Why does the 620 get no love?

Forgive my newbie ignorance, but the 620 seems to be the bastard step child of the current S&W .357s.

Can anyone tell me why? I know it has the 2 piece barrel, which some folks don't like, but is there anything else “wrong” with it?

Background information - I walked into a gun store last week looking for a Sig to replace my Glock 23. After handling the Sigs, and not liking them much, I glanced at the wheel guns. They had a couple of 686’s, and one 620 with a 4” barrel.

I haven't owned a wheel gun since I sold my Model 19 snubbie back in 1994. But I asked the shop owner if I could see the 620. Just for kicks.

The 620 felt like it was custom made for my hand. It was extremely pointable and the DA trigger was smooth as butter. I fell in love with it and bought it on the spot.

I live in California, so right now I'm enduring the 10 day waiting period. But I've been doing some online research and it seems that the 686 is the proverbial golden gun, and the 620, although similar, gets very little attention. Why is this? Did I buy a dog?

I’d appreciate your thoughts.

Can't speak for anyone else, but I think the 620 is great.
Being an IDPA nut made me stick with the 686 so I could have the 6-shot cylinder, however. IDPA does not allow loading 7, and trying to index the empty chamber each time is just too much for me to deal with.

There is a good review of your new revolver on Gunblast that was posted in August of 2005, they seemed to like it and thought it was a good revolver. Smith & Wesson Models 619 and 620 .357 Magnum Revolvers.

I have no personal experience with this model but from a quick look at the review it would seem you did fine with your choice.

This is just me personally, but I won't go near one because of the IL and the two piece barrel.

By all accounts it's a fine gun. I think you made a good choice. It's sort of a +size version of Smith's Model 66 with the added benefit that it fires 7 rather than 6 rounds. I have puzzled over the question of why Smith would manufacture two .357s that fill almost exactly the same niche, however.

OKFC05 said:

Can't speak for anyone else, but I think the 620 is great.
Being an IDPA nut made me stick with the 686 so I could have the 6-shot cylinder, however. IDPA does not allow loading 7, and trying to index the empty chamber each time is just too much for me to deal with.

Click to expand...

I agree, think the 620 is a fine revolver, but a couple of years ago was in the market for a revolver that was IDPA legal so ended up buying one of the last 66-7s. It is basically identical to the 620, but with a K rather than L frame, has the 2-piece barrel, the hated lock, handles and shoots great, and holds 6 rather than 7 rounds. If a guy isn't inclined to compete in IDPA or IPSC, he can't go wrong with the 620 IMHO.

These little guns shoot great, and make a good gun to start customization and and personal touches to...

For instance, take this one I had done for a friend a while back:





The only thing I didn't have done was having it moonclipped, which I wish I had.

The things I had done were the following:

• Action job
• Fiber optic front sight
• V-notch rear sight
• Charge holes chamfered
• Chambers honed
• Forcing cone re-cut and polished for cast bullets
• Yoke and cylinder bearing surfaces polished
• Installed Nill-Griffe laminated combat grips with Rhomlas
• Asthetic line cut on the cylinder to prevent a "drag line" and one in front of the stop notches also to make it look good.

Good to know

It's nice to know the 620 is a decent gun. I would like to try some IDPA competitions at some stage, but I guess I can either index the cylinder. Or just buy another S&W.

Andy Griffin - that's a sweet gun. I've already started a wish-list of similar mods and upgrades.

Thanks for the input fellas.

Don't worry about that IL on that size gun. It ain't gonna happen if you leave the lock alone.....about as much chance as an ostrich crapping on your head when you fire it. Don't worry about the 2 part bbl. either. Just don't pay any attention to some internet experts.

Don't send me out to get a 620!

I looked over the last 4" 66 run - the 66-7 - with the two piece barrel. I loved the half lug, only buying a 686+ when the 5" Stocking Dealer Exclusive had come out the year before (Top below.). Still, I wanted a 4" .38/.357M - that new 620 was close. The fixed sight version, the 619 which replaced the 65, had the square conversion UM's Combat grips, while the 620 came with Hogues (I have a drawer full of them!). No matter - I'd probably get Ahrends wood for it anyway, like the ones that were stock on that 5" 686+ bellow. I pondered...

Skip ahead to early May '08 - I had just sold some Rugers and had elected to buy that 620. Oops... what's this - a '627 Pro' 8-shooter - and only $80 more? Spring loaded front sight sealed the deal - moonclip ready - would go with my PC JM 627 V-Comp. I came up with the $80 - but, not having enough for the long gun I had wanted any more, I grabbed a security NIB 4" 64 - and made it home - grinning like the Cheshire cat.



I love the 627 Pro... and still want a 620. I'm a shameless S&W glutton.

Congrats on a fine revolver - now get it some nice grips. The 5" 686+ above came with those Ahrends Square Conversion fg-ed and I added the retro targets/non-fg, both in cocobolo - either is $66 inc s/h. I've never shot a 'real' .357M in either revolver - just my wimpy ones - and .38s.

Stainz

I would guess that Diamondback 68's view is held by a number of revolver folks. They simply won't buy the IL or the 2 piece barrel.

I understand, Stainz. You are not as big a glutton as I am. I like S&W's, Rugers, any kind of gun, food..........I am pathetic...

I think that too many people have forgotten how accurate the Dan Wesson revolvers were and how they dominated silohuette shooting for many years. If you wanted a revolver that could group 1/2 inch at 50 yards, you bought a DW and mounted the long barrel on it and set the B/C gap to 0.003 inch.

The reason that the DW revolvers were so exceptionally accurate has been attributed to the way the barrel was mounted to the gun. You would mount the barrel in the frame, adjust the B/C gap with a shim provided, slide the barrel shroud on the gun, and then thread on and tighten the barrel nut at the end of the shroud. The result was a barrel that was under tension and tied to the frame at both ends. By doing this, the whipping produced when a round is fired is greatly reduced because the barrel is restrained at each end. Now, does this sound a bit familiar?

Unfortunately, I never could afford the DW 3 barrel kit when they were being made. Also couldn't afford to have a gunsmith fix whatever problems it came out of the factory with, for most of the production the DW revolvers had a miserable reputation for being properly timed out of the box.

Now, when I was in a position and had the interest to purchase a new revolver, I found that the model 620 was as close as I could come to a DW revolver today. It has NOT disappointed me one little bit. On two seperate occasions I have managed to shoot 3 shot groups at 40 feet in single action off a hard bench that I could cover with a dime. As hard as I have tried, I cannot come even close to duplicating this with my model 67 or with a rented 686. The first time I did this was when I was dialing in the sights for 38 spl. and I thought that it may have been a fluke. So, next time at the range I spent some time shooting the 620 in single action, which is something I don't normally do. Got another dime sized cloverleaf, 2 nickle sized near cloverleafs, and five 3 shot groups I could cover with a quarter. Also, if you take the time to read the Gunblast review, you'll see that they produced a 9/16 inch 5 shot grouping at 25 yards with the 620 with one ammunition, so it is one accurate revolver. Hopefully, people will wake up to the advantages of the suspended barrel and push S&W into producing a 6 1/2 inch and 8 3/8 inch versions of the 620. If they do that, I expect that the long barrel guns will group as tightly as the Dan Wesson guns could. Fact is, it is a superior method of mounting a barrel on a revolver.

BTW, make sure to try this for yourself when you get the chance. I was shooting Federal American Eagle 130 grain FMJ 38 spl. when I did this and the 620 really seems to like this ammo.

Now one tip. Get on the S&W website and order the Hogue Monogrip for the 500 Magnum. I found out very quickly the first time I shot my 620 with full power 357 Magnums that the Hogue Combat grip that the 620 comes with is too small. It only took 3 cylinders to start raising blisters on my strong hand. With that small grip, the 620 squirms a lot when shooting Magnums and it not only makes controlling muzzle flip difficult, the backstrap hammers your hand about as bad as a 75 mph fastball in an old worn out fielders mitt. I also found the trigger reach to be too short with the small grip mounted. The 500 Magnum grip slides right on to the frame and makes shooting Magnum loads enjoyable instead of painful.

PS, the 686 and the 620 both use the K/L frame round butt grip frame, which is shared with the 460 and 500 Magnums. So, if you want to experiment with grips, any round butt, or round to square conversion butt, will fit perfectly on the 620. If you want to pretty it up with wood, there is a huge array of options. However, I like my grips to give me TRACTION so my preference is for rubber even if it is a bit ugly.

Thanks for the feedback gents. This is good info.

scooter123 said:

On two seperate occasions I have managed to shoot 3 shot groups at 40 feet in single action off a hard bench that I could cover with a dime.
QUOTE]

That's nice shooting! If I shoot a group like that, my freinds will be hearing about for weeks.

And yes, although I haven't picked up the gun yet, I'm already shopping for grips and accessories. Unfortunately the one item I'm having a hard time finding is ammo. Most places in SoCal and Central Cal seem to be completely out of .38 and .357. I'm going to be bummed if I pick up my new gun and can't go straight to the range.

Click to expand...

Have a 686-3, 686-4, 686SSR, 66 no dash, 327PC TRR8 and none of them shoot any better than my 620, 38 & 357 158gr. SWC and 357 125gr. &158gr. JHP, may be (???) my favorite 357 to shoot realy hard to decide, but it's definetly a keeper love it.

620 2 piece barrel

I owned a 620
I was the fella who posted the 2 piece barrel that became a 3 piece.
It blew apart at a range shoot and had action/finish/tuned job from the factory. many people debated the metallurgy or overtorque of the barrel or whatever but the fact is i was lucky I was not injured! As was S/W!. IL I can deal with only because I have fired 1k plus rds from an IL gun and it has not malfunctioned but I fired 25rds from a 2 piece barrel and IT BLEW APART.
In and of itself the 620 felt very good in the hands. weight was well proportioned and it was a great addition with the 7 shot option but...then comes the 2 piece barrel. Get rid of the 2 piece barrel and I would love the remodeled 620.

buckyjames1 said:

I owned a 620
I was the fella who posted the 2 piece barrel that became a 3 piece.
It blew apart at a range shoot and had action/finish/tuned job from the factory. many people debated the metallurgy or overtorque of the barrel or whatever but the fact is i was lucky I was not injured! As was S/W!. IL I can deal with only because I have fired 1k plus rds from an IL gun and it has not malfunctioned but I fired 25rds from a 2 piece barrel and IT BLEW APART.
In and of itself the 620 felt very good in the hands. weight was well proportioned and it was a great addition with the 7 shot option but...then comes the 2 piece barrel. Get rid of the 2 piece barrel and I would love the remodeled 620.

Click to expand...

Damn. That sucks. And I thought that was just an urban/internet legend.

620- 2 piece barrels

I read somewhere recently that S&W will be discontuing the 2 piece barrels in the 620 series, as early as late summer. Has anyone else heard these rumors?
SM1357

I sincerely hope that S&W holds the line on the 2 piece barrels, it truly is a superior method of mounting a barrel on a revolver. The 620 is, IMO, the most accurate revolver that S&W has ever made. It may be personal bias but I am convinced that by using sandbags and shooting in single action from a seated position, I could could put a full cylinder through a 3/8 inch hole at 40 feet. I don't think that anyone will ever do that with a 686 or 627 simply because that barrel will whip too much.

However, I did see Bucky's post and it is concerning. S&W could improve the design of the barrel by either incorporating a small chamfer or larger radius into the diesign where the barrel cap is formed. Currently they use a sharp corner with a small radius and this creates a stress riser where a fracture can start. If they redesigned this transition to a 3/32 X 45 degree chamfer that stress riser would be greatly reduced and that chamfered surface could also be used to center the barrel in the shroud. Placing a 1/8 inch radius in this corner would also have a similar effect and not require the precision machining that the incorporation of a chamfer would require.

I'll also point out that the normal 1 piece barrels also have a square corner where the face of the barrel sits against the frame. I have seen postings of barrels on the 686 that have fractured at this corner in a manner nearly identical to Bucky's failure. To be honest these failures can mainly be attributed to failures of the metalurgy, NOT failures of the specific method of construction.

However, with a large diameter barrel cap, such as is used in the 620, it is much easier to "hide" design features that reduce stress risers than it is with a 1 piece barrel. If you want to add a simple 1/8 inch radius at a transition between diameters, you need to have a difference in diameters of at least 3/8 inch in order to have a 1/16 inch square seating flat at the mating surfaces. Doing this on a 1 piece barrel would result in some very heavy barrels or a return of tapered barrels for weight reduction. Do I need to repeat it, thin walled barrels do "whip" when restrained at only one end?

From an Engineering standpoint, the use of a thin walled barrel and a larger diameter thin walled shroud is an elegant solution to barrel whip. Dan Wesson figured this out in the late 60's and 40 years later it surprizes me that so many revolver shooters haven't learned this. Having the barrel supported at each end produces a more accurate barrel. It's why the premium, hand fitted, 1911 platform guns can be so accurate. It's also why the Dan Wesson revolvers were so desired by precision shooters when they were being made, in spite of a reputation for requiring the attention of a good gunsmith right out of the box to correct timing and cylinder trueing issues. People bought the Dan Wesson revolvers because when properly tuned, and well set up, they were nearly as accurate as a good rifle.

so here is a repost of 2 piece barrel Model 620

A few people has asked to post my original photos so here it goes.
Model 620
IL and 2 Piece barrel that became a 3 piece.
Metallurgy problem?
Barrel design problem?
Quality Control problem?
Only those smarter than me will know.
My 620 was upgraded to a 686 plus and so far I am happy. Got rid of the 2 piece barrel and no problems with the IL.