66 vs 686 for shooting: experienced shooters?

[YeshuaIsa53]

Would love to hear a comparison between these two guns for shooting.
A comparison from those that have experience shooting both with lots of rounds would be appreciated. Just curious.

 

[27 Man]

I have 66s and 686s, both in various barrel lengths. There are no plans to part with any of them. However, if you are planning to do a lot of magnum shooting I would use the L frame gun. They have superb actions and are super accurate. The K frames are lighter and easier for carry. It kind of depends what your plans are for it. Get both.

 

[windypoint]

I have both and find the k frame 66 and 19 fit my wife's hand extremely well and I like carrying the 66. If you are going to regularly shoot heavy magnum loads then the 686 is the one to own. My wife shoots the 66 with 38 loads and has great confidence with them.

 

[old bear]

My M-19, is a joy to carry and shoot with hot 38 special ammo and downloaded .357 Magnum ammo. It is not so much fun to shoot with full charge .357 Magnum ammo. My 586 is not bad to carry and is a joy to shoot with both 38 special and .357 Magnum ammo.

If you want a revolver to carry a lot and shoot a little go with the M-66. If you want to shoot lots of full charge .357 Magnum ammo get the 686.

 

[TDC]

I agree with all the comments above.

I own them both and shoot them both. I believe it is all a matter of preference and personal choice. The L frame is stronger and the K frame is smaller.

The best idea is to own them both with a nice 5" 27 thrown in for good measure...

 

[K Frame Keith]

I have an early 686 and I will not part with it. A friend, an "old school" S&W Police armorer did an action job on it and it is very smooth. The K frames do have a certain feel about them though.

 

[papajohn428]

I think the 686 has a better, more solid feel to it. I like a muzzle-heavy gun, one that balances just ahead of my knuckles when using a two-handed hold, but I don't really care for long barrels. To me, a 4" 686 is about as good as it gets. My first 686 digested 46K rounds of full-power 357 ammo before I traded it off, now I have a 3" version I really like. The 66 is a great gun, a little lighter to cart around, but it won't stand up to hot ammo as well as the 686 will.

I carried a 66 on duty years ago, but never shot it quite as well as I did the 686. Of course, the 686 was a personal gun, and I shot it in competition, too. Mighta been a factor.

 

[chief38]

I own both of the Blued version...... the M586 and the M19 both in 6" barrel lengths. When I do some serious Magnum shooting, the M586 is the ticket, but for plinking and target shooting the M19 gets the job. Both GREAT GUNS in their own right, but to me you NEED to get BOTH!

Chief38

 

[kshock]

I shot competition with a 6 inch model 19. To me, even with light target loads the 19 had to much barrel whip when shooting fast. Switched to a 586 and like it alot better. The extra weight of that underlug gives it a slight muzzle heavy feel that tames the muzzle whip much better when shooting fast strings. I also shoot custom PPC guns. My first gun was a tricked out Model 13. I now shoot a custom 686. The grips on both are the same...I just prefer the heavier frame of the L frames.

 

[cantpickone]

I have a 686 and find it to be a perfect design for shooting. Great balance and accuracy, but too bulky and heavy for concealed carry.
I have a model 19 and it is quite decent to shoot, light enough for concealed carry but still bulky for that purpose.
Both are great guns, but as you asked about the comparison only about shooting the 2, the 686 is better if that is the only criteria IMO.

 

[jhde69]

I find the 66 goes with me when I hike the woods. 686 is a great range revolver but a bit heavy to carry. With the 66 use 38's at the range and 357's to carry,hard to beat.

 

[18DAI]

I have multiple examples of both the 66 and 686, in various barrel lengths and dash variants.

For shooting for pleasure or competition I prefer a 4" 66-2. I find the 66's to handle faster, point more naturally and more pleasing to shoot. I prefer non recessed cylinders for ease and speed of reloading using speed loaders.

Nothing against the 686's. I have some 686's that are very nice and new shooters seem to love them, especially when shooting 38's. The 3" 686 CS1 is a crowd favorite. I only purchased the 686's to keep the wear and tear off my K-frame magnums or because they were rare examples with features I like.

My most shot 66 is a 4" 66-2 that was a LEO trade in. I have very little in it. It also happens to be the most accurate revolver I own. Sub 1 inch groups at 15 yards are the norm with this revolver when using quality ammunition. It frequently makes me look good at IDPA matches.

I read much about the alleged "weakness" of K-frame magnums when fired with alot of 357 ammunition. I don't buy it based on my experience. If you can afford the amount of 357 ammunition required to shoot loose a pre lock 66 then you can easily afford a replacement revolver and will have more than got your money out of the one you used up.

I don't think you can go wrong with either a 66 or 686, pre lock of course. My 0.02 Regards 18DAI

 

[brucev]

The first revolver I ever bought was a 19-2. I loved it like a first child. After graduating from seminary, I gave it to my father. Over the years... someone else sold it. And... I became enamored w/ the N-Frame 28's... and the 586/686's. Today I own N and L frames... and am looking for a nice K frame 19-2 or -3. For my perposes and in my experience, I've always preferred a 4" K-Frame 19/66 for just about every use. However, when I was shooting matches, I must say that my best scores were fired using a box stock 4" 686. For sustained use with zombie level handloads, I'd opt for a 686... or just reach for one of my 6" 28's. Now... for the best of all worlds I would opt for a 4" nickle plated model 19 with the white outline rear sight and the red ramp front sight. Why? That's what I first bought and later gave to my father. One day... I'll own one like it again. JMHO. Sincerely. brucev.

 

[roaddog28]

I have multiple examples of both the 66 and 686, in various barrel lengths and dash variants.

For shooting for pleasure or competition I prefer a 4" 66-2. I find the 66's to handle faster, point more naturally and more pleasing to shoot. I prefer non recessed cylinders for ease and speed of reloading using speed loaders.

Nothing against the 686's. I have some 686's that are very nice and new shooters seem to love them, especially when shooting 38's. The 3" 686 CS1 is a crowd favorite. I only purchased the 686's to keep the wear and tear off my K-frame magnums or because they were rare examples with features I like.

My most shot 66 is a 4" 66-2 that was a LEO trade in. I have very little in it. It also happens to be the most accurate revolver I own. Sub 1 inch groups at 15 yards are the norm with this revolver when using quality ammunition. It frequently makes me look good at IDPA matches.

I read much about the alleged "weakness" of K-frame magnums when fired with alot of 357 ammunition. I don't buy it based on my experience. If you can afford the amount of 357 ammunition required to shoot loose a pre lock 66 then you can easily afford a replacement revolver and will have more than got your money out of the one you used up.

I don't think you can go wrong with either a 66 or 686, pre lock of course. My 0.02 Regards 18DAI

Again, a great response and I agree. My 66-4 4 inch is among my most accurate revolvers. I have a older 686-2 4 inch but I am better with my 66.
The K frame magnum fits me like a glove.
Regards,
Howard

 

[BUFF]

I have lots of both K and L frame .357 Magnums and have shot a few of them very, very much.

This is a very easy comparison to make because the K and L frame guns were designed with the exact same size grip frame and exact same size trigger reach and dimensions. You can set up one of each in, say, .357 Magnum, use the same stocks, and the same triggers, and have the same sight pictures. All you will really find any different is the handling characteristics- the L frame will hold steadier because it is heavier altogether, and the L frame will recoil much less firing the same cartridge loading both because the whole gun is heavier, and because so much of the gun's extra total weight is out-in-front, in that heavy underlugged barrel.

 

[C Islander]

I've got a 19 and a 586. It would be a tough call as to which one shoots better. The obvious answer is to get one of each. If that isn't possible, try to find one of each to shoot and see which one you like best.

 

[bananaman]

Steve, J&G has 66's for $469, LEO trade ins. Bob

 

[Hawgleg44]

Back when I was a teenager, my father and I shot pin and plate matches every week. We used a 6" 686 highly customized by Karl Sokol at Karl Sokol Chestnut Mountian Sports Gunsmithing Services . I still have it today and shoot it occasionally.

On the other hand, I have 20+ K-frames that I shoot all the time. I've competed and taken revolver classes, always using my K-frames. I have large hands and still find the K-frame fit my hand better and also seem to balance a lot better.

Now, about the .357mag loads beating up the K-frames too much. Yes, if you are going to shoot a lot of them. Back when I turned 21, Karl built me a 3" M65 for a carry gun. I shot that revolver, and pretty much only that revolver, for several years. I always shot my 158gr cast bullet reloads. Back then, when I was much younger and dumber, I didn't believe in shooting anything but max loads. After years and years of doing that, and tens of thousands of absolute max reloads, it was really starting to loosen up, and all that Bullseye powder was causing quite a bit of flame cutting on the face of the cylinder and topstrap.

I'm not saying that an L-frame would not have the flame cutting, but after 4 or 5x more rounds through it than the M65, the 686 is still as tight as the day Karl was done building it into the competition gun it still is today.

If you are going to shoot primarily .38's and occasionally shoot a box of .357's, I'd recommend going with the K-frame. If you want to shoot mostly .357's, you really don't have much of a choice. If you are a high volume shooter, you will shoot the K-frame loose.

Whatever you choose make sure you get a pre-lock example. I've heard it said that only lightweight S&W revolvers have an issue with the lock. NOT SO! I had an all SS S&W revolver lock up while firing target loads. I will never trust a S&W with the internal lock to protect myself. Either buy used or buy a new Ruger. New S&W's are a liability and lawsuit waiting to happen. One day, someone will attempt to fire to save their own life and need more than one round. Unfortunately, they will only be able to get one off and the responding LEO's will find them with a S&W revolver in their cold, dead hands with the internal lock engaged. Hell, even the *** bad guy who kills them won't take the piece of **** since it locks up while firing!

That's not some sick fantasy, it's going to happen. And with the internal lock such a well know problem, when it does happen, it's going to be the end of S&W as we know it.

 

[geotech]

I own or have owned 37 examples of the Model 66, 19, and 686 and 586 shooters over the years. All are exceptional! If you plan a large diet of full house .357Mag, I suggest the 686. Of course I prefer pre-lock and no MIMs, and the best out of the box 686, IMO, is the 3" CS-1 all-around. Longer barrel, of course, if this will be a bullseye gun.