Update:

Was out at the range on Monday, had the V-notch rear sight left over from my 329 on it. Good news is, proof of concept, the .160” height blade is correct for this revolver and I was able to sight it in. Bad news is, I don’t like the sight picture with the V-notch. It works with the front gold bead and sight acquisition is quick, it’s just not precise. Now I just need to decide to either order a Bowen Rough Country rear sight or an LPI fiber optic set up like I have on my 329. I like the fiber optics but they don’t really go with the classic look of the Mountain Gun.

The other thing is, I still hate the grips. They’re just too narrow at the top and I really feel the recoil in the web between my thumb and index finger. The finish on them wasn’t great and I ended up putting an extra coat of oil on them. I’ll be picking up some of the new style Smith & Wesson rubber grips when I’m in Denver next week. (Yes, a big FU to Smith & Wesson for not shipping to Alaska) They’re not exactly attractive, but they do wrap the back strap so I’m anxious to try them. I’ve got the Hogue Tamers on my 329 and they’re pretty much required for shooting that gun, I just don’t like how much they lengthen the reach to the trigger.

Original post:

So out at the range on Friday after getting my 686 Mountain Gun back from the factory for warranty repair and it’s shooting low. By low I mean way low, like barely at the bottom edge of the paper on the target at 10 yards with the elevation of the rear sight absolutely maxed out. Frustrated but at least I was shooting phenomenal groups with it.

Get home look it over. First thing I thought was it must be the cursed gold bead front sight that everyone is complaining about. Checked the front sight blade against an SDM gold bead front sight I had bought for a previous project and they’re both .300 high. Checked height from top of the sight to edge of the bore against the muzzle on it and my 3 other 686’s and they’re all the same.

Then look at the rear sight and it looks short. Measure it and the height of the rear sight blade is .126”, measure my other three and they’re all .160” in height. Happened to have a V-notch rear sight at .160” in height from my 329 left over from changing over to LPA fiber optics on it. Switched it over and will try it on my next range session to see where it groups. Not thrilled with the sight picture of the V-notch rear and front gold bead, but if it works I’ll probably order a Bowen Rough Country rear sight for it.

It’s just annoying when upgrades become a necessity rather than something you truly want to do.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: 2000Z-71,

My 686 MG shot real low too. I did some measuring as you did. I switched to a .160" rear sight; problem solved..

Compared it to my 617 Mountain Gun this morning and the 617 has the shorter .126 rear blade height. First thought was someone just reached into the wrong parts bin when assembling my 686. But with all of the other reports I’ve read about the new 686 Mountain Guns shooting low, I don’t think it’s a one time error.

I'll have to check mine. I've only shot it one time and don't remember cranking on the rear sight.

Well that's dumb, but I'm glad it's a relatively easy fix. I hated that v-notch on my 329, too...I swapped it out for a squared not rear blade at the first opportunity. So much better, but it was the first time I'd ever done that and I didn't know going into it that it's actually a destructive process...typically I try NOT to intentionally shear screws!

I will admit to filling a front sight down years ago, don’t even remember the exact outcome. I did sell that gun so no way to reevaluate.

These days I’m more inclined to ‘try’ a different sight picture, that may or may not be viable. I have seen that with some milsurp rifles, like maybe a ‘fine bead’ to get a correct elevation on target. One in mind is an Arisaka, since not shot a lot, no biggie.

If a gun one plans to use, would be nice if one’s ‘normal’ sight picture would be workable. Then one can get to the possibility of different ammo printing to a different point of impact. I’d think that could vary significantly among users.

https://www.gunnuts.net/2013/1...-light-fast-bullets/

With some, changing a sight may not be to difficult. I’m a lot less inclined to take out the file nowadays.

Update at top.

lol that Smith and Wesson lack of any type of QC they have become famous for!