6-inch or 4-inch

[MotoriousRacing]

OT is fun and all, but the best reason for CG........ advice from gun enthusiasts.

I'm wanting a revolver in .357M and I seem to have decided on the S&W 686 Plus .357 Magnum 6" 7rd, however RG has a few S&W .357 revolvers in stock now, but with 4-inch barrels, and apparently I'm getting a bit impatient.

I'm thinking the 6-inch barrel will be a little more accurate 25 - 50 yards. It should also provide added velocity and therefore force.

I don't really have a definative purpose other than having a reliable handgun, more powerful than my 9mms, but not too powerful that my wife can't shoot it. I'll do target shooting, but may use it for home defense, and of course it would be a good SHTF gun.

Should I hold out for a revolver with a 6-inch barrel? What are the pros vs. cons of 6- vs. 4-inch?

Thanks in advance.


****EDIT*****

Up to about 6 months ago I was going to get the Ruger GP-100 in stainless, either 4- or 6-inch. It seems S&W is a bit more desirable, so I thought I would go with the 686, but the GPs are In-Stock at RG, On Roster, and about $150 less expensive.

SOOOOOOooooo....... maybe I haven't made up my mind entirely on S&W vs. Ruger. Maybe I need to open up the poll to Ruger vs. S&W.

Here is a thread where most like the Ruger for durability on hot loads. http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ighlight=Ruger

Here is a thread split on GP-100 vs. 686. http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=994184

Two more threads I saved regarding wheel guns, .357M and Ruger vs. S&W. http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=721312

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=704257

AARggh, I'm at information overload, and I don't know how to edit the poll.

[roc_my_tims]

I dont know many pros and cons. But overall size is one for me so i choose 4inch. Dont know if its more balanced but if feels just right to me

[CK_32]

I've never been a fan of the hand cannon 6".


I love 4" and subbies. If you just want a fun gun to >4". If you want performance and match grade accuracy and need that extra 2" of barrel, maybe 1.75" of sight radius go 6".

My vote is 4" or less.

[bwhited]

I used to only like 6" revolvers. As I shoot them more I have been liking the 5" barrels also.

[mr2ndamendment]

Unless it's strictly a target gun, the 4" has always seemed to make the most sense, especially for hiking, carry, or HD.

[NytWolf]

To get the full performance of the 357 Mag cartridge, you need a 6" barrel.

[trigger945]

Have you shot both to compare?

I find the 4" to offer better balance to me.

As far as accuracy, *maybe* the 6" has an edge up to 50 yards but I don't really know. I find that the shooter is a significant component of accuracy, together with the equipment, of course.

Note that the 6" can be front heavy if it has a full lug. And I think most of them do.

Lastly, have your wife shoot both, too. Maybe that will help.

Good luck!

[floogy]

4 inch. It's all about how you use it.

I don't think 6" is going to give any significant accuracy increase at that range. Velocity is the reason for a longer barrel on a 357. There's an article about barrel length and accuracy on a 308 rifle. Not the same as a revolver, but the article might change your perceptions about barrel length and its relationship to accuracy and velocity.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/10/daniel-zimmerman/the-truth-about-barrel-length-muzzle-velocity-and-accuracy/

[sealocan]

with a Smith and Wesson you can't go wrong.

with the longer barrel you have the longer sight radius, which helps in accuracy and of course there's a little more powder burnt and the longer barrel, so there's increase the velocity even it's only a minimal increase. the extra weight helps with recoil a little bit.

and if all your other handguns are semi autos it might be nice to have the long barrel for possible (shtf or other ) hunting, small to medium sized game, applications.

the negative of course is it longer barrel makes it harder to carry and a bit slower to draw quickly in an emergency and much harder to conceal than the 4 inch.

although of course with the 686 it's not really meant for concealability.

having experienced carrying and shooting one very long barreled Ruger Super Blackhawk stainless steel in .44 Magnum.

I came to the conclusion that if you're a dedicated handgun hunter or handgun target shooter, then the longer barrel is worth the negative trade-offs,

but for most normal people, who shoot for a wide variety of reasons and pleasure.
I personally would recommend the 4 inch barrel over the 6 inch barrel.

all of this is just my opinion, worth .2 cents (and at the current rate of inflation about .67 cents).
;-)

[twotacocombo]

6" has a longer sight radius, but how much velocity are you really gaining with that 2"? And how much is that really going to matter in the grand scheme of things?

[vliberatore]

Barrel length has nothing to do with accuracy.

[Aldemar]

Take a look at the S&W 686+ Pro Series. 5" barrel. It's probably the best one I have.

[NytWolf]

Barrel length has nothing to do with accuracy.

More accurate, no. Easier to shoot accurately, yes.

[dls]

I've always liked the feel and look of the 4" revolvers, Since I already have two in that length, I might try a 6" just to mix it up a bit if I purchased another.

[nikki#2]

Hold them both if you can...... I found the 6" muzzle-heavy. The 4" balances and carries better. My experience is based on 617 .22LR's (same weight, feel, grips, etc. as the 686) .
Had both for years. Yes, my 6" was more accurate w/ it's favorite ammo, scoped or irons. But it was heavy. The 4" was all around more fun and plenty accurate.

When it was time to sell one to fund a 686... the 4" won hands down. For HD, the 686 wears a crimson trace.
I pop the laser on the 617 when I take my GF plinking. She prefers revolvers.