S&W Model 66 Vs. S&W Model 686

Hi

The S&W 19/66 is built on the K frame

The 586/686 is built on the L frame

the grip part of the frame is the same. Grips are interchangable. The action part of the L frame is bigger/ stronger than the K. Cylinder diameter of the L frame is bigger also.

The L frame was introduced in the very early 80s because K frame .357s would get loose and wear out fast with a steady diet of Magnum ammo.

I like a K frame with a 4" barrel. But if I could only have one revolver, it would be a L frame 586.

I have a 6" 586. If I come across a good deal on a 4" 586/686 in great shape, I will most likely snatch it up.

Hope this helps

Sticker
 
Excellent. So durability is the major factor...and that is important to me. Thank you.

Cheers.
 
On the other hand, most guys won't put enough full-house .457 mag loads through a K frame S&W to wear it out. Most guys shoot more .38SPL in their .357 revolvers than they do full house loads IMHO.
 
I have owned both and I can tell you that the percieved and felt recoil in the M66 is much more than in the 686. Both guns wore Hogue grips, but the M66 recoiled much more heavily and I enjoyed shooting that gun ALOT less. Recoil in the 686 is nothing to groan at and you can go alot longer shooting 357mag. That is at least my opinion. However, I recall being at the range once and having two other guys try out the M66 for felt recoil and IIRC, both thought the recoil felt much heavier than they would have expected (and those were two guys with enough experience around handguns to assess recoil in, at least, a rudimentary fashion).
 
The 66 is usally a fair bit lighter in like barrel lengths, and this will make the recoil much more pronounced. They are products of different eras, the 66/19 were designed as a variation of the old 38 Special police revolver (the model 10, M&P, etc) that allowed LEO's more power if they needed it. Keep in mind, there really wasn't a whole lot of shooting going on at the time (early 50's). The 686/586 was put into production to solve problems that arose when most police agencies modified thier qualifications to include more shooting (and perhaps more importantly, required qualification with full power magnum duty ammo). The K frames shot loose after a few years steady diet of magnum ammo, the L frames were designed not to. I find the K frame a more comfortable revolver to carry, and to shoot for fun, but if you're looking for a workhorse mid-sized frame revolver, the L frame would be the way to go. For even more strength, go with the Ruger. I would take a Python or a 27 over all of these in a heartbeat, but that's a personal taste thing. - dan
 
I've got a 686 6" and the first 1000 rounds I fed through it were 38 spl. Now, I only use 357 mag. and have shot about 2000 rounds through it. The recoil is quite pleasant. I could shoot it all day and it has good accuracy. The gun performs exactly like the day I bought it. :D
 
CanadianPackRat said:
I've got a 686 6" and the first 1000 rounds I fed through it were 38 spl. Now, I only use 357 mag. and have shot about 2000 rounds through it. The recoil is quite pleasant. I could shoot it all day and it has good accuracy. The gun performs exactly like the day I bought it. :D
Click to expand...

I believe the CAI and myself have tried your 686 at EOHC
 
Loved my 686

I've owned 3 S&W revolvers - a model 10, 686 and an old, ugly model 28 - of the 3 I think the 686 (6 inch) was the best all round shooter, it was extremely accurate and pleasant to shoot even with full load .357's. The K frames recoil is very sharp with hot loads even in .38 - I would frequently get a bruised hand after 500 rounds of +P 158 grain with the model 10, this never happened with the L frame. The Colt revolvers I've tried didn't impress me much -3 times the price and just as accurate! By the way Colt cylinders turn the wrong way (away from lock up) which is a little off putting when you're used to seeing them go the other way. The N frame Smith was the heaviest 4 inch I've ever shot and it was scary accurate, but it weighed a ton, and looked like hell so I got rid of it. If I was choosing between the K and L frames, I'd go with the L -much more pleasant to shoot for long periods of time, and that's what is needed if you want to develop solid skills.
 
I've owned both L-frames: 686 4" & 586 6" and K-frames Model 10's, Model 13, Model 14's, Model 19's, etc. I've fired thousands of rounds of .38 Spl & .357 Mag over the years...

I'd be happy with either a Model 66 6" or a Model 586 6". I'd opt for which revolver had the features I liked the most [smooth combat trigger, patridge front site, etc]. :D
 
Go with the 686 , you won't be disapointed in the least . It was the first gun I purchased and was able to use at the range and have never had a minutes regret.
 
cai said:
S&W Model 66 - 6" barell vs. S&W Model 586 - 6" barell
Click to expand...

I would suggest 66 or 686, not 586, unless you MUST have blue gun. They are beautiful, but for practical reasons stainless wins hands down (I like my blue Bisley 41, but I am looking for stainless one now). As for 66 v/s 686; if you want to shoot full power loads take 686. Also don’t overlook Ruger GP100, it’s very sturdy revolver, you have to shoot like maniac to wear it out. Not as slick as S&W but good smith could make it.

If you reload and 158 grains lead bullet at 1000-1100 fps is enough for your shooting, 66 might be the ticket, especially with long target hammer spur. Shooters in my club (they shoot silhouettes on 25/50/75/100 m) claim that, I quote; “…19 and 66 are consistently the most accurate revolvers. Not that others are bad, just 19 and 66 are more accurate in average, especially later -3 models…”, unquote.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom