Why a 6" barrel instead of 4?"

[CodyGT46]

My question to people who ask why. I ask why not? I'm always happily blasting away targets, steel, and whatever may be downrange with either my 6" Dan Wesson, 6" Smith & Wesson, 4" Ruger, 3" Colt and wouldn't hesitate to deploy any of them in a defense or even hunting situation if I had too. Although the 3" Colt would be more of a last ditch effort to save my butt in a hunting situation.

[LMan57]

Longer the better that is what she said..

[Erion929]

Or maybe the 5" works best?

[usmcspud]

Erion929, very nice.
To the OP, Always carried my 6" M29 in a good shoulder rig while hunting. Made some grips that fit my hand better. Worked many years for me. Fast enough outa the holster for hunting. Whatever you decide, practice with it.

[gregollo]

I like my 5" 629 for hunting sidearm. I'm concerned the 6" might someday catch my rifle sling. The 4" seems too short.

[trigger945]

I'm just curious as to the practical application of a 6" (or longer) barrel on a revolver. I'm guessing it serves two purposes; the first if you like to hunt with a handgun, and the second is for target shooting.

Third is for variety. As balanced as the 4" revolvers are, one ought to mix it up after having "X" number of 4" revolvers. At least that' me

Other practical application besides the 2 you mentioned? Hmmm... maybe to maximize the bullet's velocity? Or is this part of target shooting?

By the way, a 6" revolver without the full lug is not front heavy at all. I talked to a retired cop who preferred a 6" revolver (Model 14) over the standard issue 4" Model 15 for his duty gun. I don't think he was the only one...

[calif 15-22]

I hace the 4" S&W 686 SSR and its a grwat shooter and way more acurate thatn I am.

There is some thing about a blued 586 though that I just had to have one for no other reason than it was bad ***

[mikeyr]

In all honesty, you wouldn't carry that long of a barrel hiking, or in the wilderness.

I carried my 6" S&W Stainless Model 66 (no dash) for years, including weekends hiking and wilderness trips. Granted the 66 is a K-Frame so its lighter. I also carried my 7.5" Old Army on weekend hikes often. I actually had no preference on my weekend toy and took whichever one I grabbed first to go hiking/camping.

The weight difference between 4 and 6 is really minor on your hip ***In my opinion***. But that 7.5" Ruger Old Army gets HEAVY after a day in the wild.

Nowdays of course, the model 66 has become a well worn safe queen and its a toss up between a full size 9mm or a Colt SAA in 45LC with a 4" barrel, just because I shoot better with it, its my favorite these days.

For me, on quick draw and fire type situations you might find in the wild with a charging animal, I am far more accurate with a revolver than a semi, so I prefer them. I do miss the number of rounds especially since I load the SAA with 5 rounds and hike with hammer on empty chamber but I believe I will be more likely to hit my target with a revolver in that situation. The barrel length is not important in this specific situation, I find the weight negligible and I can draw and fire with the same ease. If I were hunting I would prefer the longer barrel but that is the only reason.

[ojisan]

An old rule of thumb is to consider case length, bore diameter, bullet weight and powder type.
For example, most .38 Special loads pick up quite a bit of velocity in a 4" barrel as compared to a 2".
I know the shorter barrel affects all cartridges but the rule of thumb for hand loading for efficiency and performance is:
.38 Special = 4" barrel
.357 Mag = 6" barrel (more slower burning powder to use up than .38)
.44 Mag = 8" barrel (larger diameter case holding even more slow burning powder)

Yes, using modern powders can get good burns and velocities but the loads need to be tailored to the barrel length.
Ammo makers sell "short barrel" loads (usually quicker burning powders) for this reason.

[stix213]

I'm not really into revolvers, so I bought a 6" 686 simply because it looks cooler. I wanted something I could imagine a rural sheriff carrying. I just occasionally plink with it.

[King of the 109ers]

longer barrel, longer site radius, less felt recoil from weight, better accuracy.

Less flash and noise.

I'm told they use longer barrels for drawing better beads on clays. I'm thinking a longer pistol barrel would work the same even if you were is such a panic you weren't really using the sights.

Longer barrel OK to draw from holster unless you are sporting those super high-ride cop holsters that are supposed to allow you to run like a track meet.

I like longer holsters just because I feel I'm getting my money's worth from that expensive ammo. Like pigging out at a buffet, but different.

[Issara]

I like the added weight and better sighting. Range use and possibly hunting someday. I have a 6" .357 and planning on adding a 6.5" .44 as well.

[JTROKS]

Some barrels are faster than others. Barrel length will be a personal preference as in muzzle blast effect, sight radius and felt recoil. For those worried about velocity here's a good website, but keep in mind that production barrels will differ and revolver barrel cylinder gap depending on tolerances will also affect velocity.

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

My 10" TC Contender 44 mag barrel is faster than my 10.5" Ruger SBH according to my chronograph. My Ruger tames recoil much better than my TC sans the scope.

[Sutcliffe]

Not much real difference in most applications

From a standpoint of carrying a handgun I'd go with a shorter barrel. The extra ounce or two isn't the issue. The length seems to just get in my way.