If you have a three or five inch Smith revolver, what do you like or dislike about it versus shorter and longer barrels.

Thinking about a new three inch Smith. Maybe a five inch. I've owned revolvers with two, four, and six inch barrels but never anything in between.

Six inch is too front heavy. Four inch seems ideal but the three inch looks appealing.

Thanks.

__________________
Life Is A Gift. Defend it!

I have a 3 inch and 5 inch 625. The 3 inch is good to carry in the car because it is short enough not to dig into your car seat. The 5 inch is a pleasure to shoot. It has good balance.

I used to have a 3" 65. I always thought it was one of the best-balanced handguns I've ever handled. To me it was just as easy to shoot as a 4" gun but easier to carry and quicker to draw. Similar to what nolesfan said, my 3" 65 didn't jam the butt up into my ribs when sitting down. A 3" gun is probably the longest barrel I'd use on a carry revolver.

I don't have any experience with 5" guns.

The 5 inch is pretty close to perfect for me... the balance, the weight, the sight radius, and the overall feel. I did put these smooth factory presentation target stocks on it, to me they feel better than the newer style. Not to mention I think it gives it more of a traditional look.

__________________
USAF AMMO

I have a 3" M29-3. Yes, it sat well when driving but the holster I had carried it too high on my belt and the grip and cylinder would sag away from my body. A proper holster is necessary to prevent that. Since that time, I have come to prefer the 45 ACP cartridge so I never got a good holster for it.

I prefer the 4" barrel on "N" frames, with a good holster it rides well everywhere I go.

Kevin

__________________
Unshared knowledge is wasted.

I have both,
In 44 magnum



For strictly a range gun, I'd go with the 5" gun.
Pure carry, 3" gun
I like them both but for all around every day use(working gun)
I like a regular 4" gun the best.

I couldn't agree more.

Yep, what he said ... and tapered or non-tapered without the full lug.
ETA:
In an effort to answer the OP's question and not just give my personal preference, to me would depend on your use. The 5" for range/hunting but the 3" would be better for carry use and currently would likely be worth more dollar-wise. Given that, I'd likely go with 3".
After re-reading the OP's post, although I've owned both barrel lengths, I currently don't have a 3" or 5". Closest would be 3.5 and 5.5.

I think a 5" N frame is the best balanced revolver S&W ever made. Add a tapered barrel, and I have to have more than one!

For Uniform duty-five inch ( I really prefer a six inch)
For Off Duty or plainclothes assignment- three inch

From a practical stand point I shied away from odd barrel lengths due to difficulty in finding a holster for the odd barrel lengths

I originally feel in love with the 686+ 3" Talo but didn't get a change to purchase one at the time. About the time I was ready, I found a deal on the 5" slab barrel 686+ Pro. I changed the grips to Rosewood grips and the front sight to a fiber optic sight. I like the 5" slab barrel because it isn't barrel heavy but is extremely accurate. It's really a good set up. Now one of my friends just purchased the new 3" 686+ Talo with the unfluted cyclinder. It's a great looking gun and I can't wait to shoot it. Being shorter, he can use it more as a CCW than I can with mine but I have a Shield for that. The length you finally decide on will depend more on what you need the gun for. Good luck. Regards, Elliot45

Attached Images

686+ Pro 7 Shot.jpg (72.6 KB, 72 views)

My 3" Mod. 64 is the best naturally pointing firearm, revolver or semi, I have ever owned. Is it the grip, barrel length, weight, or fixed sights? Who cares? When I pick it up, it is on target without me manipulating it in any way.

All the above +

the 3" guns give you a full length ejector rod.....vs. a short one on 2-2 1/2 inch guns......

You don't say what the purpose would be, so any opinion is without context.

For me, three inch is the utility size. Small enough to conceal with it's round grip, yet big enough to be a pleasant range gun.

I got the 4" first, then the 2.5", and finally the 3". I appreciate them all, but if I had to choose one, the 3" is "just right".

I have a 5" 629-4 , I feel it is a great compromise between a 4" and a 6". I feel I have the best of both worlds. I also have a 686-3 2 1/2" . shoots great ,I'm good with it out to 20 yards, and it is comfortable to carry. Never owned a 3" gun, don't see anything wrong with them , just that the opportunity never presented it's self to me.

Lot of personal preference in choosing a handgun size and barrel length........ "for me" I like.....

L-frame Smiths are best in 4 and 6 inch versions

I like K-frames for daily carry 4" and concealed carry 3 and 2 1/2 inch

**** a long barrel service revolver is better for giving a BG an "Attitude Adjustment" than a short barrel. (gives more swing)

Groo here
Way back when ,,,,,, the 5in was the gold standard [some say 6in]
When cops started to drive cars the barrel became too long.
You will note that the original short 357 was a 3 1/2 in,
but that was with a short cylinder.
now ,with the long cylinder , a 3in is about the same size.
The 3 and 5 in are about the best for long and short use
and get about the best FPS per inch.

Hello
Same appollo i have a 629_4 5 inches plain cylinder love this lenght,thé first 44 was an
29 buy in 80 with 6,5 ,sold for an ruger SB in 7,5 that i cut to 4 5/8
Don't like long barrel

I like the 4", 5", 5 1/2", 6", 6 1/2", 7 1/2", 8 3/8" barrels.

I didn't like barrels shorter than 5". I first shot my new m58 in 41 mag and found the n frame power to weight ratio to be spot on when shot. Holding it statically it also felt well balanced in my hand.

__________________
Plant garlic in the fall

I've had both 3"and 5" Model 60s. Both shot surprisingly well but my favorite is the 3". Like Groo says, the 5" is just too long for a car or sitting on the ground.

Attached Images

	60-15.jpg (115.9 KB, 47 views)
	60-18.jpg (103.3 KB, 52 views)

__________________
Foster Positivity.

I think 3" and 5" are the two perfect barrel lengths. I would not mind Model 19's in those lengths, at all, at all.

..for me...it just "depends"....and the depends is all about balance.

I've have or have had all the frame sizes and just about every barrel length from 1 7/8" to 8 3/8s and to me it isn't just about barrel length but what the barrel contour is, frame size and round butt or square.

My favorite Smith is a 4" N-frame in .41 Magnum. A standard square butt with standard Magnum profile barrel is just perfect. Put a slim barrel on it like a Mountain gun then I prefer the butt to be round. Don't know why but a square butt with a slim barrel like a Model 24 or 27 just doesn't balance for me.

Take the same N-frame gun in a 3" round butt and the slim barrel of the Model 24 Combat Special balances better for me than the Magnum profile Model 657...

Always loved the 5" 27 until I tried a 6" side by side...the slim barrel and square butt just balanced and shot better. Never cared for the 3.5" bacause it had a square butt...if round it would probably balance perfect...

K/L frames... Love the Ks in 2.5 and 3" with a round butt...and a 4"/6" K with a square butt and Magnum profle barrel. If a slim barrel I prefer a round butt. Have two Model 12s with round butt and pencil barrels that just balance nice. Also have a round butt 18 and like it better than the standard square butt... Have never been able to warm up to the standard full underlug L but love the PC slabside 1/2 underlug round butt 4" guns...

To the original question about 3s and 5s...I have:

J: 60-10/3", 317/3"

K: 65-3/3", 66-2/3"

N: 657/3", 657/5", 57/5" and a 27-2 rebored to .41 Magnum/5"

Love the 60-10, 65 and 66. The Ns are nice but if I had to sell off some guns I would sell the 5s and keep the 4s...



...maybe I am just too picky...Bob

I sold my 3" 66 and my 3" 36, but still have my 5" 686+. I think a lot of us just like the odd length barrels because they're less common that the even length. "It's less common, so it has to be special"

Re: Barrel length. It depends. If I plan on doing some serious shooting, I'll take a six inch barrel ... more if I can get it. I like a six inch 686 for shooting in local matches. Sadly the local powers that be decided that only five inch or less would be allowed. Guess they had to keep the 1911 boys happy. Well... S&W just happens to have made a nice little something called the 625-2... nice five inch lugged barrel. Later this year someone is going to get a unexpected surprise when me and my little friend show up. Love full-moon clips and softball load .45 ACP! That thing is just about the most accurate revolver I've ever owned/fired. Cool.

For carrying in a holster, walking in the woods, etc., I like a four inch gun. K, L, N frames... a four inch barrel is nice for such purposes. I just like the way such guns handle. And, they are easy to wear when getting in and out of a car/truck. They are especially user friendly in a Bianchi Cyclone 111 holster, or a El Paso Tom Threepersons holster.

One day... I very much want to own a post-war .38 Special M&P with the little half-dime front sight... if possible w/ a round-butt. I think I could really enjoy it. I've wanted one ever since I watched Bogart use one in The Big Sleep. Maybe. One day.

__________________
<><

I have a 5" 10-5. Balance is perfect.

I would have loved to buy the 5" 60, but I never did, including now, have the do-re-mi.

__________________
and what his trumpet saith

Not being into short-barreled handguns (less than four inches), I have no preference regarding the three-inch ones but five inches is a perfect, in my opinion, length for today's underlug barrels. The balance is better than the next shorter and longer options without sacrificing much in the way of sighting radius or muzzle velocity.

In a K-frame like a Model 19 or 66, four inches feels the same but you are losing some velocity over a six-inch. I shot in a lot of PPC and bullseye matches 40 years ago with a four-inch Model 19 and did quite well, so they can be accurate but if downrange energy is your goal, four inches can detract from that.

Ed

I have a S&W model 610 with a 5" barrel. This is as far as I'm concerned one of the greatest revolvers ever produced. The versatility of shooting either the bada** 10mm or the easy shooting 40s&w is awesome!!

If you have a chance to own or shoot one please do, you won't be disappointed!

__________________
George Jamison

I would soooo love one of those but money wise only in my dreams.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I love my 3" M-64s





If I carried open in the field much anymore, I'd skip a couple of mortgage payments to get my hands on a 5" 610.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I love my 3 inch 13. I think 3 inches is best looking lengthy on a k frame combined with round butt and a 5 inch is best looking.g on an n frame....plus 5 inches is minimal length for hunting hear in ohio

Personally, I've found the 5" pro series barrel configuration about perfect. Weight of a 4" gun but with the longer sight radius and even better balance. Of these, I find the 627 PC's about perfect.

__________________
Dave

I'd love a 5" L-frame half lug.

I know there was q special run about 10 years back, but they're scarce as hens teeth.

Actually make that a 5" 620.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The biggest drawback for both is finding holsters... 5" is worse than 3"... I have 3", 5" & 6" 686's 3" for carry... 5" for range work... 6" is from a friend... good on the range but prefer the 5"

I have 4", 5" 6" & 8 3/8" N frames... love my 5" 625 the most... I don't carry my N frames... so range only...

so in the spirit of the forum... GET BOTH>>>
problem solved... sorry if I am no help... that has come up before...lol

Recently picked up a 3" 66-3 to go with my 66-1 snub. So far I prefer the 3" tube over the snub. Full length ejector is a big plus and while I would have never dreamt the extra 1/2" of barrel would make much difference the balance is better and it points more naturally for me. Think this one is in the stable to stay.
I had a 3" 60-10. Shot it better than any wheel gun that I can think of. It was one of those just right guns for me. Sold it to my brother and for some reason he does not seem inclined to sell it back to me.

The 627-0 model of 1989 full underlug-unfluted cylinder-RB with combats and a 5 1/2 barrel is the "handiest" N frame I have ever handled. It feels lie an L-but with better balance and Dap Wah!!

The 29 or 629 classic N frames with 5" full lug barrels are hard to beat. Great balance and less barrel whip/recoil than the standard 6" or 4" N frames.

K frames with 3" are great.

L frame-I see no benefit of the 3" or 5" over the 4". The 4" L frame is perfect IMO.

Im a big fan of Skeeter Skelton. One of his favorite guns was a 5 inch N frame. Not wanting the bulk of the N frame, I took my model 19 and shortened the barrel to 5 inches. That seems to be perfect for me because of the balance and the velocities attained. This is for range and or hunting, something to carry in the woods. I am not carrying this concealed.
My carry gun is a model 64 with the 3 inch barrel. This gun makes me look good. It thinks it is a rifle.

I have a 3" Model 65 and had a 5" 686 Plus. The 65 will be the last gun I ever get rid of. Perfect balance and weight. Had a 3" 64 that I sold years ago and still regret it.

The 5" 686 Plus was a great range gun, but to me, it was a little front heavy. It was very accurate but too heavy to carry and tough to find leather for (had hi-viz front sight). I decided to sell it to fund a 681 4". I seem to have a preference for fixed sight Smiths a well.

There is NO other barrel I like more than a 3 inch. By far my favorite length.

__________________
Detective Cobras Agents Oh My!

I like 4" barrels on most of my revolvers, but after owning a 3" 686 it's hard to say which is my favorite. Don't know who said it first but "it shoots like a 4" and conceals like a 2"."

__________________
Ephesians 6 (Armor of God)

Hmmm, I'm going to go on record saying it does neither like either

I shoot better with a 4 than I do a 3. The 3 conceals better than a 4 obviously, and has a full ejector rod which a 2 does not. I definitely do like the 3's.

I'm a big fan of the 3" revolver in .357 Mag as it's the sweet spot for concealed carry as it is still very comfortable and concealable as well as still being ballistically efficient, provided you select the load carefully. They are also capable of excellent combat accuracy and a fairly good shooter will have no problem holding the 8 ring on a B-27 target at 25 yards with one.

Model 13:


Model 60:


SP101:



And I put the 2 3/4" Speed Six in the same category. Another 1/4" of barrel wouldn't have hurt it at all.




-----

In contrast, I've never had much use for a 5" revolver. I notice the extra inch compared to a 4" when it comes to carrying it, but the 5" barrel offers less long barrel/sight radius advantage than a 6" revolver that isn't noticeably harder to carry.

As far as the "in-between-lengths" go, I have a model 629-3 and find that the N-frame with the 5" barrel and full underlug balances very well, i.e. it doesn't feel barrel heavy and that balance makes it seem smaller than it really is. I don't own a 686, but have held many 3" model 686s and feel they have a similarly superb balance, whereas the 4" already feels barrel heavy in the L-frame.

You didn't mention what caliber or frame size you were interested in, but I think that in any caliber, a 3" barrel excels in concealed carry at the expense of velocity, while a 5" barrel shoots like a longer barrel without the awkwardness of the longer gun, but at the expense of ease-of-carry in most situations.

For me a lot depends on frame size. I like shooting the K-frame 3" better and the N-Frame 5" better. However, obviously the smaller frame and the shorter barrels carry better.

The current under lug fad is another factor that needs to be considered. There are some limited uses where an under lug makes sense and adds to utility of the revolver, but in most cases it is just a styling trend. In practice, under lug barrels make longer barrels more unwieldy and don't add to the controllability of a revolver in a .357 Magnum where recoil isn't the issue i5 is in a .44 Magnum, .454 Casull, etc.

I don't care for full-lugs myself, except where recoil-control may be desired.

On a 3" carry gun, I wouldn't want the extra weight.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I never understood why S&W didn't just add an extra 1/2". Seems like it would simplify production, too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I went with the three inch.


Thanks for your input.

__________________
Life Is A Gift. Defend it!

I've had some of both. The part that turned me away was that the PD didn't allow 5-inchers and in competition, 3-inches was not allowed or was at a disadvantage.

__________________
N.R.A. BENEFACTOR Member