New 686 Quality ??

[Shoebox1.1]

My new 686 2.5+ runs perfect. Yoke to frame fitment isn’t as good as I’d like but it’s a EDC and like I said runs perfect in every way. I ain’t touching it

 

[b737lvr]

Purchased two 686+'s in March. Neither with fire a full cylinder without the cylinder locking in place or the hammer not being able to be fully pulled to the rear. In looking at the guns the extractor "star" does not have the "fingers" that rotate the cylinder are cut the with the same profile, and some of the surfaces have cuttings hanging of the rear of the extractor and probably rubbing the frame. Anybody have any machining issues with the new revolvers? Looks like the cutting bit was dull and did more scraping than cutting. I will be calling Smith this morning about the needed warranty work.

You didn’t happen to order these from PSA did you?

 

[Kanewpadle]

Smith and Wesson’s quality hasn’t been very good the last few years at least.

A friend of mine ordered a Performance Center 500 S&W for a customer. No matter how hard you pushed on the thumb latch, it would not move.

Back it went.

And to think this was their top of the line gun at $1600 is an embarrassment.

 

[b737lvr]

Smith and Wesson’s quality hasn’t been very good the last few years at least.

A friend of mine ordered a Performance Center 500 S&W for a customer. No matter how hard you pushed on the thumb latch, it would not move.

Back it went.

And to think this was their top of the line gun at $1600 is an embarrassment.

That’s become our entire nation. We can’t build airplanes, we can’t build appliances, we can’t build good cars, we can’t build anything anymore. Most industry workers at this point show up to work to do the bare minimum so they can go home to get drunk or high. It’s no wonder that the only consistently good firearms produced in the USA are basically Glocks or clones of them, a machine is making the entire thing for them.

Modern S&W revolvers are the best engineered revolvers ever made. They just seem to have a lot of trouble making them a complete reality.

 

[Mike LaNier]

That machining looks like it was done by a poorly trained monkey! Hopefully S&W will fix it pronto. I have a 686-6, 3", from 2015; ten years old and it has been my 'woods gun'... I suspect those two were an anomaly?

 

[Motown_Ron]

This is a caveat on the State of Affairs at S&W Customer Service -
Several years back, I bought my 686 used after I spotted it in a gun store. After close inspection, I bought it. And after a trip to the mountains and an inspection by one of the best gunsmiths on the planet** (he also provided explanations of current S&W production problems not seen in the 70's & 80's), I realized I had lucked out. Although I didn't know it at the time, I'd purchased a vintage 1970's production gun that probably had less that 100 rds through it and had been in the hands of a loving owner. This made me very happy

Fast-forward: I carry an S&W bodyguard for EDC. After several years (2019), I noticed the cylinder getting loose so I got an RMA number and sent it back. After the required wait time, I got it back just as bad as when I sent it, but they'd put a new laser on it (Red Flag - more on this later). So I emailed them at the "Not For Public Consumption" email address that came in the box with my not-fixed gun. Low and behold, I got an actual phone call from a human named Richard Brohman. After a long conversation, the gun went back to S&W, and this time - when they sent it back to me - it was perfect.

CAVEAT: Smith & Wesson has a few good people still working for them. But the new culture has been (inevitably) influenced by pop culture. They figured they could appease me by not doing the repair and sticking a new laser on the gun. What The Fudge? Either that or the one guy that originally handled my gun the first time simply wasn't paying attention to customer service. I won't be buying any of their revolvers until we have good data of multi-year production runs that rival that seen in the pre-2001 era (they were purchased by Saf-T-Hammer Corporation that year). So, after 21 years of revolver mediocrity, Not likely.
** The gunsmith is in Northern CA. This is a guy with a degree in mechanical engineering who worked his way through college by being a gunsmith. He has oak and maple blanks that have been seasoning in his shop for a decade or more for his custom shotgun work and handgun stocks. You can bring him a block of carbon steel and come back 18 mos. later for a finished, custom gun, complete with hand-tempered springs. His backlog is months long for simple stuff, and years for custom stuff. If you want his contact info, email me: [email protected]

 

[b737lvr]

This is a caveat on the State of Affairs at S&W Customer Service -
Several years back, I bought my 686 used after I spotted it in a gun store. After close inspection, I bought it. And after a trip to the mountains and an inspection by one of the best gunsmiths on the planet** (he also provided explanations of current S&W production problems not seen in the 70's & 80's), I realized I had lucked out. Although I didn't know it at the time, I'd purchased a vintage 1970's production gun that probably had less that 100 rds through it and had been in the hands of a loving owner. This made me very happy

Fast-forward: I carry an S&W bodyguard for EDC. After several years (2019), I noticed the cylinder getting loose so I got an RMA number and sent it back. After the required wait time, I got it back just as bad as when I sent it, but they'd put a new laser on it (Red Flag - more on this later). So I emailed them at the "Not For Public Consumption" email address that came in the box with my not-fixed gun. Low and behold, I got an actual phone call from a human named Richard Brohman. After a long conversation, the gun went back to S&W, and this time - when they sent it back to me - it was perfect.

CAVEAT: Smith & Wesson has a few good people still working for them. But the new culture has been (inevitably) influenced by pop culture. They figured they could appease me by not doing the repair and sticking a new laser on the gun. What The Fudge? Either that or the one guy that originally handled my gun the first time simply wasn't paying attention to customer service. I won't be buying any of their revolvers until we have good data of multi-year production runs that rival that seen in the pre-2001 era (they were purchased by Saf-T-Hammer Corporation that year). So, after 21 years of revolver mediocrity, Not likely.
** The gunsmith is in Northern CA. This is a guy with a degree in mechanical engineering who worked his way through college by being a gunsmith. He has oak and maple blanks that have been seasoning in his shop for a decade or more for his custom shotgun work and handgun stocks. You can bring him a block of carbon steel and come back 18 mos. later for a finished, custom gun, complete with hand-tempered springs. His backlog is months long for simple stuff, and years for custom stuff. If you want his contact info, email me: [email protected]

Keep in mind that Smith & Wesson has actually changed dramatically since 2020 ever since they became an independent company again. They’ve since moved almost every aspect of the company to Tennessee apart from the revolver sector of the company. I’ve not heard of anybody, including my self, having any issues with S&W customer service lately. I recently sent my 442 in for service for the same issue you had. After exactly 4 weeks I had it back in perfect condition and it rides in my pocket every day.

 

[Jcon72]

I’ve owned a number of stainless Smiths over the years and never had one that looked all scratched up like this one.

It looks normal to me, too, in regard to their standard brushed stainless finish. It's been that way for quite a few years, now.

 

[Jcon72]

This is a caveat on the State of Affairs at S&W Customer Service -
Several years back, I bought my 686 used after I spotted it in a gun store. After close inspection, I bought it. And after a trip to the mountains and an inspection by one of the best gunsmiths on the planet** (he also provided explanations of current S&W production problems not seen in the 70's & 80's), I realized I had lucked out. Although I didn't know it at the time, I'd purchased a vintage 1970's production gun that probably had less that 100 rds through it and had been in the hands of a loving owner. This made me very happy

Just a FYI, but the 686 didn't exist until production began in 1980.

 

[SLT223]

Pic's attached. There were two of us shooting the revolvers, both have been shooting over fifty years and have owned many S&W revolvers. The issues were the same for both of us. The ammo was winchester 38 spl+P. The first gun, img2727, stopped turning in two positions and the hammer would not lock to rear in a third position. The second gun, img2728, always stopped turning at the same position as shown in red.

Looks to me like the ratchets are all different dimensions. I would imagine this is causing the bolt to lock the cylinder before the hammer can engage the sear, thus the cylinder and ratchet blocks the hand, stopping any additional movement of the trigger and hammer. No bueno for sure. Yikes!

 

[Mike N]

I had a similar issue with my 686, started a thread here in 2012 about it. Best I can figure my 686 was made in 2002 or so.

Wound up sending it back to Smith and they repaired it under warranty.

 

[Yendor357]

“Brushed finish”?

Looks more like a blemished finish to me. I saw a new 686 at the LGS. I asked the counter guy why the used 686 had a new tag on it. It looked way worse than my old dash four.

But I recently bought a used M69 that looked and is very nearly perfect. So go figure.

The new Pythons look great. But in my opinion, the Python needs a $250 Heffron SA trigger job, and possibly a $125 Wilson rear sight. Then you have $1800 tied up in it.

A nice used 686-4 isn’t cheap now days either. What to do…..

 

[BoulderTroll]

“Brushed finish”?

Looks more like a blemished finish to me. I saw a new 686 at the LGS. I asked the counter guy why the used 686 had a new tag on it. It looked way worse than my old dash four.

But I recently bought a used M69 that looked and is very nearly perfect. So go figure.

The new Pythons look great. But in my opinion, the Python needs a $250 Heffron SA trigger job, and possibly a $125 Wilson rear sight. Then you have $1800 tied up in it.

A nice used 686-4 isn’t cheap now days either. What to do…..

I haven't owned revolvers as long as a lot of folks here, but for the 35+ years that we've had them in our family, I've never seen a stainless Smith (aside from the bead blast ones) that didn't look like they were "brushed" with a Swiss army knife. I just don't know what people like about the brushed finish...if you want it matte, then bead blast it. If you want it shiny, then polish it. I don't get the "shiny with scratches all over it" appeal, but evidently, I'm in the minority of folks who feel that way.

 

[daverich4]

It looks normal to me, too, in regard to their standard brushed stainless finish. It's been that way for quite a few years, now.

Nope, I’ve never seen a “brushed finish” that looked like random scratches all over the gun. None of my other stainless Smiths were bead blasted yet they all had a smooth finish. This one looks like someone held it up to the brush wheel on a bench grinder and “polished” it with that.

 

[daverich4]

I haven't owned revolvers as long as a lot of folks here, but for the 35+ years that we've had them in our family, I've never seen a stainless Smith (aside from the bead blast ones) that didn't look like they were "brushed" with a Swiss army knife. I just don't know what people like about the brushed finish...if you want it matte, then bead blast it. If you want it shiny, then polish it. I don't get the "shiny with scratches all over it" appeal, but evidently, I'm in the minority of folks who feel that way.

Here’s a 629 off of Gunbroker. Doesn’t look at all like mine.

 

[Yendor357]

Dave, this may sound hokey…

The judicious application of an ink eraser and maybe some Wheeler’s fire lapping compound and a couple of hours of rubbing would probably get you a lot closer to being satisfied with your new gun.

^Ive done that on more than one scuffed up Smith, and am happy with the results.

 

[BoulderTroll]

Here’s a 629 off of Gunbroker. Doesn’t look at all like mine.

That’s a blurry, 160kb photo in dim lighting that looks like it may even have come from a stock photo…how on earth can you see what it does or doesn’t look like? I guarantee you, take a decent resolution, in-focus shot of that same gun in good lighting and it will look like your revolver’s long lost twin.

 

[daverich4]

That’s a blurry, 160kb photo in dim lighting that looks like it may even have come from a stock photo…how on earth can you see what it does or doesn’t look like? I guarantee you, take a decent resolution, in-focus shot of that same gun in good lighting and it will look like your revolver’s long lost twin.

Whatever. My experience with Stainless Smiths goes back more than 35 years and I know how poorly the finish on the current version compares with the earlier ones I’ve owned. But you do you.