B/C Gap on Older 686-3

[Jeepster]

A local gun shop has a 686-3 for sale. I checked the cylinder with my feeler gauges and the b/c gap is .011. End shake is .001. I have 5 other 586/686s and the b/c gap is around .006 or so in all of them. Would a b/c gap of .011 indicate barrel erosion? I'm thinking maybe this gun has fired a lot of full power magnums in its life and I do not want to get a gun and then turn around and send it off to Smith&Wesson for 6 weeks or so to have the barrel turned in order to narrow the b/c gap. The dealer wants $550.00 for the gun. Thanks for replies.

 

[Jeepster]

A local gun shop has a 686-3 for sale. I checked the cylinder with my feeler gauges and the b/c gap is .011. End shake is .001. I have 5 other 586/686s and the b/c gap is around .006 or so in all of them. Would a b/c gap of .011 indicate barrel erosion? I'm thinking maybe this gun has fired a lot of full power magnums in its life and I do not want to get a gun and then turn around and send it off to Smith&Wesson for 6 weeks or so to have the barrel turned in order to narrow the b/c gap. The dealer wants $550.00 for the gun. Thanks for replies.

 

[Wayne M]

You can get a feel for the amount of firing it has done by looking at the top strap above the rear of the forcing cone. Lots of firing usually results in cutting in that location. When someone refers to "barrel erosion" I usually feel they are actually talking about "throat erosion." To actually erode the outside edge of the barrel would take more rounds than a couple people have the patience to fire. I've seen Smith revolvers with the gap so tight you needed to hold it up with bright light as a background to see if it was really there. Others I've seen wide enough it was no problem to see at all. If the endshake is acceptable(and it appears to be) I wouldn't worry about 0.011. Most of the time I don't even measure it(can't even tell you what it is on guns I've owned for several years), just take a look. Have not been dissapointed yet! The wider the gap(within reason, of course) the more you'll be able to shoot(particularly cast bullets) without binding. $550 is on the edge but comming more into line every day. Depends on where you are, I guess.

 

[Texas Roots]

Jeepster, unless you just have to have this gun, I wouldn't buy it. .011" is too wide for me even though it is on the outside edge of being within factory specs. I think if you sent it in, they may not even fix it since .011" is within their specs. Just my humble opinion.

 

[Nightowl]

I think that .011 b/c gap is too much. My gauge is goes up to .010 max. Just my .02 worth.

 

[john traveler]

A B-C gap of 0.011" with little or no measurable endshake could mean that someone has installed endshake washers to reduce an unacceptable endshake. Increased B-C gap is the result.

I too would pass on this revolver, as the price is on the high end for a marginal condition gun. Having the barrel set back and B-C gap refitted is expensive too.

 

[bountyhunter]

I have a 686-3 and I am under the prejudice that they were made back in the days when SW still tried to make them right. That being the case, I'd pass on one that's not in spec because it might mean somebody has screwed it up post creation.