Old S&W 67 (No Dash) vs. New S&W 686

J

JJNA

New member
I bought a S&W 686 last year and was a bit disappointed (slightly over-torqued barrel and gritty, heavy trigger).

Then recently I bought a S&W 67 no dash in excellent condition and was shocked by the fit and finish of the revolver. And what sweet trigger! They really don't make them like that anymore, do they?

Also, here is something I don't get. I was under the impression that the K and L frame shared the same grip size, but the L frame round butt seems to create a less agreeable grip feel than the K frame square butt, even with both sporting identical-looking Ahrends grips (identical externally; internally obviously the round and square butts differ in their cutouts).

Why is that? Why is the old K frame much more pleasant to grip?

Do the older L frames follow more of the old K frame contour or the new L frame contour?
 
It is my opinion that brand new S&W revolvers that carry the PC (Performance Center) labeling and packaging come close to approaching the genuine smooth double action feel that all S&W revolvers made before approximately the year 2000 or so feel, work and run.

I own more than a couple, I am an absolute devotee of them. The double action trigger of new non-PC revolvers from S&W simply cannot compare, it is not close, and it is not at all difficult to notice.

My opinion, of course.
 
Maybe the weight and balance is contributing to the different feel. I have a fondness for older Smith's and some other manufactures also and agree about the finish. Most guns today are matte finish and kind of generic, S&W had all those nice variations and options on their revolvers, cool stuff! Fit on new guns is hard to beat though because of CNC machining.
 
The K- and L-frame grips are the same, but S&W transitioned to the round butt in the mid-90s. The RB is easier to conceal, but most (myself included) find the SB better for shooting. More contact area in the lower palm area is my guess.

Regarding stuff from the Performance Center - it's been my observation that current PC revolvers don't seem to get any additional tuning any longer, nor do they get equipped with goodies such as forged internals. When you buy a current PC revolver, you're simply buying a revolver configuration that's not available in their standard lineup.

Old vs new? Meh. It's an oft-discussed topic with no resolution. I've seen good and bad examples of each. My advice is to buy what you like, then shoot it as much as you can. If it needs tuning, get a gunsmith to tune it. They're not immutable, after all. :rolleyes:
 
Different barrel lengths between the 67 and 686?? That would certainly contribute to a different feel in handling.

One thing I have done to my newer Smiths: Remove the side plate then clean and apply a thin film of a quality gun oil to the moving parts and mating surfaces and pivot points in the trigger mechanism. I know how to remove the whole trigger group to more effectively do this little "job". If you are able to do so as well I would recommend it.

For oil I use the CLP that comes in a small squirt bottle, is thicker almost like 10w motor oil and says it is for lubricating the actions on autos. I apply it with a Q-tip. Just wet the Q-tip and wipe the aforementioned areas, but don't get excessive..just enough to apply a thin coating. I have found this smooths up the triggers on the newer Smiths pretty nicely.

I own both old school and new Smiths and I agree that the old timers have a nicer trigger all around. Not to say the new ones are bad by any stretch, just that the old ones are a cut above.
 
I suspect the difference is the size of the gun. The L frame is a bigger, slightly heavier gun. The grip size may be the same, but the weight and balance is different.

For some reason, and I don't pretend to know why, I've never had any interest in any L frame. If I want something bigger than a K, I'll get a N. If I want something bigger than a N, I'll get a rifle. ;) :D

Older vs newer, I can't say about either. I've owned a couple of "newer" Smith & Wessons, even a couple with the lock, but they were all made at least ten years ago. I think the last new in the box Smith & Wesson I bought was the very first handgun I bought back in the late 70's. There are too many good used ones out there.
 
I hear you. I have two S&W K frame and an older 19-3. Wonderful guns that I will never get rid off as they were my Dad's. Also an old, old Army Special Colt that has a great feel also.
 
Do the older L frames follow more of the old K frame contour or the new L frame contour?
Click to expand...
There were quite a few square-butt L-Frames in the early days. The switch to round butts across the board was to simplify production. If users wanted the square-butt profile, they could get conversion grips.

That said, round-to-square conversions still leave a bit of a gap in the rear that I find annoying.

As for weight, there's going to be a noticeable difference, partially because of the smaller frame on the 67, but mostly due to the absence of a barrel underlug.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top