what is the real story on the 686

[dyna962007]

Let me ask a question.
Considering all of the years this handgun has been made and all of the dash configurations and the pre and post lock feature, what model has most of the benefits with the fewest of changes made that cheapen the gun?
I had always heard go with a no dash but it sounds like there were quite a few actual upgrades and nice changes made over the years.
But I've also heard of changes that cheapened the gun such as going with cast parts instead of machined parts etc
Im confining this to a full underlug model with minimum 6" barrel

 

[G.A.Sea53]

IMHO the 686-4 was the pinacle of this model plus the choice
of having it in the 6-shot or the 7-shot capacity. It does not get
any better than this.

 

[Pizza Bob]

what model has most of the benefits with the fewest of changes made that cheapen the gun?

You have started three separate threads and in all of them you allude to S&W "cheapening" their guns. You really should have qualified that with " in my opinion".

If you think that things like MIM components and ECM rifling have "cheapened" the guns, you are only half right. It HAS made them cheaper to produce. Your problem is that you seem to equate the use of new, more efficient technologies with cheapness, rather than improvement.

MIM components are more dimensionally stable, more precise and have smoother contact surfaces. ECM rifling, again, is more precise and, at one time, concerned the ATF because they thought it was so smooth and consistent you wouldn't be able to forensically differentiate one gun from another.

As for the lock, if you object to it on political grounds, you shouldn't be looking at a S&W in the first place.

If you object because you are afraid that it may malfunction, it takes all of 15 minutes to disable it without changing the external appearance whatsoever.

If you object to the lock on aesthetic grounds, remove it and plug the hole.

The guns being produced today are among the best ever. It seems that every succeeding generation lusts for guns from "back in the day". 20 years from now people will covet the firearms of today. I think you should get ahead of the curve.

Adios,

Pizza Bob

 

[Brasky]

686-3 FTW

 

[Browns fan]

agree the dash 3 is the best sq butt wood target grips flash chrome hammer trigger the the 4 is better why ? tapped 7 shot ?do you really need a 2.5 inch or 4 inch gun scoped a 6 inch I can see oh and also no wood target grips on the 4 except very very few early 4 s

 

[grip frame]

-3 and -4 are the winners of the 686 race.

 

[mtelkhntr]

Even though my 686 is a no dash, I think the best one is the one you find at a price that catches your eye and when you pick it up, you can't let go.

 

[colt_saa]

OP, sorry for the continued thread drift

Wow slow down, your pizza's cold on this one Bob.

Fact check: MIM components are only as good as the machines that fabricate them.

I do not think Bob's Pizza is cold. He might have been stingy with the toppings

PolymathPioneer,
Wouldn't a hand made part only be as good as the hand that made it? And a forged part only as good as the foundry it came from?

No matter what process the part is made by, there are good parts and bad parts.

Now you are saying that a party other than your self says S&W MIM parts are no good and you are in agreement. BTW, I have never read any of Jerry's books including his section three and unless you are providing FREE copies to the Forum so that we can look at your reference material I probably will continue to not know what he wrote.

Now poor Bob only had one sentence in that long post of his that addressed the characteristics of a MIMed part.

MIM components are more dimensionally stable, more precise and have smoother contact surfaces.

That is a correct statement.

I have worked countless thousands of S&W revolver actions over the last 3+ decades, MIM guns can have good actions in much less time and work than Forged guns.

Now if you want to say that for a PERFECT action you must start with over sized parts and hand fit each and every one, I would not disagree.

Now I do prefer forged hammers and triggers on my S&Ws, but that is because they are prettier than MIM

dyna962007,
My preference for 686s is anything -4 or later. This is when the 7 shot cylinder was introduced. That is the one thing that would get me to choose a L-frame over a K-frame for my mid size revolver. Otherwise I am sticking with the 27/327/627 family if my goal is durability.

Just because a process reduces the cost of production, does not necessarily mean it cheapens the finished product.

 

[manderson]

Guess I'm getting old, but I don't understand all the hype over seven shots. I vote for the 686-3 six shooter.

 

[Jdavis]

The perception is that older things (S&W guns in this case) are better because they were made when there was the human element of caring and pride in their creation. It would not matter if the MIM or CNC components could be proven to be superior. Right or wrong, this is what drives the collector and antique markets and it isn't going to change.

 

[Voyager28]

I'm not a gun smith nor am I an expert on all of the specific advantages of the various elements of a revolver. All I know is my personal experience. I have 3 686s in my safe; a 4" no dash, a 6" dash 3 and a 4" dash 6+. All three are excellent, accurate and reliable and I've never had an issue of any kind with any one of them after several thousands of rounds through each one.

As for my personal preference of the three that I own? I would lean towards the no dash and the dash 3 because I, personally, like square butt revolvers much better than round butt.

Sometimes we would do well to remind ourselves that, just because we personally don't like something, doesn't mean it is flawed.

Bob

 

[silentflyer]

I have a 686-4 6" and a 686-5 4", that I have run thousands of rounds through and never had a problem, ever time I go to the rage at least 1 of them makes the trip. At some point I hope to find a deal on a 8 3/8" to go with them. I would tell anyone if you find one you like regardless of the dash number, buy it.

 

[ankona]

Wow slow down, your pizza's cold on this one Bob.

Fact check: MIM components are only as good as the machines that fabricate them. The machines used to create MIM components for high performance aircraft are of a quality that is far beyond the machines that gun company's use to create MIM components. Further, please review the fifth edition of Jerry Kuhnhausen's book "The S&W Revolvers, A Shop Manual", section three. Section three is a highly detailed and extensive comparison with high definition images of MIM parts compared to the pre-MIM handgun parts. My own experience revolver smithing and performance tuning S&W revolvers of both types confirms Kuhnhausn's section three analysis. Just as an example the MIM double action sear is ridiculously loose in its drop in pivot point in the MIM hammer compared to the pinned forged double action sear of the drop forged versions. This results in inconsistent high speed double action trigger pull, which is virtually impossible to eliminate due to the resulting MIM sear "wobble".

Jerry's book does bash MIM components with references to "early breakage & more prone to corrosion due to the increased porosity of MIM". His words & opinions not mine. Not sure when the 5th edition was originally written; most likely prior to 2006. Possibly S&W and other companies had a learning curve to hurdle with MIM components and also I'm confident that this process has been and will continue to improve as the technology to produce these components improves over time. I have some older pre- MIM Smith's and they are nice but was compelled to check out the "purported S&W lack of quality MIM current revolvers" so I went and purchased a brandy new 686 with 3 inch barrel with the ILS. It is a great gun. Trigger pull in DA is a little heavy but is smooth throughout and I can easily lighten that pull weight. Everything is put together quite well & the barrel is even on straight . This was purchased sight unseen from a reputable gun company and there are no issues with the weapon. I like it so much I am now looking for a 640 Pro. I must have just got lucky

 

[epj]

I foolishly sold my M19 and bought a 686 when they first came out. Didn't really like the gun all that well. Just didn't flop my prop. Sold it and bought a stainless Python. Kept it for 20+ years. I now have a 686 + and a 627 Pro. The 627 is by far my favorite. Both are 4" guns. The 686 weighs almost exactly the same as the 627, but the balance is entirely different. The 686 is muzzle heavy. If the 686 were available in a standard barrel configuration I'd probably like it better. There was a 620? Model a few years ago that was basically just as described. However it had a two piece barrel and apparently some guns had problems. The ones that didn't have problems were reported to be superbly accurate.

 

[DR505]

This is a good thread! Wish I had popcorn.

My preference in the 6" 686 line is the -3, and only because I don't want the top strap to have been drilled and tapped for scopes...I don't use them. I'm with EPJ as far as the 627 vs. 686 lines go, but I do have a wonderfully accurate 686-3 CH in 6" configuration.

All that being said, I wouldn't turn my nose up at any of them, and I still like them all, even if I prefer one over another.

 

[S&W Fan]

I have a 4" no dash my dad bought new in Sept. 1981 (I have the original receipt, box, etc). It did have issues with some magnum ammo and he sent it back, it has the "M" stamp and doesn't diminish the quality and reliability of this gun in anyway. It's had thousands of rounds through it, he had an action job done to it in either '81 or '82 and it still times/locks up perfectly.

I also have a 2.5" I bought a couple of months ago. It's also a no-dash but from November 1984 (confirmed Lew Horton model), I haven't shot it alot but with the Winchester Silvertip .357 mag ammo I haven't had any problems. Forgot to mention, no "M" stamp and no plans to return it for the mod. Wouldn't part with either for all the money in the world (they'll eventually go to my sons).

Like a few of the others here I wouldn't go past a -3 due to my preferences for the cosmetics of the guns. Purely a personal preference, frankly I think they're all pretty great guns.

 

[H Richard]

If anyone wants to complain about any of the 686/586 models, hold your comments until you personally wear one out. Now for some quite please, over the next 30-40 years.

 

[ankona]

Here's the problem: All S&W revolvers that use the MIM hammer with the non pinned double action sear are of inferior mechanical quality because it is impossible to set the double action trigger return to have precise timing due to the double action sear wobble. A heavy double action trigger pull masks the problem but it is still there in each and every single one of those guns from S&W. The result of this is these revolvers can not be made to be 100% reliable for self-defense situations because the double action cycle can fail, period end of story full stop. The symptom of this timing issue is that during rapid double action fire the cylinder will turn properly but the hammer may not full cock and your left with a click and no bang. I can go into very excruciating detail on this with video demonstrating and showing the problem on all MIM hammer S&W revolvers with the floating double action sear.

Further, following extensive testing on virtually every single model of MIM hammer S&W revolver in production today, with the floating double action sear, S&W should have a voluntary free upgrade that offers a MIM hammer with a pinned MIM double action sear. Finally, I am absolutely,unequivocally certain S&W knows of this problem.

This double action sear MIM part design flaw can be minimized by adjusting ALL bearing surfaces in the double action trigger return cycle but unlike with the older pinned double action sear it can not be eliminated without widening tolerances that make the double action firing sequence completely unreliable.

The only solution around this is to not depend on these revolvers for self-defense or be happy since of course this is all rubish and it will never affect those who ignore this (rofl). I own several of these revolvers and have switched to Apex rigged M&P 40 for wilderness or home defense. In the past I have used 1911s but any that have the firing pin block safety are not suitable for self defense application and those that don't have the firing pin block safety should have many of the MIM parts replaced by after market parts. I once did this frequently but it's a lot of work and 1911s can be messed up by FTF magazine issues. I find that when properly tuned the M&P pistols have extreme reliability (notwithstanding the lame shepherds hook) and are capable of extreme accuracy when performance tuned.

VR

Larry Wood

I for one would love to see a detailed video demonstrating and showing the problem on all MIM hammer S&W revolvers with the floating double action sear.

I also found this statement somewhat perplexing:"In the past I have used 1911s but any that have the firing pin block safety are not suitable for self defense application and those that don't have the firing pin block safety should have many of the MIM parts replaced by after market parts. I once did this frequently but it's a lot of work and 1911s can be messed up by FTF magazine issues." Maybe someone should contact Colt and inform them. I have several series 70 & 80 1911's. Zero issues after many thoussands of rounds, many of which were rapid fire. Quite frankly it's pretty simple to remove the series 80 firing pin block parts and insert a spacer.

It seems that if this was an issue with S&W revolvers being unreliable for self defense that this would be pretty widespread by now considering the volume of new MIM component Smiths being used in competition and self defense.

 

[Pizza Bob]

More specifically all L, N and X frame series revolvers with the floating DA action sear have this defect.

You seem to have the same problem that the OP has in that you speak in absolutes, rather than expressing an opinion. The above quoted statement is libelous, and while it is doubtful that S&W would take you to task, it is actionable as it impugns their reputation and may cause monetary loss due to decreased sales.

Of course the best defense against a libel suit is the truth, so you may be called upon to prove this "defect" to S&W rather than to a group of forumites.

As a sample of one, I shoot my revolvers competitively (not well, but it's the thought that counts), including those with MIM components and with literally thousands of rounds down range have had no problem. What you say may be true, it may also be true that any problems caused by your so-called "defect" are statistically insignificant. If this were truly a problem I think we'd be hearing about it from more than one person on an Internet forum.

JMHO

Adios,

Pizza Bob

 

[CAJUNLAWYER]

THIS is going to be epic before it's over