is there any accuracy difference form a 3" to a 4" barrel when you are shooting at 25 yards? I was think of getting a SW 686 in 3" for home defense, a gun that both my wife and I can shoot. The 3" is a little lighter than the 4", heavy enough to help with recoil and it does not eject shells like semi's which bothers her. our public range target distance is 25 yards which more than likely be the only place it will be fired. anyone have shooting experience with these barrel lenghts?
accuracy difference from 3" to 4" barrel
- Thread starter iyn
- Start date
Steve_NEPhila
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2009
- Messages
- 397
- Reaction score
- 38
There will be no appreciable difference in accuracy or precision barring any defect with either barrel length. However, a longer sight radius does help when seeking precision from a particular weapon. Sight radius is not dependent upon the barrel length. Without going into serious details I can say with confidence that having a 3 inch barrel will in no way decrease the effectiveness of your weapon for the intended purpose.
Dragon88
Well-known member
No real difference in the accuracy from the barrel. I do, however, find a 4" barrel just about perfect as far as handling and shootability. I would take a 4" over a 3" any day.
parabarbarian
Well-known member
Personally I like the 3" for SD. I think it is just "handier" than the 4" but doesn't have the short ejector rod the 2" bbls have.
At 25 yards my 6" and 3" shoot about the same size groups if they're shooting the same ammo. At longer ranges the 6" has a clear advantage -- especially with 357 magnum loads.
At 25 yards my 6" and 3" shoot about the same size groups if they're shooting the same ammo. At longer ranges the 6" has a clear advantage -- especially with 357 magnum loads.
Bat Guano
Well-known member
My agency's issue gun years ago was a 3". In theory there is no accuracy difference between that and a 4", but practically speaking the 4" is much more forgiving and usually a better pointer as well. It also gives a little more velocity which never hurts. It doesn't matter much for plinking or target shooting but under pressure I would rather run a 4incher. I carried one concealed for most of my career and liked it very much.
A thought: if a 3" is the choice I think the M60 S&W in either .38 Spl. or .357 is a darned good gun and a nice compact package to boot.
They will all do if you do.
A thought: if a 3" is the choice I think the M60 S&W in either .38 Spl. or .357 is a darned good gun and a nice compact package to boot.
They will all do if you do.
CigarGuy
Well-known member
This has been my dilemma for a couple months. I see myself carrying, but also want to be able to shoot and practice, relatively comfortably, at the range. I've pretty much settled
on the 3" for it's ease of carry over the 4", and will put up with it at the range.
on the 3" for it's ease of carry over the 4", and will put up with it at the range.
Dragon88
Well-known member
You could get the 3" 686, as well as a 4" or 5" police trade model 10 for fun at the range. Best of both worlds and still relatively inexpensive. Plus you give yourself a lot more options for your home defense plan with two guns.
CigarGuy
Well-known member
Good point. However, I fear, your "relatively" is way different then my "relatively"..........
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 27,659
- Reaction score
- 21,265
Sight radius is dependent on the barrel length, if the sights are on the barrel?
In any case, there will probably not be a noticeable difference in accuracy between a 3 and 4" 686. If you are not planning on carrying it I would opt for the 4", however.
There might be a slight practical difference, but it could be either way, depending on your wife's eyesight and your eyesight, your wife's experience and style, and yours. Usually, in the 3" bbl - 4" bbl range, one might expect the 4" to have a slight advantage, but it is definitely not always the case. For reasons stated above, the 3" is often a great choice.
Last edited:
5-Shot
Well-known member
I'll not bore you with the (very) messy mathematical details, but there is a way to calculate the probable difference. Given 20/20 shooter eyesight and the difference in sight radius between a 3 inch and 4 inch J-frame Smiths, the shorter gun should, on average, produce 0.12 inches larger 5-shot groups at 25 yards.
Ed
Ed
It is just barely possible that in the 3 - 4 inch barrel range, the mathematical calculations are relevant. However, in the summer of 1931, then-Major Julian Hatcher fired a "possible" at the British Nationals at Bisley with an H&R pistol with 8" barrel rather than the customary 10" barrel, with Ensign Harry Renshaw taking second place with a 98, using the same H&R pistol. The following year, interest in short-barreled H&R pistols increased considerably. Walter Roper subsequently did a limited study of the effect of sight radius on accuracy (three shooters, extensive shooting with more than one sight radius), and concluded, IIRC, that the shorter sight radius was better for one (top) shooter, longer for another, and unclear for the third. Roper reports all of this in his book Experiments of a Handgunner. There was also published an article by him in the September 1946 American Rifleman, in which he noted that after over a hundred shooters purchased short-barreled H&R pistols, a majority of the 65 who reported back to him reported better scores with the short pistol.
It seems quite clear to me that the arithmetic involved is often less important than other variables in the individual shooter, and the actual practical result can usually be determined only by extensive experimentation.
David LaPell
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2008
- Messages
- 5,541
- Reaction score
- 6,779
Get the 3 1/2 inch barrel, the best of both worlds!
Baised on my experience I would say, "most likely no".
You would have to test a bunch of 3" vs. 4" to reach a positive conclusion.
I can say this, I had a 2.5" Mod 19, that at 25 yards would shoot as good as my 2 custom 6" PPC guns. It was a tack driver.
I do seem to shoot a 6.5" 44 Mag a little better at 25 yards, and much better at 50 yards than a 4".
You would have to test a bunch of 3" vs. 4" to reach a positive conclusion.
I can say this, I had a 2.5" Mod 19, that at 25 yards would shoot as good as my 2 custom 6" PPC guns. It was a tack driver.
I do seem to shoot a 6.5" 44 Mag a little better at 25 yards, and much better at 50 yards than a 4".
5-Shot
Well-known member
520Fan,
I actually agree with you on this. Back when I did a lot of serious target shooting I had a Mod 46 with both a long and short barrel. I found I preferred the shorter of the two. It's easier to keep both front and rear sight in focus when they are closer together.
My calculations are based on the (somewhat) questionable assumption that the shooter is able master that task as well as keep the target in focus. (A Merit eye disc helps a lot here!) Since a person with 20/20 eyesight can resolve one minute of angle, the rest is pure probability and arithmetic.
The point in my earlier response was to demonstrate that any theoretical advantage for the longer barrel was so small that it was bound to get lost among all the other shooting variables.
Ed
I actually agree with you on this. Back when I did a lot of serious target shooting I had a Mod 46 with both a long and short barrel. I found I preferred the shorter of the two. It's easier to keep both front and rear sight in focus when they are closer together.
My calculations are based on the (somewhat) questionable assumption that the shooter is able master that task as well as keep the target in focus. (A Merit eye disc helps a lot here!) Since a person with 20/20 eyesight can resolve one minute of angle, the rest is pure probability and arithmetic.
The point in my earlier response was to demonstrate that any theoretical advantage for the longer barrel was so small that it was bound to get lost among all the other shooting variables.
Ed
m657
Well-known member
For "minute of grapefruit" at 25 yards, my 3" vs 4" 629s have no practical difference in accuracy.
There is considerable difference in muzzle blast though, using the same 900-1000 fps 240 gr SWC loads with the same powder.
Recoil is insignificantly different in my hand. Accuracy on paper targets is virtually identical.
The anticipated muzzle blast does tend to affect my accuracy more out of the 3" though.
When using identical 44 special loads in the 3" and 4" from the bench at 25 yards, there is no significant difference in my own test.
I don't have 3" 38 cal to test with 4". Probably the 38 level loads have little difference in muzzle blast. I'd expect 357 level loads to exhibit the same kind of blast characteristics as the 44 mag experiment.
Personally I prefer the 3" barrels for belt carry.
There is considerable difference in muzzle blast though, using the same 900-1000 fps 240 gr SWC loads with the same powder.
Recoil is insignificantly different in my hand. Accuracy on paper targets is virtually identical.
The anticipated muzzle blast does tend to affect my accuracy more out of the 3" though.
When using identical 44 special loads in the 3" and 4" from the bench at 25 yards, there is no significant difference in my own test.
I don't have 3" 38 cal to test with 4". Probably the 38 level loads have little difference in muzzle blast. I'd expect 357 level loads to exhibit the same kind of blast characteristics as the 44 mag experiment.
Personally I prefer the 3" barrels for belt carry.
Groo01
Well-known member
Groo here
The difference in accuracy between a short and a long barrel has more
to do with the way you see the sights than most anything else.
Most shooters who are near sighted will go to a shorter barrel
[closer to the eye ] as they age,, far sighted will go to a longer.
Got to see the front sight well!!!!!!!!!!!
The difference in accuracy between a short and a long barrel has more
to do with the way you see the sights than most anything else.
Most shooters who are near sighted will go to a shorter barrel
[closer to the eye ] as they age,, far sighted will go to a longer.
Got to see the front sight well!!!!!!!!!!!
