Why so few 620s?
- Thread starter carguychris
- Start date
S&WIowegan
US Veteran
WOW! This is getting ugly
I bought a 620 and a 619 as a pair when they came out. I was amazed at how good they were. The actions were literally way better than ALL of my Performance Center guns(a local wag says PC stands for Pretty Crappy). They both are very accurate and thanks for reminding me they're in my safe.
I bought a 620 and a 619 as a pair when they came out. I was amazed at how good they were. The actions were literally way better than ALL of my Performance Center guns(a local wag says PC stands for Pretty Crappy). They both are very accurate and thanks for reminding me they're in my safe.
Wyatt Earp,
You are a real charmer aren't you? You certainly have a way with words.
Annihilator,
Good advice, I have had MIM parts break on my Kimber. They were replaced with heat treated tool steel immediately. I also wouldn't buy the older Springfield 1911's with the two piece barrel. My Dan Wesson cylinder stop fell completely out of my revolvers frame after a couple thousand rounds. After my experiences if I choose not to buy MIM or whatever it is my prerogative. I'm alright with my decisions...
You are a real charmer aren't you? You certainly have a way with words.
Annihilator,
Good advice, I have had MIM parts break on my Kimber. They were replaced with heat treated tool steel immediately. I also wouldn't buy the older Springfield 1911's with the two piece barrel. My Dan Wesson cylinder stop fell completely out of my revolvers frame after a couple thousand rounds. After my experiences if I choose not to buy MIM or whatever it is my prerogative. I'm alright with my decisions...
remat457
Member
Not much interest in the 620 from me because it is not the equivalent of a K-frame which it replaced.
Not enough difference from a 686 to justify it to me.
Not enough difference from a 686 to justify it to me.
stevieboy
Member
To complicate matters a bit, I have a 686-6 6" and a 686SSR 4". The SSR does not have a full underlug barrel -- it has sort of a semi-full underlug arrel that tapers from the front end of the extractor rod towards the end of the barrel -- and weighs 36 ounces, compared to the 686's 44 ounces. I hadn't thought about it when I bought it but, in reality, it comes closer in physical specs. to the 620 than to the 686. Yet, when you look at the model series # under the crane it reads "686-6". Go figure.
I think both guns are fantastic and yes, they have 2-piece barrels, are not pinned and recessed, have locks, and have MIM parts. I can find absolutely no difference in quality between these guns and the older Smiths that I own.
I think both guns are fantastic and yes, they have 2-piece barrels, are not pinned and recessed, have locks, and have MIM parts. I can find absolutely no difference in quality between these guns and the older Smiths that I own.
Sgt Preston
Member
Sgt Preston back again. FYI,I can buy the 620 for $675 & the 686+ x 4" for $700. The 620 is a little bit lighter due to the half lug on the 620 & full underlug on the 686. It's not a money thing, it's what feels best in the lady's hand. Sgt Preston USMC LLA
ArchAngelCD
Moderator, SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
I agree it's the ILS that made the M619 and M620 so unpopular. I had a M619 for about a year and it shot well. As a matter of fact it was very accurate. I'm sure it it weren't for the ILS the M620 would be a lot more popular. Reason IMO, it feels and shoots more like a K frame than a L frame. I like the feel of those revolvers.
