Somehow I've gotten onto a 3" revolver kick. Don't really know why, I just like them. Anybody see a downside?

Attached Images

3 inches.jpg (157.7 KB, 397 views)

__________________
Foster Positivity.

I like them!

Attached Images

80990ECE-82EB-4F58-B05C-8E1007CDF721.jpg (80.2 KB, 173 views)

Three inch 65-3

Attached Images

20200221_150105.jpg (55.8 KB, 157 views)

S&W 38 3"

Attached Images

3 in S&W.jpg (70.0 KB, 152 views)

__________________
Only difference Fool/Mule-ears

No real downside I can see. At least with K-frames, a 3" barrel seems to give a good balance between ballistic performance, handling, and carry-ability. I personally think it's the most aesthetically pleasing combination. I used to have a 3" 65 and it was a great carry gun.

Not a fan of 3" J-frames, though. For me, the J-frame's biggest advantage is carry versatility (IWB/OWB/AIWB, pocket, ankle, shoulder, etc.), and that means a 2" barrel. I'm sure others will have differing opinions.

Don't really have an interest in revolvers larger than K-frames, so I can't really comment on those. I do have an interest in the 3" Ruger GP100 with fixed sights, but that's mostly because of its role as the standard issue sidearm for the US Marshals Service before the Glock 22.

I consider 3 inches, on a revolver barrel to be the minimum for accuracy. I think it looks perfect on my model 65-5.

1209191438 (2).jpg

I've got a 3" Model 29 and a 3" Model 13. Absolutely love them both and would hate to have to get rid of either!

The 3" fixed sighted K frame is especially sweet for carry.

__________________
SWCA 3563
10mm aficionado

I think that a 3" K-frame is perfect.

The only down side that I can see is the hit on your wallet by wanting to buy all of them.

__________________
Only a cold warrior

Only if it is a service weapon is it a down side, to me a 4" just fits that role better. I'd also want a 6+" for a hunting application.

Outside of that I think K, L, and N frames with a 3" are the perfect carry specimens.

OP to answer your question, yes a 3" is enough. I only have one and I am very lucky that my wife likes it also. OK someone had to go there. 686-6 3", just to clarify.

Compared to a 4-incher, you're one inch farther from your target...

__________________
Pisgah

The only downsides are reduced velocity when compared to more "traditional" lengths like 6" and a shorter sight radius.

One person posted that 3" is the minimum for accuracy. Shorter doesn't mean less intrinsic accuracy, shorter barreled guns are simply harder for the shooter to exploit the accuracy of the gun. Don

I've got a couple, whats not to like.

The 3" K's are my favorites.

Need to add some blued ones now.

For carry I like 3”on N frames, 2.5” on K/L frames.

__________________
213th FBINA

For my money a 3" barrel is about the perfect compromise.
Better sight radius for accuracy than a 2-1/2" and a little better velocity too.
Better concealability and easier draw/presentation than a 4".
I like revolvers with barrels around 3" long and have 4 of them
They are
S&W M65-5 357mag
Rossi M971 357mag (actually just over 2-3/4")
Charter Arms Bulldog 44spl
Jovino Terminator 44mag (also closer to 2-3/4")

Attached Images

	DSCN2513.JPG (138.7 KB, 68 views)
	Rossi971.jpg (25.1 KB, 72 views)
	BDAfter1-2.jpg (143.5 KB, 61 views)
	DSCN2575-2.JPG (144.5 KB, 60 views)

__________________
Send lawyers, guns & money...

The fixed sight 3" guns are my favorites. I wish I had more of them.

Groo here
If you check bullistics by the inch,,,
you will find a larger jump in speed at about 3 inch and not much more at 4
Then again at 5in and 6 makin g the 3in and 5in about the best speed vs barrel length setup.
Originally 5 ,6 and 7 in was normal.
4in came about the time Cop's started to drive cars...
The longer barrels punched holes in seats and the but hit you in the ribs.

I believe that the 3" revolver is great. It seems that a 3" is easier to conceal than a 4", and offers better ballistics and less recoil than a snub nosed.

I like them a lot. I’ve added several more since this photo was taken

Attached Images

3FD1F15D-9D5B-4D6D-BF20-EEC86E9B5D1B.jpg (53.2 KB, 98 views)

I had a 3” Model 65 that I should have never sold. Only thing close I have now is a 2.75” Ruger Speed Six. I like it a lot.

Not wrong..... I've got 3" 60s,65 and 66 J and K frames.

N-frames I've stuck to 4" guns because 3 1/2" guns are just too high priced and the extra 1/2" on a N-frame is nothing.

Where did you get that? I have a 586, no dash 4".

There's nothing you can do with a 4" that you can't do with a 3". And the velocity differences in barrel lengths are way less substantial than people like to claim...

For carry, especially concealed, the 3 inch K and L frame S&W's are as easy to carry as the 2-1/2 inch barrels, but you get the benefit of the full length ejector rod found on 4 inch barrels.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

I just got a 3” 36 it carries in the waist fine.

Attached Images

	419F8B21-A56E-4CDE-A1C0-E41D30F3F14B.jpg (32.9 KB, 56 views)
	E9EAB918-2DF8-4388-AB96-53A5694FA5D8.jpg (35.1 KB, 55 views)

__________________
Two Handguns every day

I have a couple I really like. A 13-3 nickel and a 65-3.

Attached Images

C7BF76DB-B241-43C8-9BF1-ED65A1B8D493.jpg (110.5 KB, 50 views)

__________________
SWCA 3255 SWHF 615

The only downside that I can think of is that they are difficult to find and when you do find one, they seem to bring a premium price!

I am the current care taker of a Mod. 65 and a Mod. 29 with 3" barrels. The 610-2 is, as you know, a bit over the 3" mark but, handles like a dream!

Attached Images

	IMG_1524.jpg (58.5 KB, 47 views)
	IMG_0207.jpeg (92.4 KB, 53 views)
	IMG_1541.jpg (90.7 KB, 53 views)

"Back in the day", a 4" revolver was my perfect choice for field use with a longer barrel (generally 6") for range use. My two large game hunting revolvers were 8 3/8" and 7.5" with scopes.

Then, when the S&W 60-4 (.38 Special) hit the market, I bought one. I REALLY wanted a 4" Model 60, but thought I would give it a try. The first outing was 50' indoors due to bad weather. I could hardly believe the scores I was shooting. It was witnessed by several of our local gun clubs NRA Pistol shooters. They could not believe what they saw. Well, I was as surprised as they were.

When the weather moderated just a couple of weeks later, I hit the outdoor range and did the same thing at 25 yards, standing. I mean scores on the NRA Bullseye targets in the 90's with a SNUBBY?

I loaded a bunch of field loads with both a full charge wadcutter and a full load 158 gr. SWC and went hunting. Bunny wabbits and squirrels fell from distances of a few feet on sitting rabbits to 25 yards. "Bang, Flop".

From then on in, when I went Grouse hunting in Eastern Ohio to the Upper Peninsula in Michigan, the 60-4 was worn cross draw to avoid interference with my Beretta Silver Snipe O/U shotgun. It was a revelation, I really didn't know it was there until it was needed. Snowshoe wabbits were taken readily, along with sitting and wounded grouse. It was more than a success, it was a WINNER!

Yep, a "snubby" that was truly practical in the field.

I have had my 60-4 since the first year they were offered and you don't have enough money to buy it, now, even tho' I am too old and feeble to make those hunting trips any more.http://smith-wessonforum.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

FWIW
Dale53

I had a 3” 66-3. Didn’t feel The magic others feel for their 3” K frames. The full length ejector rod was nice, but I never had issues ejecting empties out of my 2 1/2” 66.
But for some reason, I really like my 3” model 60.
Makes no sense, just the way it is.

I think they hit the sweet spot. (Considering that my duty revolvers back in the day were 2.5", 2" and under 2".)

For me they both look and shoot great (for the types of shooting I am interested in).

__________________
642-1, M&P15 TS

No downside.

Attached Images

DSCN1931.jpg (114.2 KB, 60 views)

I like 3" a lot in all revolvers. The only downside is they don't work as well as a 2" for ankle or pocket carry.

Inherent accuracy is not different between the 2 lengths but the longer sight radius make the 3" much more shootable for the average Joe or Jane.

They are enough for me. Probably my favorite. All the advantages of a 2.5 inch with a full length ejector rod.

__________________
Bill

Carried this off-duty long after autos were authorized. 10-8 .38 with Pachmayrs. Not a difficult gun to shoot or conceal.
Bob



What it looked like when I carried it daily. Bianchi holster and a grip adapter

My girlfriend thinks so.

Good Choice, OIF2

__________________
SWCA 3417 HF 642 NRA-TC

I think a RB K with a 3" is god looking and a good carry gun. I had my 4" M66 cut to RB by BMCM, and like it. An N frame is big enough that to me that 3" is not a worthwhile compromise, and to a great extent I would consider a 5" the optimum N frame barrel. (For me, the N frame is too big for regular carry except as a woods gun, even though I have qualified with 3 different 4" N frames.) I don't see much value to a 3" J frame as to me that makes a decent BUG/very NPE choice into a belt gun and detracts from it's value. I also don't do very well with fixed sights due to my eyes - just too slow to pick up.

__________________
NHI, 10-8.

I’m a big fan of 3” revolvers. I’ve got J, K and N frames in 3”, plus GP-100’s and SP-101’s in 3”. I often carry my 3” 65-3 for work, it’s a great choice for plain clothes carry.

__________________
Wheel guns are real guns.

3 is the new 4, 5 is the new 6.

The S&W Model 36 3” were sometimes seen carried as duty revolvers by female NYPD back in the day.

My first J frame was a 3” Model 36 which shot lights out at the range with 2.7 grs Bullseye and Remington 148 gr HBWC...those were the days.

I didn't even think of including 3" J-frames.
So I guess I have two more to add

S&W M36 no dash 38spl
S&W M43 no dash 22LR

Attached Images

	DSC00137.jpg (52.5 KB, 24 views)
	RS3.jpg (100.8 KB, 28 views)

__________________
Send lawyers, guns & money...

Been carrying revolvers for 4 decades and have learned a few things that work for me. 3” barrels are great on J and I frames. One K’s and N’s they are too short. Too little barrel to balance of rest of the revolver. For K frames I like a 5” barrrl and N frames get a 4” barrel.

Kevin

__________________
Unshared knowledge is wasted.

Thanks everyone. I'm thinking my next trick is going to be a fixed sight K frame 3".

__________________
Foster Positivity.

Three inch bbl revolvers are perfect. I've only owned one in my lifetime and I find myself right now without one. I think that is going to be my quest for 2020.

The downside is not having enough of them.

__________________
balin
NRA Life Member

3” not as concealable as a 2”, not as accurate as a 5-6” barrel. Not for me, more for you guys. It took me a 3” 36, 65 Lady Smith and a 3”66 to figure this out. That said if I wanted a revolver for a house gun it would be a 3” 686+ 7 shooter

I own a 3" Model 65 round butt. I'll never sell it although it is difficult to attach a bayonet to it.

The 3" models certainly hold their value if nothing else. I absolutely LOVE my 3" 60-4 with the full underlug. It's a whole different ballgame.

3" (2.75 in my case) K and L frames look and feel good, until you shoot full power magnums in them. Then it's plugs and earmuffs and muzzle blast. Tone it down 10% and it's a lot nicer.