So far we've seen one post about a failure of the barrel on a 620. That's pretty much balanced by a similar failure that I saw for a 686 on another forum. In both cases I think that the root cause was a metalurgical issue. Basically, stuff happens.

Now concerning the 2 piece barrel on the 620, I believe that it's a superior method of mounting a barrel on a revolver. A barrel mounted at just one end is more prone to whip when a round is fired through it. Barrel whip is the major reason why full lug barrels have become predominant. However, surrounding the barrel with a larger diameter shroud not only provide attachment points at each end of the barrel, it also puts the full length of the barrel under tension which can act to further stabilized the barrel when a bullet is passing through it.

Now, it may just be luck, however on two seperate occasions I have managed to get 3 shot groups at 30 feet that I could cover with a dime when shooting my 620 in single action off a bench rest. I also think that it looks better with the half lug barrel profile.

So, I voted for the 620. BTW, if I ever see a 357 Magnum Dan Wesson 4 barrel kit for sale anywher in my area I will be all over it. In a revolver, the DW's were the most accturate ever made and it just happens that the barrels in the DW revolvers were mounted in a very similar fashion as the 620.