Jim Watson
New member
S&W Model 27 of any vintage is on the N frame, larger than either K or L.
S&W Model 66, a few questions
- Thread starter AID_Admin
- Start date
One more opinion---based on a 66-6 in hand comparing it to the
fuzzy picture.
The gun in the pic is a 686.
1 Lug is longer than the 66.
2 Bottom of forcing cone is not cut flat like the 66.
3 distance from rim to edge of cylinder is more than the 66.
I don't currently have any L frames to do a direct comparison,
just J, K, N and a few old hand ejectors. Guess I need to
rectify that.
fuzzy picture.
The gun in the pic is a 686.
1 Lug is longer than the 66.
2 Bottom of forcing cone is not cut flat like the 66.
3 distance from rim to edge of cylinder is more than the 66.
I don't currently have any L frames to do a direct comparison,
just J, K, N and a few old hand ejectors. Guess I need to
rectify that.
AID,
Not trying to talk you out of a K, just advising that S&W has no replacement barrels for a 19, and with repeated use of magnum loads forcing cones have been known to crack.
Such things as firing pins & hammers are becoming problematical at S&W.
There are still many replacement parts floating around at gunsmith shops, but those will be drying up since S&W isn't producing any new ones for the older models.
I have several older Smiths, bought a new snub 66 last year. I'm not knocking them, just pointing out a potential situation with the out-of-production guns.
Get one in the best shape you can possibly afford & find, that'll give you your best chances of a longer useful service life.
If you get a 19, avoid shooting 125-grain .357 Mag loads through it.
Denis
Not trying to talk you out of a K, just advising that S&W has no replacement barrels for a 19, and with repeated use of magnum loads forcing cones have been known to crack.
Such things as firing pins & hammers are becoming problematical at S&W.
There are still many replacement parts floating around at gunsmith shops, but those will be drying up since S&W isn't producing any new ones for the older models.
I have several older Smiths, bought a new snub 66 last year. I'm not knocking them, just pointing out a potential situation with the out-of-production guns.
Get one in the best shape you can possibly afford & find, that'll give you your best chances of a longer useful service life.
If you get a 19, avoid shooting 125-grain .357 Mag loads through it.
Denis
Denis, thanks again for an advise! I am not overly concerned with a forcing cone issue on K-frame. This is going to be a target shooting gun, so it will hardly ever see 357 loads anyway, except for the nightstand loading and an occasional few rounds at the range for fun and training. I understand that for range purposes I don't even need a magnum quality gun. I could probably get by with Model 14 and if a good example of it comes by cheap enough I will probably grab it. But having a magnum option in case I ever get in a self defense situation is nice and I am willing to pay a bit extra for it.
The Verminator
Moderator
Gun in pic can't be a Model 66......it has a safety lock.
As far as I know, they never made a 66 with a lock.
Oops, I see somebody else said that they did make some late 66s with a lock.
Well, the lock still makes it very unlikely, as they couldn't have made very many of them.
As far as I know, they never made a 66 with a lock.
Oops, I see somebody else said that they did make some late 66s with a lock.
Well, the lock still makes it very unlikely, as they couldn't have made very many of them.
Last edited:
The Verminator
Moderator
As to the other questions......
Yes, just a better fit to your hand could make a huge difference in accuracy.
Maybe the K frame fits you better or maybe the grips were just slightly different.
In looking for older Smiths, don't forget the Model 15.
The 19 and 66 are great guns and unless you shoot a LOT of heavily loaded .357s, they'll last longer than you will.
Yes, just a better fit to your hand could make a huge difference in accuracy.
Maybe the K frame fits you better or maybe the grips were just slightly different.
In looking for older Smiths, don't forget the Model 15.
The 19 and 66 are great guns and unless you shoot a LOT of heavily loaded .357s, they'll last longer than you will.
AID_admin, So you like the 66 ? Like your original post when you compared some revolvers. I responded that you should also try the K frame magnum 19/66. Looks like the range gave you a 66 to shoot. Along with the model 19 I feel they are the finest all around revolvers S&W ever made. I have owned a herd of revolvers. From K frames, L frames and N frames in S&W and GP100, Security Sixes and SP101 in Ruger. Nothing shoots like a older model 19 or model 66. Start looking for a clean one.
Howard
When looking... it pays to know a few of the OTHER Model numbers that might also "fit" for your needs.
If a fixed sight revolver is to your liking, then a Model 65 is the same thing as a 66, but with fixed sights. It's also stainless steel. (A model 64 is stainless with fixed sights, but in .38 Special.)
A Model 13 is a .357 Magnum with a blued finish, fixed sights and it lacks the shroud for the ejector rod, so it looks a little more like a beefy Model 10.
Some of these model numbers do get confusing...but after a while, they draw you in and you learn them whether you want to or not!
If you end up with a K-frame, either .38 or .357 and you end up loving it, you'll need to save up some more money...because a Model 17 or 18 will be on your shopping list. (wonderful K-frame .22LR revolvers)
If a fixed sight revolver is to your liking, then a Model 65 is the same thing as a 66, but with fixed sights. It's also stainless steel. (A model 64 is stainless with fixed sights, but in .38 Special.)
A Model 13 is a .357 Magnum with a blued finish, fixed sights and it lacks the shroud for the ejector rod, so it looks a little more like a beefy Model 10.
Some of these model numbers do get confusing...but after a while, they draw you in and you learn them whether you want to or not!
If you end up with a K-frame, either .38 or .357 and you end up loving it, you'll need to save up some more money...because a Model 17 or 18 will be on your shopping list. (wonderful K-frame .22LR revolvers)
I know this has been a dead tread for a while, but just in case someone is glancing though it and looking for a revolver trying to figure it what fits him better K-Frame 66 or L-Frame 686... Here is an update.
In the beginning of this tread there was a question about the gun I was shooting on the range which looked like a Model 66 due to a half lug, but with a full forcing cone, like Model 686. Well I just shoot that same gun today. It's a Model 620! Yes, fairly rare "transitional" model based on L-Frame, but with a half lug. If you can find one for sale it would be the optimal compromise between models 66 and 686. It does have a "dreaded" lock though
In the beginning of this tread there was a question about the gun I was shooting on the range which looked like a Model 66 due to a half lug, but with a full forcing cone, like Model 686. Well I just shoot that same gun today. It's a Model 620! Yes, fairly rare "transitional" model based on L-Frame, but with a half lug. If you can find one for sale it would be the optimal compromise between models 66 and 686. It does have a "dreaded" lock though
Cosmodragoon
New member
I am a fan of both the 66 and 686+. The regular 686 is nice but ultimately lost on me. Having only stated shooting revolvers in the last few years, I have no nostalgia for the classic 686. In the environment in which I started, the larger L frame was set up for 7 rounds in .357 and it fit perfectly.
I love the way a K frame sits in my hand and it is a bit more comfortable to carry all day. So if I wanted a general purpose six-shooter, I'd reach for the 66.
I've read that the real reason for the L frame was greater structural integrity against a steady magnum diet. Then again, if I'm shooting a steady magnum diet, a little more size and weight is better for me too. So the 686+ is my natural choice for woods carry, magnum range shooting, or just when I feel like I need a little more gun.
I love the way a K frame sits in my hand and it is a bit more comfortable to carry all day. So if I wanted a general purpose six-shooter, I'd reach for the 66.
I've read that the real reason for the L frame was greater structural integrity against a steady magnum diet. Then again, if I'm shooting a steady magnum diet, a little more size and weight is better for me too. So the 686+ is my natural choice for woods carry, magnum range shooting, or just when I feel like I need a little more gun.
Deaf Smith
New member
S&W 66-2 on the left, 686-2 is on the right.
Notice the difference in thickness of the frame and cylinder between the two.
Yes they are both nice guns.
Deaf
Guy B. Meredith
New member
The 66 and 686+ have the same grip size. Any differences you feel between those is probably based on whether it is a square or round butt grip. I had the same Hogue square butt on both of mine for a while, though the 66 came with a round butt grip.
Main differences are beefier top strap, and the larger cylinder size which makes room for a beefier forcing cone.
I picked up my 66 around 2001 when they were being made with the lock.
Dunno about the specs on the 620.
Main differences are beefier top strap, and the larger cylinder size which makes room for a beefier forcing cone.
I picked up my 66 around 2001 when they were being made with the lock.
Dunno about the specs on the 620.
From what I saw 620 is essentially a 686 with half lug. It has seven chambers, thus same size cylinder as 686+ and "full circle" forcing cone like 686 has. For all intended purposes it's probably the predecessor of 686 Mountain gun which SW make nowadays occasionally as limited edition...
Several have mentioned the issue with model 19/66 forcing cones but did not fully explain what happened, giving a distorted picture. The also didn't mention flame cutting on the top strap either (although this turns out to be a non-issue, other then cosmetically).
Yes, a number of model 19s did have forcing cone trouble (usually cracks), and I suppose some model 66s did too, although one never seems to hear about them, only model 19s.
S&W created the model 19 (and later produced the 66 which is the same gun in stainless steel) by upgrading their existing .38 Special. It was intended for the police market, primarily, being the same size and weight as their .38s, but able to shoot the more powerful magnum loads. It was intended that the guns be shot mostly with .38s and .357s were to be used less frequently, as they did put a slight strain on the gun. And by this, I mean that the guns would need servicing/repair with a lower round count of .357 than they would if only shot with .38s.
Now, here's the rub, model 19s will easily take lots of .357 mag rounds without trouble. BUT it depends on which magnum loads...
The 19 replaced the model 27/28 in police use fairly quickly, its lighter, and much easier to wear for long periods. Some State Police/Highway Patrol depts. kept their N frame guns longer, but eventually, most of them did switch over to lighter guns.
All is well, for decades, then 19s start having forcing cone issues, well above the previous failure rate. And its not some flaw in new guns, the trouble is showing up here and there, all over.
It turned out that the problem was a combination of things, that had not previously existed together. IT wasn't just "magnum ammo" it was a specific load of magnum ammo, combined with the specific configuration of the 19s forcing cone (it has a flat spot not found on other S&W models).
The load was the 125gr JHP. Model 19s had served for decades in police use shooting the 158gr .357, even lots of them, with the normal failure rate, and the expected wear rates.
It wasn't until the majority of police users switched over from the 158gr ammo to the 125gr ammo that the problem with the forcing cones showed up. Studies touting the 125gr JHP load as the best manstopper (and with statistics backing that up) got nearly everyone to use that load (and for good reason, it works well).
But the combination of the model 19s forcing cone configuration, the large charge of slow burning powder, and the short bearing surface of the 125gr JHP combined into a "perfect storm" and lead to an unacceptably high failure rate. Note that this problem did not show up when the guns were shot (and shot a lot) with the 158gr load, OR the 110gr load (which is loaded lighter than the 125JHP).
This is true, BUT it was not all magnum loads, only high volume use of the 125grJHP load that gave trouble. Guns shot with high volumes of the regular 158gr magnums did not have troubles above the normal, expected (and low) failure rate. 19s/66s shooting a few hundred rounds of magnums and a few thousand rounds of 38s yearly gave the normal expected service life.
This is one of the reasons that S&W created the L frame guns. The L frame is just enough bigger and beefier than the K frame that the problems model 19s were having with the 125gr ammo didn't show up in L frames.
On an interesting note, the L frame guns (586-blued, 686-stainless), with their full underlug barrels, weigh the same as N frame guns, although their balance is different.
The guns themselves are not more accurate in one model than the other. Individual guns may be more accurate than others, but that happens with all guns. It is the combination of the grip, balance, and feel of the guns in your hands that makes one model more accurate, for you, than the other.
A difference of just a few ounces, or the difference in the balance of the gun can make a big difference to some shooters. Everyone is a unique individual in this regard.
I have a friend who cannot hit the proverbial bull in the butt with a S&W J frame revolver. He's deadly accurate with larger guns, and quite accurate with a Colt Detective Special the same (approx.) size as the S&W J frame, go figure...
Something about that model's "fit" in his hands just doesn't work for him. Maybe its all in his head, and not in his hands, but the result is the same, either way. He's more accurate with some models of gun than with nearly identical but slightly different models. I don't think he's unique in that regard. Some guns fit me better than others, too. Some just feel "right" and "natural" while others I have to work at getting the same results downrange.
Yes, a number of model 19s did have forcing cone trouble (usually cracks), and I suppose some model 66s did too, although one never seems to hear about them, only model 19s.
S&W created the model 19 (and later produced the 66 which is the same gun in stainless steel) by upgrading their existing .38 Special. It was intended for the police market, primarily, being the same size and weight as their .38s, but able to shoot the more powerful magnum loads. It was intended that the guns be shot mostly with .38s and .357s were to be used less frequently, as they did put a slight strain on the gun. And by this, I mean that the guns would need servicing/repair with a lower round count of .357 than they would if only shot with .38s.
Now, here's the rub, model 19s will easily take lots of .357 mag rounds without trouble. BUT it depends on which magnum loads...
The 19 replaced the model 27/28 in police use fairly quickly, its lighter, and much easier to wear for long periods. Some State Police/Highway Patrol depts. kept their N frame guns longer, but eventually, most of them did switch over to lighter guns.
All is well, for decades, then 19s start having forcing cone issues, well above the previous failure rate. And its not some flaw in new guns, the trouble is showing up here and there, all over.
It turned out that the problem was a combination of things, that had not previously existed together. IT wasn't just "magnum ammo" it was a specific load of magnum ammo, combined with the specific configuration of the 19s forcing cone (it has a flat spot not found on other S&W models).
The load was the 125gr JHP. Model 19s had served for decades in police use shooting the 158gr .357, even lots of them, with the normal failure rate, and the expected wear rates.
It wasn't until the majority of police users switched over from the 158gr ammo to the 125gr ammo that the problem with the forcing cones showed up. Studies touting the 125gr JHP load as the best manstopper (and with statistics backing that up) got nearly everyone to use that load (and for good reason, it works well).
But the combination of the model 19s forcing cone configuration, the large charge of slow burning powder, and the short bearing surface of the 125gr JHP combined into a "perfect storm" and lead to an unacceptably high failure rate. Note that this problem did not show up when the guns were shot (and shot a lot) with the 158gr load, OR the 110gr load (which is loaded lighter than the 125JHP).
This is true, BUT it was not all magnum loads, only high volume use of the 125grJHP load that gave trouble. Guns shot with high volumes of the regular 158gr magnums did not have troubles above the normal, expected (and low) failure rate. 19s/66s shooting a few hundred rounds of magnums and a few thousand rounds of 38s yearly gave the normal expected service life.
This is one of the reasons that S&W created the L frame guns. The L frame is just enough bigger and beefier than the K frame that the problems model 19s were having with the 125gr ammo didn't show up in L frames.
On an interesting note, the L frame guns (586-blued, 686-stainless), with their full underlug barrels, weigh the same as N frame guns, although their balance is different.
The guns themselves are not more accurate in one model than the other. Individual guns may be more accurate than others, but that happens with all guns. It is the combination of the grip, balance, and feel of the guns in your hands that makes one model more accurate, for you, than the other.
A difference of just a few ounces, or the difference in the balance of the gun can make a big difference to some shooters. Everyone is a unique individual in this regard.
I have a friend who cannot hit the proverbial bull in the butt with a S&W J frame revolver. He's deadly accurate with larger guns, and quite accurate with a Colt Detective Special the same (approx.) size as the S&W J frame, go figure...
Something about that model's "fit" in his hands just doesn't work for him. Maybe its all in his head, and not in his hands, but the result is the same, either way. He's more accurate with some models of gun than with nearly identical but slightly different models. I don't think he's unique in that regard. Some guns fit me better than others, too. Some just feel "right" and "natural" while others I have to work at getting the same results downrange.
Not necessarily. The last variants of the Model 66 were built on an upgraded frame design that, as far as I can tell, is slightly beefier than the original K-frame, but not the same size as an L-Frame. These guns used the 2-piece barrel arrangement found on the 619/620 and included the lock, MIM trigger &
hammer and new style cylinder release. See photo below. The 2-piece barrel and modified frame allowed for a circular forcing cone to meet the cylinder. That is, no flat cut to allow clearance for the cylinder yoke arm.
Late variant of the Model 66 with 2-piece barrel, lock, MIM parts. Purchased circa 2004
44 AMP
Good coverage of the S&W forcing cone issue. One additional item of note is that S&W inspected hundreds of guns returned for repair. Their analysis indicated that the vast majority of the fractured barrels also indicated a build up of lead around the forcing cone. Some theorize that police officers had used the .38 wadcutters for practice for years and that many officers were not diligent about weapons hygiene after shooting. And yes, I've seen officers dip a brush in solvent, scrub the bore with 5-6 strokes and call it "clean enough". My source, an ex-S&W employee, said that they believed it was that the 125 gr bullet jumped the cylinder gap at higher speeds and with more hot gas enveloping the bullet (due to the short bullet). You get more flame cutting, but more important, a hotter forcing cone. Add a bullet trying to force its way into a restricted space due to leading and you'll find the weakest point in the steel -- that flat spot under the barrel.