Just a little update--am going to go ahead and have it refinished back to a bead blast finish. And thanks to .357magger's suggestion I'm having a gold bead front put on at the same time. It's unlikely this piece is ever going to leave me, so I might as well have it the way I want! I'll update with pics of the finished product.
CS-1 686-what would you do? *Updated with pic*
- Thread starter equivet
- Start date
I had a 4" and found a 3" a few years ago that had a lot of handling marks and minor scratches. It hadn't been back for the recall, so I used that to get free shipping back and forth to S&W. They charged (I think) around $130 for a bead-blast and it looks very nice and matches the 4". I have another 4" I came across recently that looks like a previous owner had started to polish and gave up half way through...unlike EQUIVET's gun,this one looks terrible. I haven't decided if I want to return it to S&W or if I should see if a local shop can bead-blast it to look like the original finish. Any one have experience with that kind of work? I'd like to think that bead-blasting is a less exact science then bluing, but don't know that to be true.
Cricker,
You can start with this thread. There are many more. Type in "Customs Service" in the search box. Happy reading
http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1980-present/231410-us-customs-service-686-cs-1-a.html
You can start with this thread. There are many more. Type in "Customs Service" in the search box. Happy reading
http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1980-present/231410-us-customs-service-686-cs-1-a.html
Avery11
US Veteran
I would opt for the original bead blast finish. The frosty skin, round butt, flash chromed h/t, and narrow front sight are some of the more apparent hallmarks of the CS-1.
Were it a common 686, I would say shoot it as is (though I nearly hate polish jobs) but the scarcity of the CS-1 and the fact that it's a 4" on top of that, would compell me to return it to its original beauty.
BTW, though many say there are more of the "quad tubes" running around, I think you will see MANY more of the 3 inch guns on the blocks and in the photos posted here.
As I understand it, the longer barrels were issued to the "road guys" while the suits and brass carried the 3 inch models.
Which do you think were reclaimed and destroyed in greater numbers??
Ahem, and uh, I happen to have a 4 inch here in the safe - of course it's MUCH more rare than the 3.
Were it a common 686, I would say shoot it as is (though I nearly hate polish jobs) but the scarcity of the CS-1 and the fact that it's a 4" on top of that, would compell me to return it to its original beauty.
BTW, though many say there are more of the "quad tubes" running around, I think you will see MANY more of the 3 inch guns on the blocks and in the photos posted here.
As I understand it, the longer barrels were issued to the "road guys" while the suits and brass carried the 3 inch models.
Which do you think were reclaimed and destroyed in greater numbers??
Ahem, and uh, I happen to have a 4 inch here in the safe - of course it's MUCH more rare than the 3.
Snakeshift
Member
Perhaps I have a little too much shootkicker in me, but I kind of like to blind people with a really shiny revolver. Nothing quite says Redneck class as much as a highly polished nickle/stainless gun.
Chop
Member
Wow, that turned out nice. I do like that new front sight.
Chop
Chop
Sherminator
Member
Good decision, I like bead blasted finish. How much did it cost and what was the turn around time?
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 27,664
- Reaction score
- 21,334
Very nice, and easier to keep looking this way than shiny.
I decided to go to a local smith who seems to have the look of the S&W finish down pat. He also did the front sight. Turnaround was very fast on the refinishing, but it took something like 6 weeks to get the sight in! for everything it was less than $200, which was a smoking deal as far as I'm concerned.
Avery11
US Veteran
I think it was money well spent. Thank you for returning a scarce gun back to its original finish.
There are plenty of common 686's floating around - I believe the CS-1s deserve a little more respect.
The bead blast finish on these guns is kind of their trademark look.
Well done.
There are plenty of common 686's floating around - I believe the CS-1s deserve a little more respect.
The bead blast finish on these guns is kind of their trademark look.
Well done.
REVL33
Member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2012
- Messages
- 139
- Reaction score
- 16
i love my stainless gun but i will not polish them , i will leave them as they are keep them clean buff out the cylinder rings and call it good
To me, polished stainless is hideous on a revolver. If you must have shiny, go nickel. Stainless should be matte or brushed, not high polish. High-polish guns generally look like they have spent way too much time on the buffing wheel. I say to each his own, but if you polish your stainless guns, you might as well be throwing money away.
Memphiscbrider
Member
As for the op. ahhhhhh shiny
Similar threads
