S&W 686 4" vs S&W 66-2 2 1/2"

[Volzfan]

OK I know that TGO isn't a good place to ask for an opinion because the members here are so shy about saying what they are thinking.

NOT!!!!

Now to get serious, I have had the 686 for 10 years or so now and absolutely love shooting this gun. I never have carried it nor do I ever see myself doing so. I just hate the thought of parting with this baby. The problem is that I have the chance to buy a friends S&W 66-2 w/ a 2.5" barrel for $600. I've shot this gun and like it very much also. Has anyone had both of these guns and if so what is you opinion of the 66-2? Even if you never owned a 686 but have owned the 66-2 please give me your opinion on it.

The best case scenario is obviously to buy the 66-2 and keep them both and that may be exactly what I do. I also think that the 66-2 may be one that I do actually carry at some point.

[diablo982]

I have both the 4" 686 and a 2 1/2" 66. Aesthetically, both are great looking guns and I would sell neither. If I had to chose one, the 686 wins hands-down. Maybe I lucked out with an exceptional gun but my 686 is the BEST...GUN...EVER! The action, balance and accuracy is the best of any gun I've ever owned. I think the 4" barrel is ideal for target shooting. The short-barreled 66 is fun too, but not the same. If you were planning on carrying the 66 you might be disappointed. Even though it has the 2.5 in. Barrel, the weight felt like a full-sized revolver. In summary, if you can afford both,do it. If not, I wouldn't give up the 686.

[Bassoneer]

I might be able to confuse things a little. I have a 686 4" and as we all know it is wonderful. Shoots well, handles well, accurate, will take any ammo you put in it, etc. I have even carried it once or twice just to see if it can be done - yes it can, but it is heavy. I also recently got a K-frame, not exactly the 2.5" 66, but rather a 3" 13. As you probably know, the 13 is a blued version with fixed sights (as opposed to SS with adjustable sights). It is a .357 Magnum also, but I think it's common knowledge that we shouldn't use the hot 125 grain loads in the K-frames...actually, I've never shot a .357 Magnum in it, but rather I've limited it to .38 Special and a few +P's. Here's what I think - the 13 is more accurate. I don't know why, because the barrel is shorter by 1". And the 13 has a smoother trigger and a tighter lockup. I don't know why - I think I still like the 686 better, but the 13 is one that my wife and I both shoot well and I normally take it to the range every time I go. It is fun to shoot.

So...confusing, right? I like both. I think the 686 is probably the best gun on the planet (my opinion of course), but I don't envision ever selling the 13 either because it is accurate, smooth and a very good balanced size to handle. And I have not carried the 13, but I think you could carry it easier than the 686. Best Wishes, B

[TNWNGR]

I have M-19's in 2.5, 4 & 6" barrel versions and have owned a couple of 686's in 4 & 6". All are and were excellent revolver's with a the 686 being more easy to control with magnum loads. If I were starting over again and had a good 686 I wouldn't trade it for a 2.5 M-19 because I'd be giving up a one good gun for another good gun.

[DaveTN]

I have both. The 686 4†is my nightstand gun; I carried one as a cop for years and used it in Police Pistol Competitions. It’s the most accurate handgun I have ever shot. For me, it was more accurate than the 6†version and three 6†Colt Pythons I tried.

I also own 66 2.5â€. It’s a very good carry gun, but doesn’t get much use because I have better options now. But it carries well.

The 66 in 2.5†is very desirable and becoming harder to get all the time. The 686 4†is a work horse. Get both.

I enjoy shooting both of these guns so much that I bought the 617 in .22 to be able to afford more trigger time.

[lshel]

I too have owned several 686's in 4"&6" and the 66 in 2 1/2". I decided to reduce the size of my gun safe revolver inventory, and the model 66's in 2 1/2" and 4" were sold. The 686 in 4" is a gun for all uses, is very reliable and tough. The 66 in 2 1/2" looks good and was an easier carry. The 686 is mostly my woods gun with first two chambers loaded with snake shot and the other four 125g HP. My snake and bigger varmint stopper. My 2 cents.

[1gewehr]

If you enjoy muzzle blast, recoil, and fireballs, go for the 2.5" barrel. Personally, I've never been a fan of short-barrel .357s. An extra 1.5" of barrel makes a huge world of difference with the .357. The 686 is a larger frame than the 66, so it will be significantly heavier beacuse of that and the longer full-lug barrel. I like my 4" 686 a lot, but have not considered it a viable concealed-carry revolver. Still, if I had to, I could probably make it work.

The smaller, lighter M66 would work well for CCW. And in the dark, you would probably blind anyone you fired at even if you missed!

[LCPfraTN]

I don't have a 686, but I have owned a 66 2.5" for almost 30 years and will never part with it. It obviously doesn't shoot as well as my matching set of model 19 and 18 4" barrel revolvers, but I wouldn't expect it to. The 66, to me, is the perfect carry size .357 revolver and a decent shooter....and dare I say beautiful to look at. The only thing better might be the elusive 3" model 66. A 686 is also on my list to get some day, so like the others have said, I'd keep the 686 and buy the 66.

[gregintenn]

Never sell a Smith! Buy another one, sure. Never sell one.

[Volzfan]

This is about what I had expected when I posed the question. Looks like both will be in my future!

Hope my wife doesn't read this!!!

[Volzfan]

[LCPfraTN]

Hey, that looks familiar!

[DevJames]

The 66 is a fine pistol but one thing to watch out for is they don't like a steady diet of .357 Mag that the 686 can handle.

the K frames are some of the best all purpose revolvers built BUT, like the model 29, just don't live long on a steady diet of magnum ammo.

I'd say keep the 686 and buy the 66 out right but check things like the forcing cone and cylinder gap clearance as well as making sure it still locks up strong.

That said, I'd love to have a 2.5" 66. Fantastic guns. If you get it, I'd advise feeding it .38 Special for the most part.

[Volzfan]

I shoot very few 357 thru my 686 but spend most of the range time shooting 38's and the reason is simply the difference in price. I would do the same with the 66. Of course I'll be running some 357's thru the 66 to see how it handles them!

[DevJames]

use a heavier grain bullet when you do. The lighter magnums where the ones that usually lead to cracked forcing cones.

[DaveTN]

The K-frame handles the magnum loads fine; just use the proper bullet. Use 158 grain when shooting magnums and you will be fine. Don’t use 115-125.

That’s the short version. There are years and years of information and articles that have been written on this. You can check them out for all the details.

[Guest motonut]

I have a 686 (no dash) 4" I bought new in 1987. If you decide to sell your 686 please let me know, I would love to put another one in the safe.

[Volzfan]

OK I'm now officially the proud new owner of the S&W 66-2!

[Volzfan]

I guess that I should have known that you guys would convince me that the best solution to having to choose between the two is to choose them BOTH!!!

Thanks!!!

[LCPfraTN]

I guess that I should have known that you guys would convince me that the best solution to having to choose between the two is to choose them BOTH!!!

Thanks!!!

Now isn't that what you really wanted us to do anyway? Congrats on a very nice revolver.