S&W 686 vs. Colt King Cobra?

[jwise]

What is the practical difference between these two handguns? Other than the fact the Colt is discontinued and the 686 is not, how would you compare the two?

[JMag1]

How much do you have to spend...practically?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Sevens]

"Practical" difference, I'm not sure what your end game is here. I have owned both and each has their draw.

If you want panache and scarcity, the Colt King Cobra wins here. 686's are everywhere and growing. The Colt will likely cost you more but will also appreciate in "value" more becauae Colt snake guns simply do this and cannot be stopped.

If you want to shoot them, the 686 has a better double action trigger stroke and is far easier to tune for an even better trigger. And the actual contour of the 686 trigger is far more friendly to my trigger finger than the grooved trigger of the Colt.

Both are robust and durable and unlikely to fail... but if something does go awry, I don't believe Colt is going to be much help while S&W still services any/every 686.

Lots more grip/stock options for the 686 than the KC, if that matters.

I sold my King Cobra and while I thought it was a gorgeous revolver, it just wasn't nearly as good a handgun as my 686. But at the same time... nobody is ever gonna give me the same kind of money for my 686.

[thibaultfelix40]

I have never touched a King Cobra and just held a 686 once though I do have one on order. The difference to me is that I can get a 686 and get parts for it and find people to work on it. Also I can pick from different styles and I like 3" barrels.

[UncleEd]

Smith, better lock work and parts availability.

Smith, better trigger especially in double action.

One thing buyers must remember about the King Cobra, it is not another
version of the Python.

The only reason a King Cobra commands any attention today is that
in its day it didn't sell very well and hence it's rarer and it does have
the pony stamp on his frame.

[Gungnir]

I regularly rent both at my local range, and I'll say that the KC feels a lot heavier and bulkier in mt hand than a 686 of the same barrel length. Other than that, both rental guns are terribly abused, and drawing any further conclusions about the qualities and abilities of the two models based on the specimens I have available would be unfair.

[jackmoser65]

Would rather have a 586.

[James K]

If you are thinking carry, recognize that if you use the gun you may lose it, maybe permanently. The 686 can be easily replaced; the Colt is a collector's item and costly.

Jim

[sarge83]

I have both and carried the Colt quite a bit for a while. It just pointed and felt better in my hands. That being said when I got a Smith Model 19-4, the Colt became a safe queen.

[muzzleblast...]

Sevens and others have summed it up nicely. I am both a Colt and a S&W fan. But IMO from a practical perspective the 686 wins in a head-to-head with the Colt. The King Cobra wins in collectability.

[Hanshi]

I've owned a 686 (no dash) for over 30 years and it is as good as they get. I consider them to be virtually in the same class as the Python. I rarely shoot my Python but have shot the 686 a lot, mostly wadcutters, but have also killed several deer with it firing mag loads, of course.

While no experience with the KC I have fired the latter version of the Trooper. Trigger pull left a lot to be desired in dbl action but the single action was quite good. But that thing could really shoot. I wouldn't have minded owning one.

The 686 is supremely accurate, has a wonderful dbl & single trigger. IMHO the 686 is about as good as it gets. It does fit my smaller hands better than the Python.

[jwise]

Good to know. I already have a 586, but I was thinking about getting a stainless model. I saw a King Cobra, but don't know much about them.

[BBarn]

Back in the 80s I was in the market for a new 357. At that time I looked at Ruger's Security Six, Colt's King Cobra, and Smith's 686. I preferred the cosmetics of the King Cobra, but ended up with the Smith due to design.

My general impression at the time was that the Ruger was the most durable, the Smith had the best trigger (both out-of-the-box and with a little more work). Beyond the cosmetics, I also preferred the cylinder release of the Colt, but the grip didn't suit my smaller hands as well as the Smith.

[4V50 Gary]

Older non-MIM pre-safety 686 over Cobra.

[Psychedelic Bang]

Originally Posted by James K

If you are thinking carry, recognize that if you use the gun you may lose it, maybe permanently. The 686 can be easily replaced; the Colt is a collector's item and costly.

Jim

+ 1

[jwise]

Revolvers aren't carry guns for me. They are range toys, or critter-dispatching at most (but usually I'd pick my suppressed Glock 19 MOS for that role).

I like nice things. I didn't know if the KC is considered to be a better revolver than the Smith 686, or if the price difference was just a function of it being discontinued.

I kinda like Colt (1911s, mostly), and have a LNIB (unfired) 4" blued Python Elite. I have thought about getting something close to the Python so satisfy my desire to shoot it.

[T. O'Heir]

"...the price difference..." Has more to do with the Cobra having 'Colt' engraved on it than anything else. Otherwise, its cylinder rotates clockwise and the Smith's counter clockwise. A .357 is a .357.
Factory triggers are irrelevant as all of 'em need fixing. Except Pythons.

[UncleEd]

Nonsense regarding all factory triggers need fixing except the Python.
Pure nonsense.

[4V50 Gary]

Concur with UncleEd. My brother sent his perfectly good Python in for an adjustment. They adjusted it alright. Then I had to fix it.

[Sevens]

Original, untouched factory (double action) trigger on my circa-1991 Colt King Cobra was heinous. Original, untouched DA trigger on my circa 1989 Model 686-3 is far, far better. Even a die-hard Colt fan would agree.

Not close.

[UncleEd]

The King Cobra is not the Python action/innards; it was a version Colt offered
to try and compete on price with Smith and Ruger and retain a bit of the Python's outer profile.

[pete2]

To me the real difference is the trigger pull, double action. I'll take a S&W every time over a Colt or Ruger either one. You can rework the Ruger or Colt and come up with a good trigger pull. That is if you know someone who can do it.

[UncleEd]

pete2,

I guess all the Ruger owners who've worked on GP 100s and SP 101s were too stupid to know they couldn't work on them but they did. And the results were
excellent.

Actually, the GP 100 triggers are pretty good out of the box, usually right
around 10 pounds to 11 pounds which is the same as a Smith and the
pull is smooth much like a Smith.

I like Smiths. I like Rugers.

And I like Pythons but just not as much because of the stacking of the
DA trigger and the fact that they can go out of time more easily in fast
DA shooting.

[MrBorland]

Originally Posted by UncleEd

I guess all the Ruger owners who've worked on GP 100s and SP 101s were too stupid to know they couldn't work on them but they did. And the results were
excellent.

No one said anything about being "too stupid" until you assumed they did. Chill out. This is how threads get derailed.

IME, while Smiths tend to have a bit better factory trigger than Rugers, it's a rare factory trigger (of any brand) that can't be improved with some good tuning. Rugers, a bit rougher out of the box, generally respond very nicely to a good action job, but not everyone knows how to do that type of work themselves.