Alpha_Mutt
Member
How is the 586 different from the 686?
586 v 686
- Thread starter Alpha_Mutt
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
JCS&W
US Veteran
586 also comes in nickel.
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 27,669
- Reaction score
- 21,355
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
Classics Revolvers - Smith & Wesson
and the L-Comp:
Product: Model 586 L-Comp
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.
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.
trauma1
Member
blued or stainless. that is it.
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 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
bananaman
Member
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
SixGunHunter
Member
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.
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
lhump1961
US Veteran
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...
semperfi71
US Veteran
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.
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.
Mickey D
Member
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
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
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! 
Last edited:
Snapping Twig
Member
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.
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.
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.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
