S&W 686 or 66?

hot sauce · November 2, 2009, 08:24 PM

Which would you prefer? I'm thinking about getting one pre-lock of course but cant decide. Thanks

Superhouse 15 · November 2, 2009, 08:34 PM

One's bigger (obviously) so it depends on the use. For CCW, the smaller K frame. For lots of shooting with full power loads, the L frame.

Bigjim3 · November 2, 2009, 08:39 PM

I like the 686 just fun to shoot.

brian45auto · November 2, 2009, 08:41 PM

two different frame sizes. so the only clear option, is both.

Homerboy · November 2, 2009, 08:47 PM

I had a mint 66, but sold it for a mint 686. 66 is sweet, but i never felt comfortable shooting .357 in it. If the barrel says ".357 Magnum", I should be able to shoot ANY .357 I want, whenever I want. Uses the same grips, too.

hot sauce · November 2, 2009, 09:07 PM

Is the K frame that much weaker than the L frame?

brian45auto · November 2, 2009, 09:22 PM

the K frame was originally the 38spl frame. but it's a handy size. turns out 357's are alittle much for them(in a nutshell, a real small one). yes you can, but need to watch what bullet weights you use.
the L frame was the answer to the K's short comings. like stated above, they share the same stocks.
but if you want to feed it nothing but the hottest loads for it's entire life, perhaps an N frame would suit you better.

hot sauce · November 2, 2009, 09:43 PM

But what did they "beef up" on the frame? Did K frames crack a lot? They dont look any bigger from the pics I've seen

carguychris · November 2, 2009, 09:46 PM

Pluses for Model 66:

Lighter; less weight to drag around in your holster
Smaller-diameter cylinder easier and more comfortable to conceal
Less muzzle-heavy with equivalent barrel length; points better
Generally lower price with 4" and 6" barrel, although this varies regionally

Pluses for Model 686:

Heavier; absorbs recoil better
Larger-diameter cylinder offers 7-shot capability (686-4 and later)
More muzzle-heavy with equivalent barrel length; "hangs" on target better, easier to control during rapid-fire
3" barrel much easier to find
More durable if you shoot lots of full-power Magnum loads using <158gr bullets

Quote:

Is the K frame that much weaker than the L frame?

The L frame is stronger, but you need to consider the likelihood that you're really going to be shooting many (as in thousands of) 110-125gr Magnum loads during the service life of the gun. FWIW either gun will handle as many .38s as you can stand and/or afford.

brian45auto · November 2, 2009, 09:48 PM

it's one of those things you can't see in pics. at a glance you won't see it in person. but if you sit quietly and look them over side by side you'll see where they are different.
the K frames did'nt crack, but the forcing cones on the barrels did/do.
and seeings how s&w doesn't make a k framed treefidyseven anymore, you can't get them to fix them.

k frame top
l frame bottom

hot sauce · November 2, 2009, 09:53 PM

Ok thanks for the replies. I think I'm going with the 686.

stevieboy · November 2, 2009, 10:35 PM

They're like apples and oranges. As an owner of both guns I can tell you that there are significant differences between the two.

What are the primary differences between the 686 and the 66? I'd say that they come down to two things: overall weight and center of mass. The 4" 66 weighs about 35 or 36 ounces. The 686 comes in at about 44 ounces, or 1/2 pound more. That doesn't sound like much but you'll notice it when you hold the two guns at arm's length. The 66, with its non underlugged barrel, has most of its weight and its center of mass rearward. The 686, with its fully underlugged barrel, has its center of mass out in front of the cylinder and definitely feels somewhat front end heavy.

I find it easier to pick up a target quickly with the 66 and the gun would certainly have advantages in timed fire at multiple targets. In other words it would be my choice for a sport like IDPA. It is an accurate gun and I can at times cloverleaf 6 rounds at 10 yards with it shooting offhand. It is not recommended as a platform from which to shoot a steady diet of the the hottest .357 magnum ammo like 125 gr. rounds.

The 686, being heavier and with its center of mass shifted forward, is not nearly as handy as is the 66. On the other hand, I believe that it is a superior target gun, particularly out past 10 yards. It is an incredibly accurate handgun at longer distances!! If I had to pick a single revolver for bullseye shooting or for hunting, it would be a 686 with a 6" barrel. Also, it can handle the really hot stuff when it comes to ammo.

I would be hard put to choose between the two and I'm fortunate to own one of each.

rjrivero · November 3, 2009, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brian45auto

two different frame sizes. so the only clear option, is both.

Amen.

hexidismal · November 3, 2009, 12:55 AM

The 686 and 66 models are far and away my two favorite revolvers. They both have their place and I couldn't decide between just one. I'd have to vote for find one of each.. or more than one !
Seriously though if I HAD to pick just one, it'd probably be the 686 for no other reason then slightly better ammo versatility. The 686 being the beefier ( though just by a smidge ) frame, I'm more comfortable firing hotter 357 loads more often with it.

686, 66, 66

Stainz · November 3, 2009, 08:02 AM

From the '04 S&W catalog, the 4" 66, with it's partial lug, weighs 37.0 oz. The 4" 686+, the 7-shooter, with it's full lug, weighs 38.5 oz. Wow. Of course, the L-frame got a thicker front strap - for the .025" larger OD forcing cone - an answer to the perceived barrel-life problem with <125gr hyper velocity Magnums. They both share the same gripframe - and grips. The frame opening on the L-frame is slightly taller, permitting the '+' 7-shot cylinder. The choice between the two should 'revolve' on whether or not you like the light muzzle feel or look of the traditional looking partially lugged 66.

If you like the partial lug look, S&W did make a 5" half lugged 686+ about five years back as a 'Stocking Dealer Exclusive'. I have one - my only 686. They started making the L-framed 620, essentially a 686+ 7-shooter with a traditional half lug barrel. It weighs 37.9 oz. Of course, it, my 5" h-l 686+, and even my older 6" 66-6, all bought new, have the IL. I find that a non-issue in my selection process. YMMV.

Stainz

spacecoast · November 3, 2009, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Ok thanks for the replies. I think I'm going with the 686.

I'm a new owner of a 6" pre-lock 686-4 and am extremely pleased with it. There's very little recoil with .38 and .38 +P loads.

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...2&d=1256923680

JerseyDrez · November 3, 2009, 10:06 AM

brian45auto: two different frame sizes. so the only clear option, is both.

I like his answer.

BigJimP · November 3, 2009, 10:09 AM

I like - and own - both model 66's and 686's ....

I don't shoot max loads anyway - but I have no reservations about shooting .357 mag loads in a model 66. But realistically, I probably shoot less than 2,000 rounds a year thru most of my revolvers.

azredhawk44 · November 3, 2009, 10:10 AM

If I were to buy any current production S&W revolver, it would probably be a 619 or 620 rather than a 686. I don't favor the full underlug on the barrel.

The 13/19/65/66 are much better guns IMO. They handle better, move to new targets better, and have a lower bore axis. As long as you keep the loads above 125grains in projectile weight you don't have a lot to worry about with them. Run all the 158gr .357's you want in them. Or any .38 made under the sun.

18DAI · November 3, 2009, 11:03 AM

I own several examples of both the 66 and 686, all pre lock of course. I prefer the simplicity and reliability of "traditional" revolvers.

My preference is the 66. It is faster handling, and easy to carry all day, for me. All mine are tack drivers. The 686's are equally accurate. I've never discerned a difference between the two.

My best revolvers are the 3" 66's. "Perfect" as a handgun can be, for any and every task. Good luck with your decision. Regards 18DAI.

dgludwig · November 3, 2009, 11:46 AM

The op didn't state his intended purpose for the revolvers he's contemplating buying but if it's to be used as a carry weapon for self-defense, I'd recommend the model 65-same gun as the K-frame Model 66 sans adjustable sights with a differently configured heavier barrel.

Homerboy · November 3, 2009, 04:33 PM

I once emailed S&W about shooting 125 or 110 grain ammo in my 66. The response was an emphatic "DON"T DO IT". from them. That was when I decided to trade it towards the 686. They aren't made anymore, so how would they honor a warranty issue on a cracked forcing cone on a K frame?

Brian48 · November 3, 2009, 05:11 PM

I had the blued version of the 66 (Mod 19). Loved the gun, but I just didn't feel comfortable shooting .357s through it. Went with a 686-4 for nearly 15 years ago and have never regretted it.

David the Gnome · November 3, 2009, 06:43 PM

I just hope this is a choice I never have to make. I wouldn't want to give up either.

Russ5924 · November 3, 2009, 07:01 PM

I love my 66 have four my 686 is pretty much a safe queen. ( but shot it once this year) But I reload .38 and that is what is shot in all my .357. Why punish yourself shooting targets with .357 they make the same size hole and a lot less recoil. I would rather shoot my N frames if I want to shoot a revolver that heavy

November 2, 2009, 08:24 PM	#1
hot sauce Senior Member Join Date: May 21, 2006 Posts: 458	S&W 686 or 66? Which would you prefer? I'm thinking about getting one pre-lock of course but cant decide. Thanks

November 2, 2009, 08:39 PM	#3
Bigjim3 Senior Member Join Date: November 21, 2008 Location: Alabama Posts: 210	I like the 686 just fun to shoot. __________________ Jesus according to Luke:22:36: Then said he unto them, ,,,,,, and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one......... Thomas Jefferson: "No man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

November 2, 2009, 08:41 PM	#4
brian45auto Senior Member Join Date: April 19, 2009 Location: eastern pa Posts: 154	two different frame sizes. so the only clear option, is both. __________________ it's only metal, we can out think it.....

November 2, 2009, 09:22 PM	#7
brian45auto Senior Member Join Date: April 19, 2009 Location: eastern pa Posts: 154	the K frame was originally the 38spl frame. but it's a handy size. turns out 357's are alittle much for them(in a nutshell, a real small one). yes you can, but need to watch what bullet weights you use. the L frame was the answer to the K's short comings. like stated above, they share the same stocks. but if you want to feed it nothing but the hottest loads for it's entire life, perhaps an N frame would suit you better. __________________ it's only metal, we can out think it.....

November 3, 2009, 12:55 AM	#14
hexidismal Member Join Date: September 19, 2006 Location: Ulster County, NY Posts: 84	The 686 and 66 models are far and away my two favorite revolvers. They both have their place and I couldn't decide between just one. I'd have to vote for find one of each.. or more than one ! Seriously though if I HAD to pick just one, it'd probably be the 686 for no other reason then slightly better ammo versatility. The 686 being the beefier ( though just by a smidge ) frame, I'm more comfortable firing hotter 357 loads more often with it. 686, 66, 66 __________________ hex.gfx Design Studio - Offering discounts to all Pro-Gun and 2A Related Companies/Projects

November 2, 2009, 08:34 PM	#2
Superhouse 15 Senior Member Join Date: September 13, 2007 Location: Sunny Florida Posts: 686	One's bigger (obviously) so it depends on the use. For CCW, the smaller K frame. For lots of shooting with full power loads, the L frame.

November 2, 2009, 08:47 PM	#5
Homerboy Senior Member Join Date: June 16, 2004 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 595	I had a mint 66, but sold it for a mint 686. 66 is sweet, but i never felt comfortable shooting .357 in it. If the barrel says ".357 Magnum", I should be able to shoot ANY .357 I want, whenever I want. Uses the same grips, too.

November 2, 2009, 09:07 PM	#6
hot sauce Senior Member Join Date: May 21, 2006 Posts: 458	Is the K frame that much weaker than the L frame?

November 2, 2009, 09:43 PM	#8
hot sauce Senior Member Join Date: May 21, 2006 Posts: 458	But what did they "beef up" on the frame? Did K frames crack a lot? They dont look any bigger from the pics I've seen

November 2, 2009, 09:53 PM	#11
hot sauce Senior Member Join Date: May 21, 2006 Posts: 458	Ok thanks for the replies. I think I'm going with the 686.

November 2, 2009, 10:35 PM	#12
stevieboy Senior Member Join Date: March 14, 2008 Posts: 710	They're like apples and oranges. As an owner of both guns I can tell you that there are significant differences between the two. What are the primary differences between the 686 and the 66? I'd say that they come down to two things: overall weight and center of mass. The 4" 66 weighs about 35 or 36 ounces. The 686 comes in at about 44 ounces, or 1/2 pound more. That doesn't sound like much but you'll notice it when you hold the two guns at arm's length. The 66, with its non underlugged barrel, has most of its weight and its center of mass rearward. The 686, with its fully underlugged barrel, has its center of mass out in front of the cylinder and definitely feels somewhat front end heavy. I find it easier to pick up a target quickly with the 66 and the gun would certainly have advantages in timed fire at multiple targets. In other words it would be my choice for a sport like IDPA. It is an accurate gun and I can at times cloverleaf 6 rounds at 10 yards with it shooting offhand. It is not recommended as a platform from which to shoot a steady diet of the the hottest .357 magnum ammo like 125 gr. rounds. The 686, being heavier and with its center of mass shifted forward, is not nearly as handy as is the 66. On the other hand, I believe that it is a superior target gun, particularly out past 10 yards. It is an incredibly accurate handgun at longer distances!! If I had to pick a single revolver for bullseye shooting or for hunting, it would be a 686 with a 6" barrel. Also, it can handle the really hot stuff when it comes to ammo. I would be hard put to choose between the two and I'm fortunate to own one of each.

November 3, 2009, 08:02 AM	#15
Stainz Senior Member Join Date: May 13, 2007 Location: Alabama Posts: 517	From the '04 S&W catalog, the 4" 66, with it's partial lug, weighs 37.0 oz. The 4" 686+, the 7-shooter, with it's full lug, weighs 38.5 oz. Wow. Of course, the L-frame got a thicker front strap - for the .025" larger OD forcing cone - an answer to the perceived barrel-life problem with <125gr hyper velocity Magnums. They both share the same gripframe - and grips. The frame opening on the L-frame is slightly taller, permitting the '+' 7-shot cylinder. The choice between the two should 'revolve' on whether or not you like the light muzzle feel or look of the traditional looking partially lugged 66. If you like the partial lug look, S&W did make a 5" half lugged 686+ about five years back as a 'Stocking Dealer Exclusive'. I have one - my only 686. They started making the L-framed 620, essentially a 686+ 7-shooter with a traditional half lug barrel. It weighs 37.9 oz. Of course, it, my 5" h-l 686+, and even my older 6" 66-6, all bought new, have the IL. I find that a non-issue in my selection process. YMMV. Stainz

November 3, 2009, 10:06 AM	#17
JerseyDrez Senior Member Join Date: August 26, 2009 Location: Hmmm? Posts: 320	brian45auto: two different frame sizes. so the only clear option, is both. I like his answer. __________________ "I don't know what situation you'd be in where you'd be facing a bad guy and he'd have the time to notice your laser shaking and evaluate you as having low confidence. "

November 3, 2009, 10:09 AM	#18
BigJimP Senior Member Join Date: February 23, 2005 Posts: 3,557	I like - and own - both model 66's and 686's .... I don't shoot max loads anyway - but I have no reservations about shooting .357 mag loads in a model 66. But realistically, I probably shoot less than 2,000 rounds a year thru most of my revolvers.

November 3, 2009, 10:10 AM	#19
azredhawk44 Senior Member Join Date: September 28, 2005 Location: Mesa, AZ Posts: 5,146	If I were to buy any current production S&W revolver, it would probably be a 619 or 620 rather than a 686. I don't favor the full underlug on the barrel. The 13/19/65/66 are much better guns IMO. They handle better, move to new targets better, and have a lower bore axis. As long as you keep the loads above 125grains in projectile weight you don't have a lot to worry about with them. Run all the 158gr .357's you want in them. Or any .38 made under the sun. __________________ Blog: http://azredhawk44.blogspot.com Updated... whenever I feel like it. Are you a Rifleman? Appleseed Information: http://www.appleseedinfo.org Smarmy loquatious signature lines ® WildAlaska, Ken at Wild West Guns. Used with permission.

November 3, 2009, 11:03 AM	#20
18DAI Senior Member Join Date: September 30, 2005 Location: NC Posts: 1,621	I own several examples of both the 66 and 686, all pre lock of course. I prefer the simplicity and reliability of "traditional" revolvers. My preference is the 66. It is faster handling, and easy to carry all day, for me. All mine are tack drivers. The 686's are equally accurate. I've never discerned a difference between the two. My best revolvers are the 3" 66's. "Perfect" as a handgun can be, for any and every task. Good luck with your decision. Regards 18DAI. __________________ S&W Model 19 Combat Magnum. Everything you need in a revolver, and nothing you don't.

November 3, 2009, 11:46 AM	#21
dgludwig Senior Member Join Date: February 12, 2005 Posts: 1,554	The op didn't state his intended purpose for the revolvers he's contemplating buying but if it's to be used as a carry weapon for self-defense, I'd recommend the model 65-same gun as the K-frame Model 66 sans adjustable sights with a differently configured heavier barrel. __________________ ONLY AN ARMED PEOPLE CAN BE TRULY FREE ; ONLY AN UNARMED PEOPLE CAN EVER BE ENSLAVED ...Aristotle NRA Benefactor Life Member

November 3, 2009, 04:33 PM	#22
Homerboy Senior Member Join Date: June 16, 2004 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 595	I once emailed S&W about shooting 125 or 110 grain ammo in my 66. The response was an emphatic "DON"T DO IT". from them. That was when I decided to trade it towards the 686. They aren't made anymore, so how would they honor a warranty issue on a cracked forcing cone on a K frame?

November 3, 2009, 05:11 PM	#23
Brian48 Senior Member Join Date: December 21, 2001 Location: Boston, People's Republic of MA Posts: 511	I had the blued version of the 66 (Mod 19). Loved the gun, but I just didn't feel comfortable shooting .357s through it. Went with a 686-4 for nearly 15 years ago and have never regretted it.

November 3, 2009, 06:43 PM	#24
David the Gnome Senior Member Join Date: July 5, 2007 Location: Lexington, KY Posts: 2,132	I just hope this is a choice I never have to make. I wouldn't want to give up either. __________________ David the Gnome's Collection

November 3, 2009, 07:01 PM	#25
Russ5924 Senior Member Join Date: February 18, 2005 Posts: 1,781	I love my 66 have four my 686 is pretty much a safe queen. ( but shot it once this year) But I reload .38 and that is what is shot in all my .357. Why punish yourself shooting targets with .357 they make the same size hole and a lot less recoil. I would rather shoot my N frames if I want to shoot a revolver that heavy __________________ Russ5924