Trying to decide between an older NIB 686 and 66-8

[charleswrivers]

I have a nickel 4" 19-3 that was my late father's that's pretty well semi-retired to wadcutters with the (very) occasional 158 gr. magnum load.

I've been wanting another 4" 357 that, well, I'm not afraid to shoot the heck out of. I figured a stainless gun would fit the bill better as well, because I'd not want to get a nice blue gun just to wear away the bluing and I go fishing in so-so weather a lot. I do already have a pair of shooter grade model 10s, a V model and a 10-3, nickel and blue respectively.

Given they have the same grips, barrel length, and roughly the same price, what seem to be the better buy, a vintage NIB 686 (there one available for the asking price of $800 near me. Kind if crazy money, but still around the cost of a new S&W today) or a modern NIB 66, which I expect would perform almost identical to my current, well loved, 19. I'm not sure with the changes in the 66-8 if I'm gaining anything by going with a 686, other than getting more of a classic gun. I assume the differences in the 66-8s forcing cone makes the concern if shooting hot, light magnums a moot point. I didn't know if there were any other physical difference with the revised forcing cone that made the newest 66 still less durable as a 686. I understand the heavier the gun, the less felt recoil it will have but the heavy on the hip it'll be. As much as I love my old 19, I just have too much anxitety to really shoot it as much as I'd like. I want it to go to my boy in the shape it's in now.

The gun would be shot at the range extensively and open carried when hunting/fishing in any weather or for walks. I don't intend to ever conceal it. I'm not hung up on this specific NIB 686, but it piqued my interest and made me realize I really ought to just get another .357 to be my go to and let my old man's gun be the safe queen and occasional heirloom shooter it deserves to be.

 

[colt_saa]

The -8 engineering revision of the Model 66 has the redesigned barrel/forcing cone

The -8 engineering revision of the Model 66 is not susceptible to the old internet epidemic of cracked K-frame forcing cones that is often talked about but very seldom seen.

Shoot whatever you want in it. food for thought, the NEW revolver will come with a Factory warranty, the used one will not.

 

[Doug M.]

686. Not even close to a question.

 

[Sevens]

Agreed that the older 686 is my choice and the choice is nowhere in the hemisphere of "close." The new 66 may indeed be able to combat the (real) problem of structural weakness with hot/heavy .357 Magnum but it will never have the mass of a 686 and that mass makes actually shooting .357 Magnum from the revolver a far more pleasant and enjoyable experience.

There is also the rampant and known QC problems that new S&W revolvers are riddled with and the fact that the double action trigger stroke, feel and smoothness of currently made S&W revolvers simply don't match up with the 680 no-dash through dash-5.

It's impossible for us to keep emotion out of our opinions and I suffer from it also and my opinion also is intertwined with emotion, but I stand firm in it -- give me one 686 over a pair of brand new S&W anything they offer all day long.

 

[CLASSIC12]

If you want to support S&W, have a brand new gun, the lighter one, shoot the snot out of it, and are not bothered with the IL, the 66 makes sense.

I’d go for the 686 though, hate the IL. They just don’t make them like that anymore.

 

[CLASSIC12]

The -8 engineering revision of the Model 66 has the redesigned barrel/forcing cone

The -8 engineering revision of the Model 66 is not susceptible to the old internet epidemic of cracked K-frame forcing cones that is often talked about but very seldom seen.

Guess I am on the unlucky side, mine cracked not once but twice.

Posted this 3 years ago

Bought a brand new 66-3 in 1989, 6 inch. It was only my second gun and first revolver, loved that thing. LGS gave it a trigger job, SA pull is 1.5 pounds, DA 7 3/4 pounds.

and that's what it says on the barrel

so I went and shot a steady dose of .357 Mag, 125 and 158 grains commercial, all jacketed, as well as handloads, 125, 140 and 158 grains, Speer and Sierra jacketed on 2400 powder, within the Speer reloading tables, always staying below max.

Abt. 2000 rounds later the forcing cone cracked badly, locking the cylinder. LGS got me and installed a new one. I started mixing .38 spl (which I had never shot before) and .357, while paying close attention to the forcing cone. It cracked again after abt 1500 rounds, but a much smaller crack, which does not impede the function of the gun. Since that day I only use it with .38 spl, did not feel like buying a third barrel. Probably shot another 2000 rounds with it. Crack did not move or worsen.

Still love that gun, been with me for 25 years and with it's amazing trigger it's one of the most accurate gun I own.

But I now use my 586 for .357.

Took these pictures today

Also some flame cutting but I am not concerned by that.

The flat and thinner portion of the barrel compared to a 586 can be cause for problems in my opinion.


http://smith-wessonforum.com/138517693-post13.html

 

[charleswrivers]

Thanks for the feedback.

My old man, to my knowledge, never researched anything on the internet about about the model 19s not standing up to light weight magnums loads... but he still said in the 90s, when he taught me reloading on his Dillon 450 to shoot magnums sparingly and only in 158 gr. (that's all we had anyway) and a pile of light wadcutters were better than loading a bunch of hot .38s for just punching paper.

I don't recall him justifying why he said it, certainly nothing about cracking a forcing cone... but I always followed his guidance. I assume it's what he learned or was told in the 70s/80s as a deputy and did the bulk of his shooting.

 

[charleswrivers]

Guess I am on the unlucky side, mine cracked not once but twice.

Posted this 3 years ago

Bought a brand new 66-3 in 1989, 6 inch. It was only my second gun and first revolver, loved that thing. LGS gave it a trigger job, SA pull is 1.5 pounds, DA 7 3/4 pounds.

and that's what it says on the barrel

so I went and shot a steady dose of .357 Mag, 125 and 158 grains commercial, all jacketed, as well as handloads, 125, 140 and 158 grains, Speer and Sierra jacketed on 2400 powder, within the Speer reloading tables, always staying below max.

Abt. 2000 rounds later the forcing cone cracked badly, locking the cylinder. LGS got me and installed a new one. I started mixing .38 spl (which I had never shot before) and .357, while paying close attention to the forcing cone. It cracked again after abt 1500 rounds, but a much smaller crack, which does not impede the function of the gun. Since that day I only use it with .38 spl, did not feel like buying a third barrel. Probably shot another 2000 rounds with it. Crack did not move or worsen.

Still love that gun, been with me for 25 years and with it's amazing trigger it's one of the most accurate gun I own.

But I now use my 586 for .357.

Took these pictures today

Also some flame cutting but I am not concerned by that.

The flat and thinner portion of the barrel compared to a 586 can be cause for problems in my opinion.


http://smith-wessonforum.com/138517693-post13.html

Yep. I've seen the new ones don't have the flat spot at 6 o'clock. I'd be devastated if I had that happen to my old man's gun and have to pay whatever I'd have to in order to have it repaired.

I didn't know if there was anything else that made the 686 more durable with the forcing cone revision. I'm neither here nor there with the internal lock. I hate there's a hole in the side of the gun one and, well... I've got a bunch of other guns with them and have never once engaged them so I see them as unnecessary. I teach my kids gun safety as I see appropriate and my guns are kept in a locked case when not in use. Not that everyone needs to do as I do, but that's what I do to be safe and I feel plenty good about it. I don't consider them a flaw... just an unnecessary item that is aestetically unappealing that is a way for dirt/water to enter the interworkings of the gun.

 

[Gunhacker]

Hands down, the 686.

I've had my 4" bbl 686 no dash since the inception of the 686 L-Frame in 1984, and it has seen a lot of water go under the bridge in it's life, it's been my "go-to" camping/backpacking gun and seen a lot of range time... it's been used pretty much like your described intended use.

Zero problems.

I have recent model revolvers... M69, 986, 625-8. Had an issue with the 625-8 (rough barrel crown & canted barrel) and the 986 (poor accuracy). I haven't used the M69 enough yet to discover anything out of sorts, but it's been the best out of the 3 newer guns so far.

I don't yet have the same degree of trust with them as I do with my 686. They will likely be the only ones I'll own.

 

[Sevens]

The accusation is that the internet perpetuates the "rumor" that 110/125 grain .357 Magnum in K-frame 13/19/65/66 can be a problem. Like anything, I agree that the internet is powerful in that manner.

However
Definitely NOT the internet the began the discussion of 110/125 grain .357 Magnum and it's long term effect on S&W k-frame Magnum revolvers. Oh no -- that was absolutely the gunwriters and print industry. Gun magazines from the 1970's and forward got that ball rolling LONG before Al Gore invented the internet.

 

[apollo99]

I have a 686-3 , and a 66-5 both in the 2 1/2" variety. in my opinion, get the 686 and don't look back.

 

[S&W Rover]

I've got a 686 3" and a 586 4" -- both of which I shoot a lot -- and they are wonderful. The 586 is a PC model and is exceptionally accurate. I've also got a 65-5, which is at risk of the same problems the 19 can suffer, with the forcing cone -- but I shoot it very little, and only .38 Special.

The current 686 with 4.125 barrel weighs 39.7 oz, and the 66-8 with 4.25 barrel weights 36.9 oz -- not a huge difference. Both should be able to handle the recoil of full charge .357 Magnum rounds.

My vote would be for the 686, especially for holster carry -- and if an older model without the IL, even better -- but the 66-8 is a close second.

 

[reddog81]

$800 is kind of steep. You can find new ones online for under $650 and the new 66's only only a bit more. Even after shipping and FFL fees the new ones will be $100 less.

I prefer the older guns over the new ones but I consider any 686 to be a newer model as they are all post the pinned and recessed models.

 

[StakeOut]

If you can find one,go for a 686-4

They're the cream of the crop.

 

[nachogrande]

THE 686

That is if you can't find a 681. What dash # is "vintage"??? It sounds like the stainless L frame is exactly what you described wanting. No lock a bonus. 150$ more (if indeed NEW old stock) then for a new model??? I'd spring for it, & am so poor I can't pay attention.

 

[hittman77]

I'd vote for the 686 ..... a -4 if you can find one.

Or if you're options are open, look at a GP100. Never heard of 357 loads breaking one of those.

 

[charleswrivers]

Well, I called the guy and it sounds misrepresented. It's in 'a' box and he's pretty sure it hasn't been shot because it 'looks like new' and couldn't tell me the revision number while we were on the phone so I'm pretty lukewarm on it. It's 5 miles from my hometown, which I now live ~2 hours away from... but I was kind of bummed that it's probably not what he stated. As it is, I wouldn't pay $800 for it.

When it comes to older things, sometimes you have to take people at their word as to history... but he might as well of been describing a different gun compared to the listing.

 

[charleswrivers]

I've looked at the Rugers. I like their Mark-# pistols. Have a mark III Hunter. A 10-22. I'm just not wild about their revolvers. I don't care for their aesthetics and they don't feel very good in my hand... neither the SP-101 or GP-100. I'm sure their fine, they get good reviews... and if people prefer them, that's fine... but for me to get a Ruger, I'd be settling. I'd get a Dan Wesson before I got a Ruger. There's a 15-2 going for $400 an hour away bit it's got a 6" barrel and is blue vice stainless. The few LGS (all combo gun store/pawn shop, save one small one) around *never* have S&W revolvers. They're like unicorns around here. I know I could order something but I've been stopping by weekly for a year and they're just never around. I don't like buying used guns sight unseen.

 

[Wee Hooker]

IMHO, if you want to shoot 357 mag loads regularly and without worry, then the 686 is the better choice. It was designed for just that purpose and will suck up the recoil better than the lighter framed 66.
That said, every revolver lovers safe should have at least one of each!

 

[Shark Bait]

Sorry that one didn't work out. But for what you want to do the 686 is the right gun. Hold out for a -3 or -4 if you can. IMO, the 686 is one of the very best .357 revolvers ever made. Just bought my 3rd 686-4+.