Ordered the 686

Hylander

Hylander

Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2022
Messages
22
Reaction score
65
So I asked for a couple of comparisons with other brands.
Most of you gave me honest feedback :)
So today I won a bid on GB for a new 686 6" Stainless for what I think is a very fair price, it has already shipped and will be here in two days.
Yes it has the hole, but that does not bother me one bit.
I have not seen any new ones or older models in my area for over a year (and I work for at Local gun store) and know most of the dealers within a 25 mile radius.
Anyway, thanks for the input and I will post it up when I get it.
 
Register to hide this ad
I have a 6" 686 and it is the most fired 357 I have ever owned. Very accurate and a pure joy to shoot! As to the "dreaded" hole mine is an older model without but I have a 617-5 with the lock and it easily out shoots my older non-hole 617-1.

Yeah let us know how you like the new 686!
 
If the lock bothers you or if you feel it is a source of potential failure, it can be removed and a plug inserted into the hole. S&W won't do it, but a gunsmith can if you lack the skills to do it yourself. When your 686 arrives, check it thoroughly for defects.
 
I think you made a good choice. Most of my competition guns are some form of 686. Some are fairly stock, some highly modified. All have great actions and shoot small groups.
 
Congratulations, you bought one of the best revolvers ever made IMO. While I do not know the laws of your state, most allow for hunting with 6¨ which is an added bonus, also you will get optimal muzzle velocity with that length. Outstanding choice, lock or no lock I am sure you will love it.
 
Congratulations. I took delivery of a 3" 686 Plus TALO (7 rounds) recently. I ordered a set of Mesquite round-to-square target grips from Texas Grips - stained to look much like S&W ones. Fitment was good and now I have both the 3-5-7 grips and the Mesquite target grips. Debating whether I want/need moon clips. I'll shoot it a bit without the moons before deciding. [I already have a Model 610 and a Ruger GP100 10mm that each requires moon clips, so I'm up the learning curve on them.]
 
The newer ones, like yours, also have the 3 holes in the topstrap. It's nice to mount a scope or dot sight for accuracy and load testing. I prefer the iron sights for carry, but the older my eyes get, I may leave the next dot on, lol. Welcome to the forum and give us a range report!
 
I am very high on the L frames. I was still an active duty LEO when the L frames first came out. I was in charge of our department's patrol division at the time. I was able to work out a straight across trade for 4" 686s to replace our 4" 66s, which had always been problematical for us. (When I went through the two week CA POST range officer course in 1980, by the time I finished I was on my third issued 66).

The 686s cleared up those problems, and were our full size issue revolver until we switched over to mandatory semi-autos in '92.

For my intended competition use I have a highly customized 6" L frame with the high front sight to allow a neck hold at 50 yards. One of the items I added was a Wichita Arms barrel shroud which has an integral recoil suppressor/muzzle brake (whatever one wants to term it). Between the barrel length, the shroud which completely covers the barrel except the top surface, and the additional length of the shroud with the muzzle brake, there is a lot of weight out in front. More so than my conventional configuration PPC revolvers. Unfortunately I never got to fire it in competition. Work responsibilities, including teaching AJ subjects in academies and at the local community college, ended such recreational pursuits.

Firing .38 wadcutters through it though feels like .22 rimfire. If one can handle the weight, rapid sight recovery will not be an issue.

I have thought from the outset that the L frame is the ideal .357 S&W platform. It has enough additional size to get past the issues experienced by the K frame .357s (which had been the impetus to develop the L frame to begin with). On the other side, it is smaller enough than the N frames to avoid the stresses created by the large cylinder suddenly stopped by the bolt under rapid double action firing or dry firing.

Everyone has their own idea of perfection. For me, in S&W .357, the L frame is it.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all the replies.
It should be here tomorrow, hopefully I will have a glowing report of it.

Laketime said:
Tell us why you chose the 686.
Click to expand...

I really wanted one when I got to handle one a few years ago when I worked for Sportsman's Warehouse. Then at a cast match my friend said hey shoot my 586 in the next stage. I shot my best score ever with that revolver, I almost cleaned the stage. I weighed all the pro's and con's between the 686, GP100 and Python. Overall the 686 just seems to be the better buy for my use.
And it is just sexy 😍
 
Arguably, some of the most accomplished revolver shooters were the operators from GIGN from 1973 - 2000 or there about. In the beginning they wanted to use the Model 19, but it would not stand up to the at least 100 rounds of Norma .357 magnum per day that was part of their training. So, they went to Manhurin and the legendary MR73 was born. Once the 686 became available, GIGN started using it on their waterborne operations. those 686's seem to have weathered that high round count training just fine. One has to wonder if the 586/686 had been available in 1973 would there be a Manhurin MR73?

I recently watched an interview with Jerry Miculek and he said the new Smith & Wesson revolvers are the easiest to tune of any era. He explained that the uniformity of the mim parts is the reason. Yes, he is sponsored by Smith & Wesson, but he has always struck me as an honest individual, and one who values performance above all else.
 
Last edited:
My fave, if I had to give up my whole collection, an L frame 357 would be the last to go or last gun to keep...I have 3...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top