Pre lock 686 snub or New 66 2 3/4"

[Dino44]

I was thinking I would like my next purchase to be a model 686 2 1/2". A couple of days ago I entered one of my LGS and saw both the new model 69 and 66 snubs. I was impressed with both of them. My question concerns the 66. Does anyone know if it is on par with the pre-lock 686 in terms of strength and construction? Or would the forcing cone and frame be susceptible to the issues of early 66's after a steady diet of magnum loads?

 

[rwt1405]

You're comparing an L frame (686) to a K frame (66), which really isn't a fair comparison.

If you're looking to "carry" it, the K frame would be "easier", but a J frame (642 is my personal favorite) would most likely work best for you.

I (me, myself) would always pick a pre-lock anything (J, K, L, or N) frame OVER any with "the lock".

But that's just me.

Good luck in your search!

 

[Colonel]

I have to agree with rwt1405's comments. The 66-8 will be easier to CCW over an L frame, but one cannot beat a J frame as the easiest to CCW. Stuff it with premium ammo like Buffalo Bore 38 Spl. 158 grain HP +P's and be done with it.

 

[riverrat38]

The new M66 has a two piece barrel, and the actual barrel has thicker walls and no cut off under the forcing cone than the old M66's. As far as old versus new, I prefer the new, even if I have to "put up" with the IL. I like MIM and the pinned front sights. I don't like red ramp front blades. And, I especially didn't like the idea of the cut off on the bottom of the barrel. I like two piece barrels, no over cranked barrels. I think the two piece barrel design was the reason that S&W started manufacturing K frame magnum's again. The 66 snub has a quarter inch longer barrel and 0.6 oz less weight than the 686 snub. The 686 is 7 shots and the 66 is a true six shooter. The winner here depends on the likes of the shooter. The 66 has a bead blasted finish. the 686 has a standard S&W satin finish. Again, the advantage goes to the shooters opinion. The slightly longer barrel gives a slightly (about 5%) longer sight radius, and maybe 30 FPS more velocity.
If you wast to get even closer to the M66 barrel length, you can get the PC M686, with 2.62 inch barrel, its only 1/8 inch less than the M66, and the same weight as the 2.5 inch version. Either should make a fine carry revolver, the differences mostly a matter of opinion. With one exception! The M66 might be having some teething problems. There have been a few reports of the new snubs spitting "something" back in the shooters face. And I am one of those shooters. I am waiting to hear back from S&W on what they are going to do to my revolver, which they have acknowledged receiving. We will see. If the M66 doesn't work out, I will be getting a new M686 snub.

Best,
Rick

 

[Ashlander]

The forcing cone on the new 66-8 2.75" is noticeably thicker all the way around than the older models and as riverrat38 mentioned, it does not have the flat spot on the bottom that was the real weakness when it came to a steady diet of 125 grain .357 magnum loads. I have both the new 66-8 and a 3" 686-6. The 66 is a lot less hefty (which has both pros and cons), but if you want a 7th shot, there's only one choice.

 

[revolver686]

Between the two I would choose the pre-lock 686. My 686-4 is one of the finest examples of a S&W revolver that I have ever handled.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[old bear]

Dino44, as others have mentioned the L frames are heavier than the K frames. Personally, I find the L frames to be noticeably heavier. I've never owned a 2 ½" barrel L frame, but I think it would be a handful to carry concealed.

 

[DD357]

I have carried 2.5" L and K frames and I find the K to be much nicer to carry.

 

[gnystrom]

When comparing my 686+ 3" with the new Mod 66 I noticed virtually no "felt" weight difference between the two especially when holstered. In fact, even a visual comparison showed me little difference in frame size other than the shortened barrel underlug on the 66. To me, the stainless is more durable than the satin finish. The 686+ has white outline rear sight another positive for me. Personally, I find my 3" 686+ to have better overall balance.
My desire to own a new Mod 66 has dimmed now that I have had a chance to handle and shoot both guns side by side.
Locks on S&W revolvers have never been of any concern to me. As a RSO I have seen hundreds and hundreds of thousands of rounds fired through these revolvers and never any problems whatsoever. I do keep a S&W key on my keychain and finally after seven years I had a customer come in with no key and his lock intentionally locked. I used my key to unlock the gun and we both agreed it would be best if he found another way to secure his gun.

 

[Dino44]

Thank you all for your insightful opinions. All great considerations, to be sure. Special thanks to revolver686, your -4 is magnificent! I have yet to hold a pre lock 686 snub in my hands. I'm sure when I do that may make a decision more clear. I was curious if the manufacturing process or metallurgy of today, may have made the new K frame more equivalent to the L frame of old.

 

[Ashlander]

I was curious if the manufacturing process or metallurgy of today, may have made the new K frame more equivalent to the L frame of old.

I don't know metallurgy, but the use of a new detent on the yoke rather than the old lock-up on the front of the ejector rod allowed for use of a slightly thinner ejector rod and hence more space for a far more robust forcing cone which seems to match that of an L-frame. I am impressed with the changes.

 

[g17]

The 686 has been my favorite revolver since they came out but in a 2.5", I'll take the 66-8 every time. I owned a 2.5" 686 for some time and always felt it too heavy and a slow pointer, just didn't balance well. You wont have any problems with the forcing cone on the new 66-8 as it has a two piece barrel and doesn't have the 6 o'clock position machined flat like found on the earlier K-frame guns. I just don't think you'll shoot anything through a 686 that the 66-8 wont handle.

 

[loeman]

With respect to g17s opinion, I find the 2.5 inch 686 to be one of my very favorite guns. It is accurate and smooth. Mine is a no dash model. The only thing I didn't like about it were the S&W Combat stocks that came on it. They didn't fit my hand at all. However, a new set of Ahrends remedied that problem. I just wish S&W had made a 2.5 inch version of the 681.

 

[StakeOut]

A 2.5" 686-4 would be my 1st choice of the presented options.

 

[justBrian]

Between the two I would choose the pre-lock 686. My 686-4 is one of the finest examples of a S&W revolver that I have ever handled.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Dead, fookin' sexy...

 

[Gripgrabber]

It's nice reading about the best 2 smith and wesson revolvers there are! These are mine, 66-1 and686-4.