6 inch or 8 inch .357?

T

TruthTellers

New member
I decided a while ago that my first .357 Magnum revolver must have a barrel 5 inches or longer. I'd settled on the Ruger GP100 in 6 inch as that's more available than the 5 inch versions, but lately I've been thinking about 8 inch S&W revolvers.

Seeing as how I've never shot a 6 or 8 inch .357, for those that have, do you notice if one is easier to shoot than the other? Is the extra 2 inches of barrel that much of a difference maker?
 
5-6 inch revolvers are easier to balance. Anything longer is a lot more front heavy and not fun to handle. I had a Colt Python in 4,6,8". I got rid of the 8" right off the bat. I didn't like it.

Best thing is to try them out.

I still have a 4" and 6" GP100. I find the 6" is more accurate but it is too impractical for me to carry.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
I can see an 8 inch revolver with a full underlong being front heavy, but the S&W Model 27's only had a lug to cover the ejector rod and didn't go to the end of the barrel.

I'm thinking that would be the 8 inch revolver I'd get if I were to get an 8 inch .357.
 
I've owned a LOT of revolvers over the last forty-seven years and several of them had eight inch barrels. I can tell you for a fact that you won't shoot the eight inch much, if any, better than a six inch barrel. After six inches it becomes a case of diminishing returns on any gains made by a longer sight radius. In my opinion, six inches is the absolute best barrel length for shooting a revolver with open sights.
Note: I had a model 27 and although it was very accurate with its eight inch barrel, I shoot my model 686 much better with its six inch barrel. It was a nice gun, but it was too heavy and didn't balance well at all. I ended up sending it out to Bill Davis and had a different barrel put on it (six inch) and it shot a better after I got it back.
 
The eight inch barrel is great for target revolvers. S&W's 8 3/8" barrel is designed to be as long as possible and still meet the match rules in effect when it was designed.

If you plan to carry the gun in a holster, get a 6". Otherwise you can't go wrong either way.
 
The 6", and even better 6-1/2", are more practical. But, I like the old hog leg 8-3/8" S&Ws and have them in .38, .41 mag., .44 mag., and .45 Colt. I don't know that they are easier to shoot, or if the extra length makes any real difference. But, I think they care cool. The shorter lengths are more popular, however.
 
I've owned a LOT of revolvers over the last forty-seven years and several of them had eight inch barrels. I can tell you for a fact that you won't shoot the eight inch much, if any, better than a six inch barrel. After six inches it becomes a case of diminishing returns on any gains made by a longer sight radius.
Click to expand...

I suspected as much when reading the OP, but have no personal experience to say with confidence like you do.
 
Can't really say between 6 & 8. To me both are too long. Maybe apples, and different apples, but I shoot my 4"HB Model 10 better than my 6" GP100 using the same 38 Spcl.+P ammo. Don't have a 4" 357 to compare with magnum loads, but revolvers with a 4" barrel just feel much better, and more balanced to me than ones with longer tubes.
 
I found out that my uncle owns a Model 27 with the 8-3/8" barrel, so next time we go shooting, I'll badger him to bring it along with some of his handloads.

Last time we went shooting, he brought his .22 Jet which also had an 8-3/8" barrel and I did enjoy shooting that.

Didn't like the concussive blast though.
 
Do you intend to holster it, and carry it around?
If you just shoot at the range, that's one thing.
But the six inch is much more portable. The 8"
holster tends to snag and catch on everything.
 
I have a six inch GP100 and it shoots great but I can't imagine holstering and carrying it. As for an 8 inch all that goes through my mind is "It shoots through schools" and "my mother hung me on a hook once........once." :)
 
Danoobie said:
Do you intend to holster it, and carry it around?
If you just shoot at the range, that's one thing.
But the six inch is much more portable. The 8"
holster tends to snag and catch on everything.
Click to expand...
No, not intending to carry it. Just want a .357 for the sake of it.

The revolver I plan to possibly carry, or am seriously entertaining it, is a Ruger SP101 in .327
 
I have 1 revolver that is 6 1/2 inch, my Taurus Tracker.
If I was a hunter I'd appreciate the longer barrel. but im not.
(Plus my state has 5inch minimum for handgun hunting)

Honestly I regret not buying the 4inch model..
I think 4inch barrels are really the most well rounded size for a revolver.

I got the 6 inch model telling my self I was gonna scope it.. I never have and after 10 years at this rate probably never well.

There is no way I personally would want a 8 inch barrel.. I don't even think I'd want it if I was a hunter.


Try to borrow or at least handle a 8 inch at the shop before you commit to make sure you really want something that long.
 
Ditto the above. I would just use the 8" for hunting. The GP100 is a beautiful gun and fun to shoot and will never have a problem. My favorite Model 27 is the 5 inch. You can still buy them on GB, if money is no object.
 
I decided a while ago that my first .357 Magnum revolver must have a barrel 5 inches or longer.
Click to expand...

Why?

but lately I've been thinking about 8 inch S&W revolvers.
Click to expand...

I have a 686 w/ 8-3/8" bbl - it's a "no dash" purchased new in 1984.

I also have 686's in 3" and 4" bbl. Not to mention a Python in 6"

I have shot them all extensively, so I have a good amount of experience with them.

Seeing as how I've never shot a 6 or 8 inch .357, for those that have, do you notice if one is easier to shoot than the other?
Click to expand...

The 8" is quite heavy; and quite front heavy at that. I used to like front-heavy revolvers, but not so much these days. It's personal preference; and my personal preference has changed. I will say that the 8" can fire super hot ammo with easily manageable recoil - so there's that.

Is the extra 2 inches of barrel that much of a difference maker?
Click to expand...

In terms of recoil? Yes. A little. The difference is definitely noticeable. But the 6" bbl handles quiet well enough (to me) even with hot ammo.

The extra 2" is another 200 ft lb (of kinetic energy).
Click to expand...

This has not been my experience at all. I have done extensive chronograph testing with all sorts of different ammo - ranging from 38 Special target wadcutters, all the way up to full-throttle hot ammo of all bullet weights - and have concluded that the 8" bbl offers such diminishing return as to not make all that much difference. I suspect the barrel-cylinder gap bleeding off gasses comes into play with this phenomenon.

In most cases, the velocity increase between 4" (not 6", . . 4") and 8" bbls is in the order of 30 - 50 f/s - that's all. And in many cases (usually light ammo), the 8" bbl yielded a lower velocity.

The biggest increase I ever recorded from the 8" was with Federal's 130gn Hydra-Shok ammo. The 4" yielded 1430 f/s, or 590 ft/lbs of KE. The 8" yielded 1538 f/s, or 682 ft/lbs of KE. A 92 ft/lb increase.

Speer's 158gn GDHP was more typical, for instance: 4" = 1153 f/s; 8"= 1190 f/s. 466 vs. 497 ft/lbs respectively.

Speer's 135gn GDHP SB's were 1223 f/s vs. 1215 f/s - a reduction of 6 ft/lbs of KE with the 8".

Diminishing returns.
 
Perhaps you could squeeze the extra 200fps out with hand loading?
Lot of times factory loads are optimized around a specific barrel length, 8 inches is an usually long barrel for a revolver.

maybe something loaded to make the most out of a rifle like a lever action?
 
The very thin tapered barrel of the 8 3/3" Smith 27 is not overly muzzle heavy in the least to me and would be great choice for a long barreled 357. Now an 8" Python or 8 3/8" 686 both have heavy full lug barrels where the 27 barrel is scrawny by comparison. I have a 27 8 3/8" and I would say it feels less muzzle heavy then my 6" 686.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top