586 v 686

[Canuck44]

Two months ago I bought a no dash 686 with a 105.14mm barrel - it is supposed to be 4". The gun is legal up here. It is a former US Custom Service revolver as evidenced by the CS above the serial number of the gun. It has oddly enough adjustable rear sights.

I use the gun as back up to my GP-100 for IDPA SSR Division. Neither revolver gives anything up to the other. Both have excellent triggers and sights. The 686 is exactly one ounce heavier with Hogue rubber grips on the gun.

The 686 no dash is miles ahead of the new 686 Smith is now putting out regarding overall finish.

Take Care

Bob

 

[muddocktor]

Guys, this thread was necro'd from almost 3 years ago.

 

[kemper]

Really ?????

I am talking about early 586's guys, not the new production ones. MacA evidentally you dont know much about the 586's.
Eric

So to be clear, you are saying that a 586 no dash is much better made than a 686 no dash or for that matter a 686-1 ?

Please tell us how a 586 made around the same time as a 686 of the same era is superior ?

 

[jglsprings]

Kemper , it's a dead thread.

Look at the datetime stamps.

 

[Sully8548]

May be a dead thread but the 586 and 686 are both awesome revolvers. Best shooting hand guns I own. Best looking too.

 

[rwsmith]

Then I'll say this.....

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 a 686 no dash from the early 80s. I humbly disagree with your assessment. They were/are the same gun in different materials. If the current 686s have MIM parts, so do the 586s. The workmanship is also identical with examples from the same time period. And the 686s didn't have locks until other guns got locks. I have a beautiful specimen with a perfect trigger. I don't want to get a 'trigger job' because it would probably mess it up. It's that good. And i Stain. Steel abrades, then bluing wears off.

 

[BAM-BAM]

Basicly the same gun if the dash numbers match...........

I take my 4" 686 on my walks into Penn's Woods

I'd take my 4" 586 to a BBQ............my 1996 586-6 (IIRC) is a round butt,pre MIM with hammer mounted firing pin....wears a set of Spegel Extended Boot Grips in Birdseye Maple....... it would hold its own w/ a "Snake"at any BBQ from Massachusetts to Texas.

 

[44wheelman]

So this is a comparison of stainless vs. carbon steel thread now?

In general terms, stainless is tougher and more abrasion resistant. The nickel and chromium in stainless is tough and gummy to machine compared to carbon steel. As a result, it is much easier to get a good finish on carbon steel, and cutting speeds are higher.

 

[bananaman]

This is another thread that has been around quite a while. I made a post on it 03-2012. But since then I added a 686-3. They get along well together, but don't go to the range at the same time. Bob

 

[dwever]

The 686 is a K Frame the 586 is an L Frame. There are production differences that make the 586 L version a bit stouter such as a reinforced forcing cone, beefed up frame, full-length barrel underlug, and non-counterbored cylinder. Also, in the Talo special edition currently being sold, most if not all of the 686 MIM parts have been replaced by forged steel as you can tell from the trigger and hammer below. This latter point is also true of the current Talo .44 Magnum snubbie.

Generally speaking, in the extra-tuned 586 L-Comp versions, I have handled two of those and they have superior action to 686's, and that 586 feels closer to a Performance Center 627 of which I own two of the latter as well as a PC 629. No surprise there as the current S&W website brags that the 586 L-Comp's action is Performance Center tuned. (Product: Model 586 L-Comp); and, that Talo 586 will run you North of $1,000 if you can find one new.

The current S&W Talo 586 is a 7-Shot with a 3" ported barrel moon clip ready with tritium front site on the S&W web page (pictured below).

 

[Mike_Fontenot]

The 686 is a K Frame the 586 is an L Frame.

S&W customer support says that all the medium frame guns currently being made are L frame, including the 686.

 

[dwever]

S&W customer support says that all the medium frame guns currently being made are L frame, including the 686.

I stand corrected. Back when our agency had the 686 I believe they were K frames and made an assumption. I think the MIMs/Forged steel comment still stands as well as the Performance Center action on the 586 L-Comp (and beastly price). I've been an N frame only user for years (the L Frame 586 next to my current favorite carry N frame below; and, they both weigh 37 oz.), but the 586 L-Comp may be my first L-Frame.

As far as all medium frame guns currently being all L frame, the S&W web site says their 617's are still K frames as well as the Model 67.

From the web site, on the Model 67 page, see "Overview", quote: "The K-Frame revolver is one of the most important innovations in Smith & Wesson history and was built specifically to handle the .38 S&W Special cartridge. Since its introduction in 1899, the K-Frame has been a favorite for military and police professionals as well as target shooters and enthusiasts. Today's K-Frame is available in .22 LR and .38 S&W Special."

 

[rwsmith]

Stainless machining....

So this is a comparison of stainless vs. carbon steel thread now?

In general terms, stainless is tougher and more abrasion resistant. The nickel and chromium in stainless is tough and gummy to machine compared to carbon steel. As a result, it is much easier to get a good finish on carbon steel, and cutting speeds are higher.

You are right, machining stainless is a bear especially with some alloys. Improvements in techniques and tooling have also made a difference. By the time the 686 rolled around, most of these problems had been dealt with. I don't have any complaints about the machining on my 686. I remember to make a thread they had to use an 'interrupted die' which had an offset in the cutting edge or it would tear the thread off in the process of cutting it. I'm sure the alloy they use in guns is higher in machinability than old 304 SS.

 

[rwsmith]

Huh???

The 686 is a K Frame the 586 is an L Frame.

The 686 IS an L frame. It is heavier built that my model 10 that is a K frame. The model 19 was a beefed up K frame in .357 magnum.

 

[caleb4387]

The 686 was always an l frame

 

[BAM-BAM]

The 686 was always an l frame

No the I-frame was the.....IIRC... Ladysmith bicycle revolver in .22lr.......not the manly 686.... Distinguished Combat Magnum...firing the .357 magnum!!!!!!




Sorry sometime I just can't help myself or anyone else for that matter!!!

 

[jspick]

The 686 IS an L frame. It is heavier built that my model 10 that is a K frame. The model 19 was a beefed up K frame in .357 magnum.

Actually since we are being picky, if you mean the K frame 19 being beefed up by having better quality metal than the older k frames that is accurate. But if you mean it has more metal then than is not true. The 19 is the same K frame, size wise, as the rest of the K frames.

John

 

[Goodoljake]

586+. Nail in the coffin.

 

[Mickey D]

I like tacos.

 

[Twilight Onearmshooter]

586 and 686 revolvers are both L frames. My Talo 686 plus 7" barrel round butt shoots most wonderful. I need to change the round butt grip to square butt conversion Ahrends grips. Square butt grips are "fastback" style. More support to the hand. My hand gets more tiresome with a round frame or a Cattleman Birds-head grip on my Uberti revolver.
I have a 586-8 6" on order. I am saving the best for last.