586 no dash no M

[tmn1ahntoo]

Hi new to the forum. I've had several 586's though the years but now that I'm a little older I want to learn more about them. My previous 2 guns were nickel plated. I kind of gave them away because of money problems. So now I just bought a 586 no dash, no M. ADN 1817. Would like to know when it was built. Thanks. Andy

 

[Sailfish 40]

Nice gun. Looks like between Oct-Dec 1983.

 

[flintsghost]

The absence of the M means it hasn't gotten the upgraded hammer nose bushing that was replaced in those guns with an M. Many during initial manufacturing. That should be a recall item and S&W should allow you to return it to the factory for a new bushing. However all of the replacement bushings are stainless.

 

[Hapworth]

The absence of the M means it hasn't gotten the upgraded hammer nose bushing that was replaced in those guns with an M. Many during initial manufacturing. That should be a recall item and S&W should allow you to return it to the factory for a new bushing. However all of the replacement bushings are stainless.

Correct -- S&W replaces the hammer nose bushing, as well as the hammer nose itself, on their dime.

Not everyone experienced the primer back flow issue, and there's some debate about whether or not getting the "M" stamp affect value on a collectible-quality item.

Consensus leans toward getting the fix if the revolver might see defense use.

 

[Kernel Crittenden]

.... all of the replacement bushings are stainless.

That's interesting.

 

[tmn1ahntoo]

Thank you.

 

[akviper]

I was an armorer back in the day. Buy 100 rounds of Remington or Federal 125 grain 357 magnum ammo and run it through the gun. If the cylinder seizes then the M modification is needed if you want to shoot 357 in the gun. They ran all day long with 38 ammo but if you had the issue they would choke on 357.

If your gun seizes you may need a rubber or plastic mallet to get the cylinder open.

I owned two 686s that needed the M modification and I fixed all our department guns.

I picked up a four inch 586 no dash a few years ago that did not need the fix. I runs fine with any 357 ammo.

 

[tmn1ahntoo]

I'm liking the idea of going ahead with the recall. It is a safety factor. As for effecting the value, I bought it as a shooter not as a collectible. As you can see the gun has seen some use, but it seems to be tight.

 

[ralph7]

akviper;138905342]I was an armorer back in the day. Buy 100 rounds of Remington or Federal 125 grain 357 magnum ammo and run it through the gun.

Are you saying there are no issues with the 158 grain ammo?

 

[Hapworth]

I'm liking the idea of going ahead with the recall. It is a safety factor. As for effecting the value, I bought it as a shooter not as a collectible. As you can see the gun has seen some use, but it seems to be tight.

I had it done last month; was a breeze with customer service, they knew exactly what I was calling about, sent a label, and the gun was back to me inside of two weeks.

They will also perform function checks and if any of the easy fixes are off, like endshake, they'll likely attend to it gratis (they did on mine). Don't be surprised if they replace springs, too, so if you love the current spring tension/break-in, consider swapping out with some expendables before sending it.

Be prepared, though, if S&W finds something significantly out of spec, or undiscovered damage making the firearm dangerous, you'll have to work with them to determine next steps.

 

[Hapworth]

Are you saying there are no issues with the 158 grain ammo?

The traditional Fed and Rem .357 125s tend to be the hottest and likeliest to produce the back flow issue; this doesn't mean no other grain could, just that if the issue's present, the 125s are likeliest to produce it.

 

[Yorkie Man]

I also have a 586 no dash without the modification and just last week I contacted S&W and inquired about having mine updated. They responded by e-mail telling me that if the hammer nose moves freely in the bushing with the hammer all the way down it would be alright. I have two other 686's that we updated at the PD I worked at and one of those would lock up with the Federal 125 gr loads before it was updated. I have fired the same loads through the 586 without any ill effect. I got the impression from my response from S&W that they were not interested in updating mine.

 

[armorer951]

refit

Refit parts, including blued carbon steel and stainless bushings, hammer noses, springs, rivets, and necessary tools were provided to some factory armorers to upgrade department and officer owned L-frames.

After the parts were replaced, guns were test fired with Remington 158 gr .357 ammunition, also provided by S&W.

Record sheets which showed the serial and model number of each re-fit revolver were submitted to S&W after the work was completed.

 

[Kernel Crittenden]

I'm liking the idea of going ahead with the recall. It is a safety factor. As for effecting the value, I bought it as a shooter not as a collectible.....

I think the notion that the S&W Modification to M586/686's could lower value comes from the fact that the Safety Conversion Ruger does to their Old Model Blackhawk does have a BIG effect on value. Unconverted OMB's sell for way more.

But the comparison isn't fair. The Ruger conversion changes the trigger pull and other aspects of how the gun functions. The S&W conversion is totally invisible to the end user, and doesn't change the human-to-gun interface in any way.

In fact, if they weren't marked with a "M" you'd have no way of even knowing the modification had been done. Has the market price of unmodified OMB's created a feeling in the gun community that ANY recall or modification to a gun lowers it's value?

If we ever do see a large price difference between modified M586/686's and unmodified guns we may have RUGER collectors to blame.

 

[bananaman]

I enjoy my 586 no dash. Got it in a trade a few years back. Came with factory stocks/grips. Has scruffy Herrett grips on it, which are nice and comfy! Bob P.S. no M

 

[spad124]

I had it done last month; was a breeze with customer service, they knew exactly what I was calling about, sent a label, and the gun was back to me inside of two weeks.

They will also perform function checks and if any of the easy fixes are off, like endshake, they'll likely attend to it gratis (they did on mine). Don't be surprised if they replace springs, too, so if you love the current spring tension/break-in, consider swapping out with some expendables before sending it.

Be prepared, though, if S&W finds something significantly out of spec, or undiscovered damage making the firearm dangerous, you'll have to work with them to determine next steps.

I sent my 686-1 in for the recall in October 2014. I've owned the 686 since new in 1988. My experience is the same as Hapworth's. The recall work was very professional and I can tell S&W took the time to go over the action and clean up a few things. My 686 is nicer now than it has ever been.

I agonized and overthought sending it in for the recall, but now I'm very glad I did.

As I understand the need for the recall, certain Federal 125gr .357s used a softer primer and because some bushing holes were oversized the primer would flow back into the hole in the bushing tying up the gun. The replacement bushing and hammer nose are more of a matched fit.

 

[model70hunter]

I think the notion that the S&W Modification to M586/686's could lower value comes from the fact that the Safety Conversion Ruger does to their Old Model Blackhawk does have a BIG effect on value. Unconverted OMB's sell for way more.

But the comparison isn't fair. The Ruger conversion changes the trigger pull and other aspects of how the gun functions. The S&W conversion is totally invisible to the end user, and doesn't change the human-to-gun interface in any way.

In fact, if they weren't marked with a "M" you'd have no way of even knowing the modification had been done. Has the market price of unmodified OMB's created a feeling in the gun community that ANY recall or modification to a gun lowers it's value?

If we ever do see a large price difference between modified M586/686's and unmodified guns we may have RUGER collectors to blame.

I agree on the S&W recall not being an issue. My Bro has 2 586's 1 with th M an one without. The unmodified one was Dad's gun, he and I shot it many times with out issue.

I did get Dad's 3 screw Ruger Single Six. Dad was the 2nd owner. The original owner did his own lighten the trigger mod. Dad bought the gun so the trigger guy had ER and Doc money for the bills. It was truely a hair trigger. Dad liked it but I always felt it unsafe. The 1st thing I did was send it in for the trigger mod. The gun shot the foot of the 1st owner and once almost shot me when in HS I let a friend shoot it, he turned from the target with gun cocked pointing at my middle. I turned sideways and moved back quickly, just milliseconds before the gun went off.

Knowing the gun had the malfunction saved me. Factory mods will never be an issue with me.

The replacement trigger in the Ruger works well, I've taught many folks how to safely shoot a pistol with it.

Ruger sent the original trigger back with the gun. I will never pass it on to my son with the gun.

 

[Kernel Crittenden]

I believe the Ruger Blackhawk safety mod was to add a transfer bar, so the gun could not fire unless a finger was on the trigger pulling it fully to the rear. It was to prevent the gun from going off if it was dropped, or if a finger was not otherwise on the trigger.

It had nothing, specifically, to do with "hair" triggers or reduced trigger pulls. Though, it would fix a lot things that could go wrong with bad trigger jobs.

 

[K Frame Keith]

I purchased a 686 the first year they were released and and fired it until the firing pin bushing became an issue. It was repaired and M stamped by a police armorer friend who also did an outstanding action job on the weapon. If you plan to use the gun, get the bushing updated, the mod is invisible.

 

[model70hunter]

I believe the Ruger Blackhawk safety mod was to add a transfer bar, so the gun could not fire unless a finger was on the trigger pulling it fully to the rear. It was to prevent the gun from going off if it was dropped, or if a finger was not otherwise on the trigger.

It had nothing, specifically, to do with "hair" triggers or reduced trigger pulls. Though, it would fix a lot things that could go wrong with bad trigger jobs.

Yes the mod was the transfer bar setup.

The gent my Dad bought it from lightened the trigger until it would fire with a slight pull or even fire if one pushed on the side of the trigger. Totally unsafe.

Fine for small game but still dangerous. I sent it to Ruger for the free mod so the gun would be safer and it is.