2" vs 3" .38/.357 revolvers

[Okie Red]

The main thing to remember with any handgun is shot placement.

 

[IAM Rand]

I disagree with SFurry79. As long as you use quality ammo, I think you should be fine. He is mixing up 2 different categories, critters with 4 legs vs critters with 2. I would not use anything under a 6" barrel for the 4 legged kind. If you are carrying for self defense, you are typically at closer ranges. Not sure I have ever heard of someone complaining about being shot with a 2"ish revolver and the projectile not expanding properly. I know, I know, the FBI is the pre-eminent authority when it comes to everything under the sun, including guns and ammo. They, like doctors, keep on changing their opinion. Eggs good for you, now eggs BAAAAAAD, no wait, eggs are good for you.

How many times has the FBI changed their gun and ammo selection over the years. AGAIN, I know, there are advancements in both and they are just keeping up with the times. I have a feeling that more people have been shot and killed/wounded with something other than what the FBI carries. I found this on Youtube. Kinda dispels the length vs velocity argument, just a little.



If I am carrying a short barrel revolver with quality ammo, the main concern I have is in my ability to use it to save my life or someone else's life, not that the ammo might not expand properly. You could should the same ammo over 100 times at a person or animal and get many that will act differently. No real way to test that unless we want to start shooting sheep again (hope no PETA types are here).

Control what you can and make sure what you are using is quality, everything else will work out in the end.

 

[rockquarry]

The one you shoot best has the best barrel length for you. Ballistics are insignificant. You'll only lose about 35-40 fps per inch.

 

[Shibadog]

I do like the 3's. Got a couple 2's but I shoot my 3" 60 better.

 

[UFGator]

I've seen people shot with 357 magnum rounds still on their feet. I've seen people shot with a 22 who dropped dead on the spot. A colleague of mine shot a guy five times at close range with +P 38 Treasury loads. He ran a hundred yards before dropping dead.

Not trying to be argumentative but all of this is theory unless the person has a Kevlar plate on.

You can't say for sure what is going to happen when you put a bullet in someone's body. The only exception is a GOOD head shot. Lights out on the spot, hopefully.

 

[BE Mike]

LAPD carried six inch revolvers for a long time. Florida HP carried only 5" bbl revolvers to include 5" Model 19s, Model 27s.

FHP used high rise cross draw holsters. Not my first choice for a duty holster.

 

[rockquarry]

I've seen people shot with 357 magnum rounds still on their feet. I've seen people shot with a 22 who dropped dead on the spot. A colleague of mine shot a guy five times at close range with +P 38 Treasury loads. He ran a hundred yards before dropping dead.

Not trying to be argumentative but all of this is theory unless the person has a Kevlar plate on.

You can't say for sure what is going to happen when you put a bullet in someone's body. The only exception is a GOOD head shot. Lights out on the spot, hopefully.

You're right, but the theoretical gunfighters are quite fond of the the theory part of all this, even if it doesn't mean much.

 

[No Quarter]

Buffalo Bore .38+p 158gr LSWCHP renders the difference moot.

 

[gunbarrel]

Re: FHP high-rise, cross-draw holsters, the troopers carried their revolvers that way for many years. Some wore them higher than others, as it was the case of former College basketball player, 7 ft. tall Pembrook Burrows. I believe that when the FHP switched to semiauto pistols, they went to strong-side holsters.

 

[Chrisj357]

This might not be a popular opinion but I think a 2" barrel .357 is in most cases unreasonable. I have even stopped carrying my 642 with a 2". Here's my reason. You cut accuracy in half under stress and accuracy with a 2" barrel compared to my 4" is noticeably reduced. Lastly it's the recoil. If you are going to take .357 recoil why have 38 special performance which essentially what you get blasting a .357 with a 2 inch barrel. So you have a big bang increased time to follow-up shots with little benefit. Might as well carry a 38+P J frame air weight. Lighter, smaller quicker and close to the same performance.

I carry a 4" 686 every day. It's a gun I have shot several hundred rounds with. I know it, it's part of me. Like has been said little snubbies are not user friendly at the range so we're not going to be as "broken in" with them.
IMO they are a backup gun. Great for IN YOUR FACE type situations or dire straits when anything is better than nothing but not ideal at all for a primary carry gun.

 

[UFGator]

Re: FHP high-rise, cross-draw holsters, the troopers carried their revolvers that way for many years. Some wore them higher than others, as it was the case of former College basketball player, 7 ft. tall Pembrook Burrows. I believe that when the FHP switched to semiauto pistols, they went to strong-side holsters.

I loved those Orange Blossom patches and the old Stetsons. Stetsons were still in use when I was down there. No disrespect meant to any department but the current covers look goofy. We wore the same hat the troopers did but they were straw? and green in color. All the SOs in FL wore basically the same uniform except for Dade County.

They did go to a strong side holster with the pistols. I'm still looking for one of the special order nickel Model 19s with the 5" bbl. A unicorn.

 

[Brian Parrish]

Re: FHP high-rise, cross-draw holsters, the troopers carried their revolvers that way for many years. Some wore them higher than others, as it was the case of former College basketball player, 7 ft. tall Pembrook Burrows. I believe that when the FHP switched to semiauto pistols, they went to strong-side holsters.

Cross draw shoulder holsters are great for car carry and an added benefit is you get a longer barrel. However, there was a problem. It was the retention training. Weapon retention training is NOT more difficult for officers with shoulder holsters, but it is different. Therefore those wanting to carry that way had to have a separate extra course.
Nobody wanted to take extra training.
No Department wanted to pay for it.
Some people will say that shoulder holsters just went out of style.
What went "out of style" was a philosophy of law enforcement which gave discretion to the individual cops. The lawyers killed it long gone.

Please correct me with my thanks!
BrianD

 

[Well Armed]

You cut accuracy in half under stress and accuracy with a 2" barrel compared to my 4" is noticeably reduced.

That's not true at all. Accuracy isn't noticeably reduced with a 2" vs a 4" barrel and defensive distances. If you personally had an accuracy problem, then that was a personal problem with you or maybe the anecdotal example of your particular 2" revolver. It could also be the particular ammo you were shooting. In any event, your assertion isn't true.

If you are going to take .357 recoil why have 38 special performance which essentially what you get blasting a .357 with a 2 inch barrel.

A .357 out of a 2" barrel will generally and more often than not outperform a .38 out of a 4" barrel. I'm not sure what you're talking about. The velocity and muzzle energy will be greater with the 2" .357....

 

[shawn mccarver]

I know that there will be a slight difference in velocity and muzzle energy. I know there's a difference in site radius, that I'm not sure makes much of a difference at defensive distances. My question is, what will a bullet shot out of a 3" revolver do to a human that it wouldn't do if it was shot out of a 2" revolver? Some people prefer 3" or 4" revolvers for EDC, but if the shot placement is exactly the same with a 2", 3", or 4" revolver, what difference, if any, will it make to a human target?

In my mind, the effect on the target for the 3-inch would be the same as if you had fired the 2-inch from one big step closer.

 

[CH4]

I have several 2.5" and 3" K frames and I actually prefer the 2.5", but not for any meaningful reason, especially ballistics. Pick the one that works or looks better to you.

 

[Chrisj357]

That's not true at all. Accuracy isn't noticeably reduced with a 2" vs a 4" barrel and defensive distances. If you personally had an accuracy problem, then that was a personal problem with you or maybe the anecdotal example of your particular 2" revolver. It could also be the particular ammo you were shooting. In any event, your assertion isn't true.


A .357 out of a 2" barrel will generally and more often than not outperform a .38 out of a 4" barrel. I'm not sure what you're talking about. The velocity and muzzle energy will be greater with the 2" .357....

I have been shooting many years and I have many many associates to compare notes with. A 2" barrel cannot compete with a 4" barrel for the majority of shooters as far as accuracy. Sure, as soon as that is said there will be be someone to step up and swear they can shoot a flea off a hog at a thousand yards with a snub nose.357. I get it

A 2" air weight with 38+P ammo is closer the performance of a .357 from a 2" barrel than many know. My main point is there are pros and cons to snubbie revolvers. I feel the cons outweigh the pros.

 

[Lt.Donn]

That's not true at all. Accuracy isn't noticeably reduced with a 2" vs a 4" barrel and defensive distances. If you personally had an accuracy problem, then that was a personal problem with you or maybe the anecdotal example of your particular 2" revolver. It could also be the particular ammo you were shooting. In any event, your assertion isn't true.


A .357 out of a 2" barrel will generally and more often than not outperform a .38 out of a 4" barrel. I'm not sure what you're talking about. The velocity and muzzle energy will be greater with the 2" .357....

Thousands of cops carried 2" Det specials, 36's and even j-frame 2" over the golden age of American policing, without any apparent major issues, and I can say from personal experience, I never felt under gunned...BUT we did not encounter today's criminal element armed with everything from AK's to Glocks with the "switch's installed...So I think snubbies are still a very viable option for the avg EDC civilian, they are not the best option for our front line LEO's...in fact, in many agencies today, the troops are trained that in a deadly force encounter greater than 15 yds, the patrol carbine should be used instead of the sidearm.
Its just the times we live in

 

[greenwellg]

From a reloaders perspective the burning rate of a powder can affect the muzzle velocity of different ammo loads considerably. A faster burning powder with a lighter bullet can significantly increase muzzle velocity. In order to make an effective comparison different variables must be eliminated and only one variable allowed. A longer barrel producing a lower velocity would imply that a heavier bullet combined with a very fast burning powder could contribute to that result.
The longer time a heavier bullet would spend in the bore combined with the gap between the forcing cone and cylinder could produce reduced velocity in a longer barrel.
I'd be willing to bet there are tests of barrel lengths which use loads that are precisely consistent in powder type, bullet weight and type. Cylinder gap, projectile true diameter and other factors that WILL affect the final velocity and muzzle energy. Simply changing any individual component can cause changes that are hard to predict.

 

[Riposte1]

I have been shooting many years and I have many many associates to compare notes with. A 2" barrel cannot compete with a 4" barrel for the majority of shooters as far as accuracy. Sure, as soon as that is said there will be be someone to step up and swear they can shoot a flea off a hog at a thousand yards with a snub nose.357. I get it

A 2" air weight with 38+P ammo is closer the performance of a .357 from a 2" barrel than many know. My main point is there are pros and cons to snubbie revolvers. I feel the cons outweigh the pros.

While I don't necesarrily feel the cons of a snubby outweigh the pros of the 4", I agree with your general statement.

I don't want to come off as the expert here, but I do beleive what I've been taught - accuracy comes in different categories - Practical and Mechanical. Some of the above posts are right as far as mechanical accuracy goes - but you are certainly correct as far as the typical shooter goes when it comes to practical accuracy. While I can point to several noteable exceptions, generally speaking it takes more skill to shoot a lighter shorter gun.

As to the pros and cons, that is for everyone to measure and decide for themselves. As a general admonition, not meant specifically for any one person, set yourself a simple course of fire - shoot it with both, and record the score - then decide if the convienience of a snub is worth the cost in performance. Yes, I've done that but I don't wish to go down any bunny trails here.

I certainly agree - depending on how you measure effectiveness, or even potential, a 2" .38 +P comes darn close and in some loads exceed some .357 loads but you have to be very selective to find those. I have a 2.25" 640 - when I was working I carried 158 gr Buffalo Bore .38s in it because I found, for me, not only was it more effective than a 125 gr. .357 Magnum (in the same gun) - I could shoot it better. But that might be just me - we each have to work out our own salvation.

Riposte

 

[Well Armed]

I have been shooting many years and I have many many associates to compare notes with. A 2" barrel cannot compete with a 4" barrel for the majority of shooters as far as accuracy. Sure, as soon as that is said there will be be someone to step up and swear they can shoot a flea off a hog at a thousand yards with a snub nose.357. I get it

A 2" air weight with 38+P ammo is closer the performance of a .357 from a 2" barrel than many know. My main point is there are pros and cons to snubbie revolvers. I feel the cons outweigh the pros.

Then I'd say that's an issue with you and those you've been shooting with, not not an issue with the revolver or barrel length. I actually don't think it's a barrel or issue with you or your many many associates. I think you are conflating two different things. If you were to claim that a ~14 oz. aluminum frame, short two finger grip, and gutter sights S&W J-frame that happens to have a 2" barrel is harder for the person behind the trigger to shoot as well as a ~30 oz or more medium to full-sized revolver with a full-sized grip and better sights, I'll agree with you with one caveat. The difference in the shooter's accuracy isn't because of the barrel length! It's because of other factors like steel vs aluminum, gutter sights vs adjustable sights, grip length, etc.... 12-14 oz pocket sized J-frames are the only snubs on the market. I'd bet you a 2"-2.5" L-frame or N-frame category of revolver with full-sized grips will be more accurate in some shooters hands than a very lightweight aluminum sized J-frames revolver with boot grips. It's not the barrel length that's the issue at defensive distances.

We've have published data online, on YouTube, and several other sources that we can cite that say otherwise with regards to compare 38 special +p from a 2" barrel vs 357 mag. IIRC, I believe Paul Harrell (and others) even did a couple of videos debunking this commonly repeated myth. A 2" 357 magnum will out perform a 2", 3", and even a 4" 38 Special+P. Heck, even go look at the LuckyGunner test results for most popular higher quality defensive ammo. They list 2" and 4" velocity numbers for both 38 and 357.