6 inch 686 vs 66

[caelo4]

I've been considering a longer barreled revolver for a while now. It would be primarily used for some short range hunting and an occasional strong sided ranch carry gun around my place. I'm not looking to get into a debate on various dash models, and I currently own a few K and L frames so I know a little about the differences in size. I am mainly interested in some wisdom on the benefits of the 6 inch barrel on the 686 vs the 66.

Edit: I know certain pistols have perfect dimensions, so I'm looking for a comparison between the two in balance, feel, weight, looks, 7 shot vs 6 etc.

 

[BC38]

Well, every extra inch of barrel is good for another 50-100 fps, depending on the specific ammo you're using.
The extra couple of inches of sight radius also improves most people's accuracy a little as well.
On the other hand the extra couple of inches of barrel also makes clearing leather a little more awkward and difficult for most people.

 

[JimBianchi]

686 vs 66

The older pre lock 686 are very beautiful pistols, i love the full lug.

The 66 is also a great shooter, but I would buy it over the other only based a screaming good deal.

 

[Benchrest1]

I'm a big fan of the 686 and have a few with a 6" barrel. For range work I like 5 & 6" barrels, but for carry I would rather have a 4".

 

[Chukar60]

I like the full lug on my 4" 686. It balances well and shoots fantastic. I don't own a single revolver with a barrel longer than 5" and only one 5".
I have shot several 6" revolvers that belong to friends. I liked the 6" 66 much better than a 6" 686. The 686 just seemed front heavy to me and I did not like the balance.
But that is just me. i don't like long barrels much at all.

 

[BLUEDOT37]

This doesn't directly address your question but I've found the balance of 5" barrels a nice compromise between too long & too short. A little less wheeledly than a 6".

They still make the "old TALO" 3-5-7 Series 686+ in a 5". The L-frame is also a nice compromise size between the K & N frames, yet it's plenty strong. Seven shoots is always better than 6.

The new 66-8 (good revolvers) only comes in a 2-3/4" or 4" but is stronger than the old versions.

If you're going to shoot it a lot & are set on a 6" bbl. then the 686 would be the better choice, IMO. If not, get a 66.

.
5" TALO 686+, (42 oz.)
.

.

 

[The Gila Bender]

I'm a big bore revolver guy. .44 Special, .44 Mag., and .45 Colt are my thing. I wanted a gun for casual revolver steel matches and didn't want a .45 ACP Model 25/625, so the 6-inch 686 became the obvious choice. It's more stout than the Model 19/66 and I prefer the heft of the full lug and the longer sight radius of the 6" barrel. I bought an older 686-4 pre-MIM. I see some guys shooting 4-inch 66's and 625's, but I'm quite satisfied with my slick 686 for range and competition shooting. Carry, defense, and hunting are separate applications entirely, so it depends on your intended use. I have handled a 4" 66 and think it's best use is for carry and defense, but I wouldn't pound a ton of rounds through a K frame.

 

[leonardocarrillo]

Hola,yo tengo un 66-1 y un 686-3 los dos con cañon de 6",ambos son precisos y confiables,pero el 66 es mas liviano y para portar o caminar por el campo puede ser un poco mas comodo.
Perdon que escribo en español pero no hablo ingles.
Gracias.

 

[sandog]

My brother had a 4 inch 66, it was certainly easier to pack than a 6 inch L frame, but I couldn't hit near as well with it as my 686.
As others have stated the full lug 686 is a bit muzzle heavy, but that seems to help.
My old M 17 .22 was really accurate, but I can honestly say my early production 686 is the most accurate handgun I've ever owned.
Just about every load I've tried in it groups around the 1 inch mark.

 

[colt_saa]

Obviously the Model 686 is more muzzle heavy, this will be a big benefit if rapid followup shots are required.

The Model 66 is considerably lighter and if this is going to be mostly carried that might be a important consideration.

I see no benefit of 7 rounds over 6 rounds for your needs. The odds of firing 7 shots in a row during hunting without having time to reload are Extremely small

Considering just these two models, in your shoes I would be looking for a Model 66

If we opened the floor up to all Smith and Wesson 357 Magnum revolvers, I would opt for one of the 5" Model 327s. Due to the Scandium alloy frames, these 5" N-frames weigh in about the same as a 4" Model 19/66

Pictured above is my Pinto Model 327 TRR8. There is also the M&P Model 327 R8, Plus the now discontinued Model 327 JM. All are 5' revolvers. The 327 JM shaves a little more weight substituting a Titanium cylinder for the steel one. The JM model is not in the running, because of the small number manufactured it is seeing collect type pricing. The 2 other variations on the 5" Model 327 are current production firearms

They happen to be 8 shot revolvers, but that was not part of the decision to go this route.

 

[scooter123]

I have a model 67-1 and I would "pound" a ton of lead thru it. So what does this have to do with the OP. Simple, a 4 inch Tapered Barrel K Frame has a balance that is unmatched by any other revolver. As a result I have been spoiled by the Lotus 7 of revolvers.

Obviously my vote would go to the 6 inch Model 19. While it's not a model you will want to put a lot of 357 Magnum thru it will shoot magnums when needed and your stated use will not result in damage from over using Magnums. The reason for this choice is simple. The model 19 will have much less Swing Weight and this means you will be able to change the point of aim more rapidly than with a model 686. If you are carrying it you will also find not having that needless full length barrel lug will be much more comfortable at the end of the day.

However, if you decide to take up shooting steel silhouettes I would recommend the 686 because it will hold up much better when shooting Magnums is essential.

PS; My 357 Magnum L frame is the model 620. If you are wondering why, it features a semi lugged 2 piece tensioned barrel assembly.

 

[roo_ster]

When I read "short range hunting" I think the revolver might see some pretty stout loads. And while I love me some K-frame goodness, the L-frame is the go-to for hot .357mag loads no matter the bbl length.

 

[357 shooter]

My 686-4 6" is my favorite Smith of all the 357s revolvers I own or have owned in the past. In the 66 I like the 4" which I also have a pair of. The 686 6" is still the magnum I shoot best with. Any magnum load I have ever fired in it was pretty mild even with wood grips.

 

[Jim Watson]

Do you think there would be a place in the lineup for a half lug 686? Maybe even a tapered barrel.

 

[rockquarry]

There is probably little or no difference in accuracy between the two revolvers, but the under barrel full-length lug on the L-frame adds weight. That may make it a bit muzzle heavy, but it also makes it somewhat easier for many (particularly less skilled shooters) to shoot well in comparison with the 66. A very skilled handgun shooter would likely see no difference in shootability between the two guns.

 

[bigggbbruce]

There is probably little or no difference in accuracy between the two revolvers, but the under barrel full-length lug on the L-frame adds weight. That may make it a bit muzzle heavy, but it also makes it somewhat easier for many (particularly less skilled shooters) to shoot well in comparison with the 66. A very skilled handgun shooter would likely see no difference in shootability between the two guns.

I have a 44 Stealth Hunter.. 7 1/2" with changeable barrel weights. 100 yard shots off hand are very doable.

A big long barrel hangs on target steadier than a shorter lighter barrel.

 

[Mehutch]

686 and 586 S&W are the best shooting iron's I've ever owned. It will last several life times. Just buy it!

 

[caelo4]

Thanks so much for the wondeful pics and insightful replies. I think I'll probably go for the 686 over the 66 6 inch. For some unknown reason I prefer the late 90's to early 2000 guns and there are a few 686-5 that would fit in my collection nicely on gunbroker. I know they have the frame mounted firing pin and MIM parts, which some folks avoid like the plague, but they speak to me on a level I cant explain. There seems to be a few hundred dollar markup on the 7 shot vs the 6 shot, so I'll have to see what the budget/wife allows. I'll post some pics whenever I decide to pull the trigger.

 

[stansdds]

6 inch barrel vs 4 inch barrel, the 6 inch barrel will give you more muzzle velocity and a longer sight radius. The long sight radius makes accurate shooting a bit easier. As for how much more velocity, there are a number of variables, but generally 100 to as much as 200 fps difference between a 4 inch barrel and a 6 inch barrel.

The 66 will be lighter and easier to carry, but it does come with the potential for the barrel throat to crack.

The 686 was designed for lots of 357 Magnum shooting, but the full underlug makes the muzzle heavy with barrel lengths of 6 and 8 3/8 inches.

If you are planning to shoot lots of magnum loads, I would have to say the 686 is the better revolver.