Collector mindset..N and K frames

[Retired W4]

I don't consider my 3" 686-6 TALO part of my collection but it does fill a space in my home defense plan. It's a little heavy for me to carry but it fits nicely in it's nook in the kitchen. The Hillary hole is plugged and the fact that it's not P and R'ed doesn't bother me a bit.

 

[Birdhunter6]

S&W brought out the L because Colt Troopers and various Rugers that would take a steady diet of light bullet .357s were already on the market. Some considered them better revolvers for "carry" than the N frame.

 

[Muley Gil]

While the smaller K frame grip fits more folks than the larger N frame grip, if I recollect correctly, the weight of a 4 M586/686 is the same as a 4" M27/28.

If a 4" round butt L frame .357 Magnum WITHOUT the full lug barrel had been more common, I would have bought one.

I personally dislike the balance of the FL L frame revolver. To each his own.

 

[stansdds]

I have found that 4 inch barrel revolvers with a full length under lug balance well in my hands, but with 6 or 8 inch barrels, the full length under lug makes them overly muzzle heavy for extended periods of shooting from a standing position.

 

[hkcavalier]

Definitely go get one! I only have one, a 686-4 6" Plus model. In the rarity scale it's "uncommon" I suppose.

That's what neat about the L frames, you have everything from extremely common configurations (and new production) to very rare variants, particularly some of those distributor specials in the '90s.

 

[Jeep 1]

My collection is almost 95% magnums from 44 magnums to 22 magnums.
I lean extremely heavy towards N frames which I only have one non 44 magnum N frame and that is a Model 625 1989 model 5"
bbl.

So I grew up a Dirty Hairy fan which explains my love for Model 29...

I had deep connections with both Wayne Hazelrigg and Dick Metcalf, Both of which were deeply rooted in the conception of the Model 629. They were both my mentors in the Smith and Wesson World.
Wayne put together one of the foremost 629 collections ever assembled which put me in a unique situation because I was able to spend a lot of time with Wayne both looking at his collection and shooting them, So that explains my love for the 629

When I was shooting the Masters competitively along with other competitions I was shooting a 6 inch Colt Python which I had two of because one of them was always sent back to the factory to be repaired, because I would knocked them out of time, Dick Metcalf said to me why don't you just buy a L frame Model 686 and be done with it! That was in 1989, I sold my Pythons bought a New 686 no dash and have never looked back or had to have it repaired and it has been shot approximately a quarter million times and probably dry fired that many times and is still one of my favorite guns to shoot.

K frames, I have an extreme love affair with Model 648 and 648-1 22 Magnums I don't know how many one guy should have but I know how many I've got.....
I have a few other very unique Model 66's, Model 19's Model 617's in my collection.

I have a knack for collecting freaks, Mostly by accident! I have found some very unique Smith and Wessons from CS-1 to One of the kind in all three frame groups.

My absolute favorite quote is from the Great Roy Jinks,
" With Smith and Wesson all things are possible"
Tom

 

[Engine49guy]

The L frame is kind of like the story of Goldy locks and the three bears,
The N frame .357 came first in 1935 but was a bit too big,
The K frame .357 came next in 1955 but was a bit too small,
The L frame came next in 1980 and was just about right.
Of course they eventually introduced a J frame .357 magnum but thats another story.

Imo the high water mark of its design evolution was the seven shot 4" Model 686-4 plus, for those that are not fans of the full underlug barrel Imo it is the 7 shot 686-5 Mountain Gun which does have the new MIM parts and internal firing pin but is the last frame that is pre IL, not only does it add one more round but at 35.5 oz it is not only stronger but is slightly lighter than the 36 oz Model 19/66 .

 

[38 Specialist]

A 586/686 belongs in any collection of S&E revolvers, IMO. I find them really pleasant to shoot, fondle, and behold.

It's one of the "food groups" in the product line. Your collection is lacking if this design isn't represented in some format.

 

[THE PILGRIM]

Way back when I was loading and casting, I fired heavy 357 loads in my K’s, especially my 19.
Following the Gospel of Elmer, I cast 150, 160 and 172 grain bullets.
Loaded the 172 in the 357. 150 in 38 Special.
160 - swing bullet, loaded in both.
Increased 2400 loads until I saw it laying unfired on the bench.

 

[Sevens]

The L frame is kind of like the story of Goldy locks and the three bears,
The N frame .357 came first in 1935 but was a bit too big,
The K frame .357 came next in 1955 but was a bit too small,
The L frame came next in 1980 and was just about right.

It's funny how personal the "feel" is, however. When I laid down my own cash for the first time ever to buy my first handgun (first job in high school and saved up paper route money!), the handgun I bought was a 6-inch S&W Model 686-3.

To me -- it looked exactly the way a revolver was supposed to look. Exactly!

What I found many years later was that a 4-inch Model 686 had a much better balance. I believe the 4-inch with a full lug barrel looks stubby and not-quite-right, but the balance is excellent.

The 6-inch Model 686 with full lug feels a little gangly and muzzle heavy to me.

And then I discovered the Model 28-2! The Highway Patrolman isn't as attractive to my eye but the balance of the 6-inch N-frame ended up being my Goldilocks.

The K/L grip feels more correct, but the 6-inch N-frame balance feels wonderful to me.

If that wasn't enough... it was a short time later when I fell head over heels in love with the 4-inch heavy barrel K-frame .38's. The models 10 and 64 feel like an extension of my hand. As a revolver goes, nothing feels as perfect to me as a heavy barrel 10.

And some silly folks wonder why we have so many

 

[Hair Trigger]

The L frame also had a significant nod to the Python with its full lug barrel.

I never understood why S&W felt the need to "nod" at their main competitor. I find the shorter extractor shroud more appealing than the full length underlug, and even so, I think Colts look better with the underlug than S&W's do, possibly due to the vented rib above the barrel. The underlug on the L frame is the single main reason I don't and won't own one.

Even the vented rib looks better on a Colt. I bought a 6" M57 a few years ago that had an aftermarket vent rib addition. I finally got tired of looking at it and worrying if I'd damage the finish by removing it. I got it removed without damage and could finally give my M57 the love it deserved.

 

[rct269]

I'm afraid I don't understand the infatuation with "P&R".

Pinned is what has long since been proven to be an unnecessary version of "belt and suspenders". Recessed came to be in the 1920's when (Remington's) .22 Long Rifle ammo was blowing rims. Both Remington and S&W (and perhaps others) set out to solve/mitigate the problem.

Remington went one way, and S&W went another. The seeming difference in their respective approaches was Remington's folks must have been to Problem Solving School---where the very first thing that gets beaten into your head is to make sure you KNOW what the REAL problem is---before you spend valuable resources trying to solve symptoms of the problem. They stopped buying cheap brass, and the problem was solved. S&W moved heaven and earth, and came up with the recessed chamber (in the Straight Line single shot----first ever handgun with a recessed chamber)---which achieved the dubious distinction of increasing the difficulty of cleaning the gun-----then AND now!!

Perhaps someone can explain all this---then again, maybe they can't!

Ralph Tremaine

 

[Jeep 1]

I'm afraid I don't understand the infatuation with "P&R".

Pinned is what has long since been proven to be an unnecessary version of "belt and suspenders". Recessed came to be in the 1920's when (Remington's) .22 Long Rifle ammo was blowing rims. Both Remington and S&W (and perhaps others) set out to solve/mitigate the problem.

Remington went one way, and S&W went another. The seeming difference in their respective approaches was Remington's folks must have been to Problem Solving School---where the very first thing that gets beaten into your head is to make sure you KNOW what the REAL problem is---before you spend valuable resources trying to solve symptoms of the problem. They stopped buying cheap brass, and the problem was solved. S&W moved heaven and earth, and came up with the recessed chamber (in the Straight Line single shot----first ever handgun with a recessed chamber)---which achieved the dubious distinction of increasing the difficulty of cleaning the gun-----then AND now!!

Perhaps someone can explain all this---then again, maybe they can't!

Ralph Tremaine

I don’t collect P/R guns because they are superior, most of my collection I do not shoot in the first place. It is because of what they were when they were in the simple fact is that most collectors, collect P/R simply because of Clint Eastwood and the Dirty Harry series, that’s what his gun was and that’s what we wanted. Basically Dirty Harry save the 44 magnum and the model 29.
That is the case with me I have both P/R and non recessed.
And I most certainly will not run one of them greatest revolver of all time in the ground. I don’t degrade either one so I don’t disagree or agree with you.
Tom

 

[Model29-26.5]

I had a Japanese replica by Kokusai when I was a kid.
My brother had a plastic 1:1 scale model by another Japanese company “LS”.
Both were obviously non firing but the detail was there and both pinned and recessed.
When I started reading up, I realized that was the thing.
Also the Dirty Harry thing too.
Now my whole collection is pinned and the only ones not recessed are the 45’s I have.

 

[Muley Gil]

I've never felt that cleaning a recessed cylinder was that much harder than cleaning a non-recessed cylinder.

I reckon some folks just need something to complain about.