popular 686. And that is saying a lot! But, still, no love for the 620!?
Fast forward to 2014, and S&W has released the 66-8, which is a revamped 6-shot K-frame gun with a 4.25", half-lug, "non-compromised" forcing cone, two-piece barrel being praised for its accuracy, i.e. it is very similar to the soundly rejected 620, however, the 66-8 is getting almost universal high praise from the S&W community.
Why the different treatment of what are very similar guns? Is the two-piece-barrel design of the 66-8 really all that better than that of the 620? Or, has the S&W community simply grown to accept two-piece barrels as maybe not all that bad, after all? Or, is this yet another example of S&W management making only a limited number of guns that the S&W community really really likes? (For a recent example of this odd and self-impairing product management behavior, check the 617 Mountain Gun). Or, some other reasons at play, here? Finally, maybe the success of the new 66-8 will cause a re-discovery of the forgotten 620 and its fine attributes?
.
Smith & Wesson Model 619 & 620 - Wikipedia
Smith & Wesson Model 19 - Wikipedia
The M620 was a 7-shot, L-frame gun having a 4", half-lug, "non-compromised" forcing cone, two-piece barrel praised for its accuracy. Despite the accurate shooting, the 620 was a major face-plant by S&W, and lasted only a few years before it, too, was discontinued. It seems suspicion/controversy over the durability of the relatively-new-to-S&W two-piece barrel was the primary reason the new gun was not accepted by the S&W community.
I've got a 620, and I love it - super accurate, good balance, functions perfect, lots of fun to shoot. While .357Mag L-frames are absolutely fantastic guns, personally, I am not a fan of the overwhelmingly ubiquitous full-lug 686 guns. The aesthetics and balance of that full-lug just don't fit my ideas of what makes a great revolver. Obviously, this is JMHO, but I know there are many others who feel the same. I know not all 686's have a full lug, but half-lug 686's are not common and go for a high price when they do go on the market. (I know, because a 686 Mountain Gun, which has a half-lug, burned a big hole in my gun budget when it came up on Gunbroker). In my mind, the half-lug 620 solves this quite substantial flaw of the 686. In other words, not only is the 620 a very worthy replacement for the 66, but for the large number of half-lug lovers, it is a better gun than the highly popular 686. And that is saying a lot! But, still, no love for the 620!?
Fast forward to 2014, and S&W has released the 66-8, which is a revamped 6-shot K-frame gun with a 4.25", half-lug, "non-compromised" forcing cone, two-piece barrel being praised for its accuracy, i.e. it is very similar to the soundly rejected 620, however, the 66-8 is getting almost universal high praise from the S&W community.
Why the different treatment of what are very similar guns? Is the two-piece-barrel design of the 66-8 really all that better than that of the 620? Or, has the S&W community simply grown to accept two-piece barrels as maybe not all that bad, after all? Or, is this yet another example of S&W management making only a limited number of guns that the S&W community really really likes? (For a recent example of this odd and self-impairing product management behavior, check the 617 Mountain Gun). Or, some other reasons at play, here? Finally, maybe the success of the new 66-8 will cause a re-discovery of the forgotten 620 and its fine attributes?
.
Last edited:
.
