4" vs 6"

With magnum calibers, I'd say yes. Shorter barrels give off a larger fireball, meaning less powder was burned in the barrel, and was burned outside. Less powder burned equals a loss in velocity.
 
At close range 25 yards or less I don't see much difference between 4" and 6". At 50 yards and beyond there a slight advantage with the 6". I think you will really start seeing the differences when you compare a 4" barrel to the 8" barrel. Velocity goes up and the longer distance between sights makes it easier to stay on target at distances. I have used a 4" 357 mag for deer hunting. At distances of 50 yards and less it does the job if you can get in a good shot. Not all pistols are equal. I have been able to shoot better groups with one 4" barrel than I could with a 6" off of sandbags.
 
Someone else already posted this, but it is worth repeating.

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html

You will find the answers you seek here.

All you need to do is determine if the greater velocity you get from the longer barrel is worth the extra lengh and weight you have to carry. And that is largely determined by how you plan to use the gun.

For me, I have no use for anything less than 4". Velocity is still acceptable for me at that length, but you couldn't give me a revolver with a shorter barrel. I don't hunt or shoot long range targets. If I did 7-8" is what I'd want. As generel rule 4" is the best compromise for how I use a gun. How you plan to use it will determine the best length for you.
 
I've been shooting handguns for 39 years and I just don't remember any of my shorter barreled handguns out shooting my 6" to 6 1/2" barreled guns. If performance is what your looking for a little more velocity is always better that a little less velocity.
 
The link jmr40 posted is informative, but look it over carefully. The test barrels they used did not have a cylinder gap, and elsewhere on that website, they discuss how guns that do have a cylinder may gain less from a longer barrel, because the longer the bullet is in the barrel, the more gas and pressure exit out the cylinder gap.

If you compare actual guns toward the bottom of the link, you'll see that a 4" S&W often produced higher velocities than a 5" S&W, which often produced higher velocities than a Colt with a 6" barrel.
 
4" vs 6"
Click to expand...

I suppose 5" isn't an option...:rolleyes:

This question (I've seen it come up like a dozen times) is why I bought my TRR8 with its 5" barrel. The best of both worlds (and it's not like I'll be deep-concealing an N-frame cylinder inside my belt anyway)

TCB
 
I've owned all three, 4, 5, and 6 inch barrels (and a few shorter). Today, I don't own one longer than 4". I know all the "advantages" of longer barrels but they don't matter to me. Four inch barrels just look right and that's good enough for me.
 
I own revolvers with 2'', 4'', 5'' 6'' 7 5/8'' and 10'' barrels. 100% of my usage of these is either CWC, hunting and range shooting. Because of this, the 4'' gets very little use. It's usually the one folks pick up first at the range and claim it feels the best in their hands, but after shooting all the handguns for a while, they generally reach for something else second time around. For me, my 5'' L-Frame has the best balance once it is loaded with seven cartridges. Funny how much difference that makes.
 
I prefer 6" barrels, but what Bob Wright posted is a very good summary of the differences between barrel lengths.

For practical purposes like carrying, a 4" is more practical. Try sitting in your car with a 6" bbl gun strapped to your hip and you will see what I'm talking about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top