S&W 686 PATRIDGE SIGHT 6" .357 MAGNUM REVOLVER, SATIN STAINLESS - 150844 Columbia, SC

[BluesBrother]

Okay, lets try this again. This do over is for those that don't know where Palmetto State Armory is located. Or more to the point which state identifies as the Palmetto State. I'm not selling this piece, PSA is. I've not seen this for sale at PSA before. I'm aware there are many on this and many other forums that would like to own this revolver at a reasonable price. This looks like a reasonable price to me. This one has the desirable Patridge front sight. Try to call in a favor from your favorite FFL to help procure this beauty. Good Luck. If you are able to buy it, you won't be sorry, your children won't be sorry, and your grand children won't be sorry. This is a true heirloom piece. Many on the forum are not on the PSA email list. This post is to make those forum members aware this is available for price plus shipping and fees but no sales tax. I think I have that right.

 

[Welldoya]

I got that email but assumed it has the internal lock which makes it a no-go for me.

 

[Jester896]

it was in the email they sent me today around noon

 

[Bullet Splatter]

Obligatory love my 686 post.

 

[Az-Vic]

A partridge is a bird, hard to put on the end of a revolver barrel. Some Smith & Wesson's do have a Patridge sight, a wide flat topped front sight.

 

[Ron]

That is not a bad price at all. These pistols go for close to, if not $1000 on average now. Of course the older ones do command a higher price. With all the talk about possible assault weapons bans and high capacity magazine bans, the price on these are sure to climb!

 

[Try'n Hard]

A partridge is a bird, hard to put on the end of a revolver barrel. Some Smith & Wesson's do have a Patridge sight, a wide flat topped front sight.

 

[BluesBrother]

Thanks for all the constructive criticism especially on the Patridge (Partridge) front sight. I especially like the photo shopped picture with the partridge roosting on the barrel. Or maybe that picture isn't photo shopped. Stuff happens when you're in a hurry and you copy and paste without editing. I wonder if someone caught the error in the email and advised PSA of the mistake? I think that email goes out nationally. I don't think it's a regional email.

 

[Welldoya]

I just wish they would show a picture of both sides of the gun but nobody ever does due to the stigma of the internal lock.

 

[BluesBrother]

I just wish they would show a picture of both sides of the gun but nobody ever does due to the stigma of the internal lock.

I hate that S&W charges everyone for a safety that no one wants or needs and looks terrible. I'm thinking that safety adds $50 to $100 to the price of a new gun. I can only think of four other companies that install safeties on their revolvers. Two of them are SSA. I've heard some say the safety can engage by itself from recoil or something. People that say this don't know the way the safety is engineered to the hammer of the S&W. That's an impossibility and not true. It's no more possible for the gun to engage the safety than the gun is able to fire itself without intervention of some kind. However, there is a guy in Arizona that has made a pretty good looking plug to replace the safety in the newer S&W. He replaced the safety in his Model 629 titanium 25 ounce 44 magnum that he shots full power 240 grainers. It's his EDC. He has shot thousands of rounds with the gun without failure. This is the web site if you'd care to take a look. I'm not saying this plug makes the newer guns as good as the older ones. Not at all. S&W to stop installing the safety would be the best solution. I've been thinking about buying but he's a bit pricey. The plug is above the cylinder latch in the picture. What the plug mimics is hammer stud pivot pin below the cylinder latch. safettyhttps://www.originalprecision.com/

 

[BluesBrother]

I think if your shots were going low it would be that partridge front sight. However, I think it's held in place with a drift pin so you could change it out. He might not like it though. He looks pretty comfortable up there.

 

[Welldoya]

I just don’t like the looks of the internal lock as well as the possibility that it could lock up.
My only modern Smith and Wesson revolvers are a couple of 642s and they are available without the lock.
If you google “Smith and Wesson internal lock engaging under recoil” there are several first-hand accounts of it doing so.

 

[BluesBrother]

I just don’t like the looks of the internal lock as well as the possibility that it could lock up.
My only modern Smith and Wesson revolvers are a couple of 642s and they are available without the lock.
If you google “Smith and Wesson internal lock engaging under recoil” there are several first-hand accounts of it doing so.

I appreciate not liking the appearance of the lock. I hate it. Not only do I not like the appearance I don't like the costs associated with installing the lock. The consumer pays for that modification that doesn't help him complete the task at hand for which the gun was intended any better. But alas, that's the way they are made today. And for the last 20 years. Yes, S&W has put that lock on most if not all their revolvers since 2001. Can you imagine the immense liability it would be for S&W if the lock activated without intervention and someone suffered as a result? They would not expose themselves to that. You can hold out and hope to find a pre-lock model but expect to pay an additional $500 over the cost of a new model or hope to buy from someone who is not aware of the market. To me the extra cost of the pre-lock isn't worth it. This is a fine weapon with or without the lock aesthetics not withstanding. Again, pretty much impossible to activate without a proprietary key.The price PSA is asking is reasonable as well. I'm more inclined to disbelieve information found on google than hold it up as a resource. google is the poster child of fake news. Information is posted on google in hopes that some people will change their behavior as well as being informative. The only filter google has, and it changes, is left leaning.

 

[Ron]

I appreciate not liking the appearance of the lock. I hate it. Not only do I not like the appearance I don't like the costs associated with installing the lock. The consumer pays for that modification that doesn't help him complete the task at hand for which the gun was intended any better. But alas, that's the way they are made today. And for the last 20 years. Yes, S&W has put that lock on most if not all their revolvers since 2001. Can you imagine the immense liability it would be for S&W if the lock activated without intervention and someone suffered as a result? They would not expose themselves to that. You can hold out and hope to find a pre-lock model but expect to pay an additional $500 over the cost of a new model or hope to buy from someone who is not aware of the market. To me the extra cost of the pre-lock isn't worth it. This is a fine weapon with or without the lock aesthetics not withstanding. Again, pretty much impossible to activate without a proprietary key.The price PSA is asking is reasonable as well. I'm more inclined to disbelieve information found on google than hold it up as a resource. google is the poster child of fake news. Information is posted on google in hopes that some people will change their behavior as well as being informative. The only filter google has, and it changes, is left leaning.

Several years ago I had a Taurus mod 608 357 mag. I liked it better as far as the lock because it was at the base of the hammer so you really didn't see it unless you were looking down from the top view of the pistol. I feel S&W should have done that.

 

[BluesBrother]

Several years ago I had a Taurus mod 608 357 mag. I liked it better as far as the lock because it was at the base of the hammer so you really didn't see it unless you were looking down from the top view of the pistol. I feel S&W should have done that.

I'm a no lock kind of guy. I hated when Marlin rifle did it. I hate that S&W did it to their revolvers. I hate that the Italian SSA have them. Taurus and Rossi 1892 rifles install them. Stevens single shot shotguns have safeties. I'm sure there are others I'm not aware of. Have lives been saved? I don't know. I've never heard the number of lives or an estimate of lives saved as a result of these safeties being installed. It's a feel good thing. It has no practical used in the real world. It's another way to conform the citizenry to left ideology. I'm sure you heard this before. Gun control is more about control rather than the gun.

 

[Ron]

I'm a no lock kind of guy. I hated when Marlin rifle did it. I hate that S&W did it to their revolvers. I hate that the Italian SSA have them. Taurus and Rossi 1892 rifles install them. Stevens single shot shotguns have safeties. I'm sure there are others I'm not aware of. Have lives been saved? I don't know. I've never heard the number of lives or an estimate of lives saved as a result of these safeties being installed. It's a feel good thing. It has no practical used in the real world. It's another way to conform the citizenry to left ideology. I'm sure you heard this before. Gun control is more about control rather than the gun.

I totally agree with you. I guess the only reason that they started doing this is because of lawyers and liability law suits. Out of all the years, I've never known anybody that uses the locking system. I bet most people can't even tell you where the key is!

 

[tros6t]

I though it was on the 357? Hahahha