Looking at 2 different 27-2s. Both in nice condition and both reasonably priced. One is a 6" and the other is an 8 3/8".

So my question to those who have owned both, how is the balance, accuracy, feel between these two barrel lengths? I will only be using the gun for target shooting.

Thanks for any feedback.

I have both and the 8 3/8" is definitely more nose heavy, as you would suspect. But for range use, the longer sight radius is also real nice. And felt recoil on the long tom is less to me anyways, but I don't find even full bore 357 Mag ammo to be much of a problem in any barrel length model 27. I would say for you to handle both of them and go with the one you like best.

I also have both. I only use them for casual target shooting for which I prefer the long one. In theory, on average, the longer tubes should get higher velocity from the same powder charge but you'll get a hole clear through the paper or pop can with either one. The muzzle end of the barrel and barrel rib are so thin that I find the difference in balance insignificant. The two things that are significant to me are reduced noise and blast and sight misalignment is evident with a smaller aiming error. Out of the holster I see no advantage to the 6"

On the other hand, some people, especially older ones, see the long barrel's rear notch too blurry when they focus on the front blade. Elmer Keith wrote that was why he preferred a 4".

I've had both (sold my 6"), and prefer my long barrel among my favorite range guns, but I think I just have an affinity for the look. I think practically unless you're doing distance targets, I believe 6" is a much better choice.

There's something just elegant about the long barrel 27.

Let's just talk about what you asked about-------balance, accuracy, and feel---although I'm kind of inclined to lump balance and feel together. We'll do balance and feel together, just because you already have the best answer you're going to get from "muddocktor"----handle them both and go with what you like best---or just say the hell with it, and buy both of them!

Accuracy: I've spent A LOT of time with a machine rest. I got it to test handloads way back when I was off the deep end seeking the ultimate in accuracy (at 25 and 50 yards). It started out as fun---and quickly became a lot like work. But I learned about guns along the way. What I learned was pretty much any good quality handgun shoots A LOT better than almost all shooters shoot them---almost all----so much better it can be embarrassing---or extremely motivating if you're bound and determined to get better---and most folks will have to get a lot better.

So what'd I learn? I learned there isn't a worthwhile correlation between barrel length and accuracy (of just the gun---no shooters allowed)--unless you're talking about the difference between a snub-nose and a 6-6 1/2" target gun-----and I'll let someone who knows about such things say why (but I'll hazard a guess it has to do with the stabilization of the bullet). I'll also say there isn't a dime's worth of difference in accuracy between a 6" and 8 3/8" barrels--with the shooter out of the picture. Now, when you factor in a shooter, you also have to factor in sight radius---and there are those who can and do do better with a longer sight radius. I'm not one of them. I used a Model 41 in bullseye--and shot a lot better scores with a 5" field barrel than I did with the 7+" regular barrel. I was rock steady with the shorter barrel. The longer barrel(??)---forget about it---wobble-wobble-wobble. Again, I'll let somebody who knows about such things say why.

Ralph Tremaine

I would get the 6" gun. Not as nose heavy, easier to carry around in or out of a holster and someday you just might want to holster carry and the 6" is very doable and the 8 3/8 not very, either is more accurate than you will ever be, resale value of the 6" is better and its easier to store. The only advantages of the 8 3/8 is a more sighting radius and a bit more velocity. The 8 3/8" is also more susceptible to bullet strike variation due to your grip variation and follow through because of longer time in the barrel. The longer barrel length also effects variations in point of impact, using the same sight adjustment, from ammo variations because of barrel time. Because the gun starts to move during recoil, the more time in the barrel the more different velocities and recoil will effect point of impact. In other words, if you sight in with 158 loads, then fire some 125 gr loads, the 6" gun will usually have group centers, with the different loading, closer together than an 8 3/8" gun, even if group size remains constant.

Now with all the practical reasons covered I can say that I doubt there are many on this forum who have not lusted for an 8 3/8" Model 27 or 29 in the presentation case.

I would be one of those "not many".........if I lust for anything it would be a 5 inch 27!!!!!

LOL anything over 6" ...... get a rifle!

I'm with Steelslaver A 6" N frame can still be carried; if needed, in a Bianchi 111 Cyclone cross-draw or vertical shoulder holster.

Obvious answer is "buy both." If just one though I'd buy the six inch although not for the "balance" etc. reasons previously stated. Where I shop the 27-2 in six inch (and four) shows up less often then the other lengths. I have 3.5, 5, and 8 3/8s 27-2s but in many years of "gathering" I've not come across many 4 or 6 inch ones and none at prices I was willing to pay. Same condition, same price, I'd grab the six inch. Good luck.

Jeff
SWCA #1457

I'm with Hipower, get them both! If they really are priced well you should be able to shoot them both, decide which one you prefer and sell the other and recover your investment. In the mean time you will have had a lot of fun.

Sure is easy to spend somebody else's money!

Yeah But --- But the long barrel has all that extra beautiful blue (or nickel in a few cases) barrel with the lovely top strap checking. In or out of the presentation box, it is pretty.

4" 27s were special order only until about 1979/80 when the 31/2 and 5 inch options were dropped in favor of 4" guns......

I've always found that revolver barrels longer than 6-6 1/2" feel awkward and unwieldy to me. Even more so if you try to carry one. So I don't own any long Toms. But, that's just me.

I got on a long-barrel kick around 1980. I admired the 8 3/8-inch barrel so ended up with Models 14, 17, 27, and 29 with that barrel length. Still enjoy using three of those four revolvers.

Not long after obtaining the 8 3/8-inch Model 27 I bought a new 6-inch. Got to testing heavy .357 Magnum handloads over the chronograph through both revolvers. That 8 3/8-inch revolver must have had a "slow barrel" for it uniformly clocked lower velocities than the same loads fired through the 6-inch barrel. All the "usual suspect" optimal .357 Magnum powders were tried. The difference was up to 150 fps difference in favor of the 6-inch.

I ended up swapping the long-snouted Model 27 away. It did serve for self-defense on an occasion, outright personal preservation. Took a friend varmint calling one night. During the fun and frolic of the evening a large owl answered the call, flapping around me and even striking me with his wings. I hauled out the long-barreled ordnance and grasping it in a one-handed shooting grip began flailing the owl with the revolver's barrel which served to run him off.

Recalling what opinions are often compared to and that there is no reason why we'd all agree, I see a couple of things differently.

That is correct theory and even relevant for bench rest shooters struggling to reduce their sub 0.2" 200 yard groups, but for pistols? Also, any larger difference in point of impact between different loads can be adjusted for with the rear sight.


Without claiming that I actually know about such things I'll opine there are two simple explanations, muscle fatigue and the longer sight radius makes the wobble more visible. The old saying that too much magnification in a bullseye scope will make you sea sick comes to mind. I suspect most readers need to be told I included muscle fatigue because of your scarce Model 41 5" Field Barrel's light weight. Field Barrels are not well known.

First: I'm going to let the photos do the talking...

6" 27-2 - stock as it came from the factory:



Three of my 8.375" 27-2's:

With some modified "Diet Cokes":



With some Kurac Birdseye Maple Magnas:



With some Kurac GA Targets:




... and my favorite 8.375" Pre-27 shooter:




Second: You cannot go wrong with either! They are both great and I shoot both lengths. With that said - JUST LOOK at the Elegant Beauty of those long ones... One of the great things about the design of the 27's and their predecessors is that they have that tapered barrel - wonderful for both reducing barrel weight and it just looks so cool... That makes the balance, even on the long ones very nice (you will be surprised how well the 8.375" balances with a set of nice target stocks). Just a note - my favorite range gun is the well-worn, slightly modified (trigger stop and gold bead front sight), Nelson Ford tuned, 8.375", pre-27 with 1960's era presentation target stocks shown in the last photo above. Another cool thing about the long ones, is that when you pull them out at the range, everybody takes notice...

Third: I have to agree that you should buy both and see which one you like best - as a matter of fact, you should have at least one of every length - 3.5", 4", 5", 6", 6.5" and 8.375" My collection is very heavy on the ends of the barrel length spectrum with a bunch of 3.5"ers and a bunch of 8.375"ers.

__________________
Richard
Engraved S&W fan

GET 'EM BOTH!


Chubbo

zogger52:

GET 'EM BOTH!

Chubbo

Okay, well now you've done it-------"Because the gun starts to move during recoil-----------and recoil will effect point of impact." (Post #6)

WOW!!

Please explain explain just when and why the gun starts to move, and we'll go from there.

Many thanks!!

Ralph Tremaine

I bought both a 5" and an 8-3/8" together a few years ago, both pristine nickled m27's, which a gunshop had, I made an offer of 1450 and at first he balked but came around and said let's do this.....so I kept them a couple years and couldn't bring myself to shoot them as they were minty....and I flipped them for a nice return...have also had an 8-3/8" m657 once-was fun to shoot but unweildly imo....flipped it in a trade for a m19 which was 6"....gone now too as I favor 2 highway patrols a 4" & 6", but favor more....a 1980 4" 686....maybe my favorite centerfire revolver. That's my take... :->

To each their own, I have an 8 3/8" Model 14,17,27,48,29 and 57 and enjoy shooting all of them.
Also have some long tube Dan Wesson's 8 and 10".

Only a 4" Model 19 and 686 and a 6 " 686+....

I can't buy both. I got some thinkin' to do.

Thanks for all of the feedback.

Can't buy both??? That is why Master Card was invented. Just kidding. After reading all if the posts, it looks like there really is no wrong decision. I would opt for 6". Why? Just in terms of resale. I think more people would be inclined to buy the 6" over the 8 3/8".

RKmesa, I like what you said... " First: I'm going to let the photos do the talking...".

You set the standard, we sure could do with more from others...

Yup & Yup & Yup. I actually can't stand anything over 6" and consider 5" the perfect length for hunting and general field carry in a cross draw holster. You can sit in your pickup or in your tree stand with ease.

To me, 8 inchers are like single actions. I can never seem to keep them around for any length of time as they just don't get used.

__________________
DAO Hunter, SWCA #2955

Here's a fun fact about Model 27s. When bowling pin shooting was in its hay day during the 1980s, Jerry Miculek was one of the top shooters and he used Model 27 with 8 3/8" barrel. I don't remember what ammo/load he used but that long barrel dampens recoil of hot loads.

__________________
Bob.
SWCA 1821

I had a 8-3/8” 27 years ago and now have a 6” 28. I’ve looking for an 8-3/8” 27 to replace the one I sold. To me the long tube is so darn sexy. I guess I’m “compensating “.

__________________
I told you not to use Lifebuoy

zogger52, it's too bad you live so far north and I live so far south. I would have loved to get together with you at the range and let you handle and shoot both and see what you prefer. Maybe someone here lives up around New York can get together with you and let you handle and shoot both.

In have two 8 3/8" Smiths. My favorite handguns. Holstering isn't a problem. I have custom made leather that fits both N frames.

My several 6 inchers shoot well too, but I wouldn't say they are better or worse, in accuracy or handle-ability.

My deer gun is a 15" Encore. That isn't a problem either.

I also have Chief's specials in 2 and 3". Don't shoot them much.

Had a 8 3/8" M 27 many years ago.
Just didn't seem right to carry for target or hunting.
Now, this M 27 5" is just right for both for me!

__________________
Only difference Fool/Mule-ears

Buy both.

Reading through the thread, it seems that yes/no/both are a wash.

Most shooters that are revolver fans have a couple .357's. Of the barrel lengths in my .357 collection, I have but one 4", and a couple 6" tubes, (you can have my share of the 2" .357 snubs). To shoot them at the range I like the longer barrels best. Shooting a couple 8 3/8" 27's and 29's over the last few decades, they can take the bite out of even the meanest loads. Often by a noticeable amount. Shooting spots, or clays at long range on the berm, the longer the barrel, the easier it is to hit anything with my eyes.

If you have a 4" or 6" .357 now, the longer 27 might be the better choice if one is your limit. It might even be a favorite when you want to show the gang how good you can shoot