Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns New Production S&W Mt Gun

.


Care to share what the cost was?

I’ve been considering selling mine since a 44 is a range toy for my uses and I enjoy shooting my SBH Bisley Hunter more. If anyone is seriously interested feel free to PM me an offer. I’m not willing to lose money on the package but I’m not going to gouge someone either. Mine has a straight barrel, tight lockup and is how it should be. It’s also one of the few missmarked ones that slipped through and is engraved “629-8” by the serial instead of 629-9 which will be highly collectible down the road. I also had a $300 simply rugged sourdough pancake holster made for it with cognac alligator leather.

Mine was a little under 1200 out the door. Tax and transfer included.

My local dealer just ordered it like every other gun they bring in. $1149 out the door.

That's the best price I've seen on a 44 Magnum, don't think I've seen it quite that low on the 357

That 686 plus looks bad ass, but dang that 44 is just like owning a 30-06. You know exactly what’s gonna happen when that hammer falls. I just don’t really see much improvement over a standard 629-6 the more I look at it. I want one in LC pretty bad though. I did grab another model 69 with the 2.75” barrel and I think it saves you 300 bucks and is a better carry gun with magnum capabilities. I finally got it tuned up with some hsm 240s at 1100. Not difficult to shoot at all. If any one actually has to use a revolver for defense in the mountains, it’s gonna be 15 yards and in and the sixth shot may not even make a difference. I guess if I doubt the 5 shot, I have that 629 that can handle some buffalo bore 1300’s. I’ve dumped a cylinder or two with that stuff and I looked like Harry on dumb and dumber shooting at the bad guy…..stuff is violent lol.

Looked at a 44 Mag today and the MIM stuff was a turn off. Also seemed the grips were not fully finished an sealed. $1149.

I picked up my 686 mountain gun recently, most things about my revolver, appear to have been done well. Barrel cylinder gap is excellent, barrel is torqued on straight, timing is good, no endshake, and trigger pull is what I would expect from a new Smith and Wesson. I have put a few dozen rounds through it and it seems accurate. I agree that the grips could use a little more oil, but they fit my hand excellently and the grain on mine is decent.

I would like to ask for the input of others who have handled the new Mountain Guns in person, mine has a very significant .030" gap between the top of the crane and the frame. One can easily fit a business card into the gap, none of the other Smith & Wesson revolvers that I have owned had a gap exceeding the thickness of a sheet of paper between the top of the crane and the frame. I looked the revolver over fairly carefully before doing the paperwork, but missed this gap in the store as I was mainly concentrating on timing and making sure that the barrel was straight, and the forcing cone did not look like a beaver head chewed on it.

I am hoping to ascertain whether all of them appear to be fit similarly.

Thanks.

.

I've been tracking the 686 Mountain Gun on a few different forums and this issue has come up before. I've checked that gap on some of my older S&W and that gap is non-existent you couldn't slide a single edged razor blade in it.

My only excuse for S&W is perhaps it's needed for the new ball detent lock up?? Other than that it's just sloppy workmanship as far as I'm concerned


41

The gap on my .44 mtn. gun gages at .010"; my Model 19 gages at .007". It doesn't really bother me.

Picked up my 686

AU7MM08,

Please give us a full review when you have shot your new revolver some.

Thanks, RS

I would be satisfied with .010, my 686 mountain gun is .030. That much gap does not appear to be necessary for clearance of the new ball detent lock up. On the other hand, I like everything else about the revolver and it does seem to shoot as accurately as my ability allows.

I agree with that.
My results from yesterday, 7 yds. standing, single action.