Question about SW 686, 6 shot, 6” barrel

[Rmiked]

I owned a 1986 SW 686, 6“ barrel. Mine had a SS semi target hammer and trigger. The finish on the trigger and hammer matched the rest of pistol. Today, at a local gun shop, I saw a new model like the one I had except the trigger and hammer was a blackish finish vs the SS finish I had on my 1986 model. What is the material of the new model? Can you still get the trigger and hammer like I had on mine? I think the SS looks much better. Just curious. Thanks

[Wingate's Hairbrush]

When you had your original 686, the hammer and trigger were carbon steel flash chromed to approximate the the stainless finish. Many folk mistake flash chromed parts for stainless; they are not. In the mid-60s when S&W first introduced stainless revolvers they quickly discovered galling issues arose with stainless hammers and triggers, and flash chromed carbon was the solution.

Today's 686s have hammer and triggers made from the metal injection molding process (as distinct from the old forged ones), and most are made to look (somewhat) like case hardened carbon steel hammer and triggers. Flash chromed is largely a thing of the past at S&W, as is forged hammers and triggers.

[Inkwell 41]

Related... the 6 shot, standard 686 doesn’t appear on Smith and Wesson’s website now.

[Rmiked]

Wow. I held a new one today. Perhaps it is older stock but never sold?

[Wingate's Hairbrush]

Related... the 6 shot, standard 686 doesn’t appear on Smith and Wesson’s website now.It's still there presently; they're updating the site. You now have to select revolvers; L-frame; choose the one 686 they do show; select "no restrictions" for state compliance; then select the 4.1" barrel and you get the six-shot version.

Terrible site update if it isn't better streamlined.

[Inkwell 41]

It's still there presently; they're updating the site. You now have to select revolvers; L-frame; choose the one 686 they do show; select "no restrictions" for state compliance; then select the 4.1" barrel and you get the six-shot version.

Terrible site update if it isn't better streamlined.

Looking at it now, it’s listed as a 686 Plus, but with a 6 round capacity. The “Plus” is a 7 shooter. S&W needs to hire a firearms nerd to fix the mistakes on the site. The Performance Center Model 19 Comp is listed as an L frame.

[Dave T]

Looking at it now, it’s listed as a 686 Plus, but with a 6 round capacity. The “Plus” is a 7 shooter. S&W needs to hire a firearms nerd to fix the mistakes on the site. The Performance Center Model 19 Comp is listed as an L frame.

Yet another example of S&W's current take on quality control. Sad isn't it?

Dave

[Inkwell 41]

Yet another example of S&W's current take on quality control. Sad isn't it?

Dave

Is QC on the production line really that bad? Kind of interested in a 4” 686, but numerous recommendations in LittleLebowski’s revolver quest and other threads make it seem like a GP100 is the way to go. I have a fondness for Smith and Wesson revolvers from when I was a kid. My dad and brother both had several, a couple of wartime K frame .38’s of my dads and a 66 and 60 combo that my brother carried when he got on with an SO in the early ’80’s.
I don’t own any revolvers currently, and it seems like it would be a good idea to acquire one or two, or eight.

[JTMcC]

Is QC on the production line really that bad? Kind of interested in a 4” 686, but numerous recommendations in LittleLebowski’s revolver quest and other threads make it seem like a GP100 is the way to go. I have a fondness for Smith and Wesson revolvers from when I was a kid. My dad and brother both had several, a couple of wartime K frame .38’s of my dads and a 66 and 60 combo that my brother carried when he got on with an SO in the early ’80’s.
I don’t own any revolvers currently, and it seems like it would be a good idea to acquire one or two, or eight.


There are thousands of 586/686's for sale on the used market.
The value (to me) of those guns are the ability to launch tens of thousands of top end 357 loads with a lessor amount of wear on small parts and the forcing cone. Most people don't do that.
The other appeal is a full size gun that feels just right, more so than K frames. It's a personal thing like most firearm preferences. My Wife/Chic likes L and K's, but thinks both are highly inferior to Her 1911 triggers ;)
But you can buy an older production, low round count hi quality S&W in the "less desireable" L frame if you look for a bit. My late model S&W experience is small, but all good. I remove the lock the first day.
I prefer to buy used guns overall. My 1950's K-22 is rediculously well made.

[Dave T]

Jfpatch,

My comment was based to a large extent on the numerous reports (more on the S&W Forum than here) of Smith not being able or careful enough to align the barrel shrouds (and consequently the front sight) with frame. This results in cases of moving the adjustable rear sight all the way to one side to compensate. There are also reports of new owners sending their guns back and getting them returned, unchanged, with a note saying it is in factory spec.

My personal experience with newer revolvers and QC problems has not been favorable, but I won't go into all that again.

The current comment that they can't even get the description of one of their firearms correct, on their own web site, seems like more of the same. Too many people working for S&W don't seem to give a damn.

Dave

[FrankB]

This year I’ve purchased two Model 642 Smiths, a 4” Model 686+, and a Model 627 Pro Series. They’re all as good as can be expected from machinery, and I check EVERYTHING. Cylinder timing is perfect, no end shake, canted barrels, and lock up is tight. I did buy a Model 36 Classic in 2019, and that had a couple of shavings floating around. A quick blast of compressed air solved that, and it works dandy.