2" vs. 3" ballistics- .38 Special J-frames

G-Mac

G-Mac

Silver Supporter
Joined
Nov 24, 2003
Messages
4,313
Reaction score
4,943
Location
CNY
For a long time, my main "small" carry gun was my 649-1 with 2" barrel. Recently, I've been carrying a 36-1 with 3" heavy barrel.

Just wondering, is there any significant advantage to the extra 1" of barrel length on my Chiefs Special versus the Bodyguard?

I sort of "retired" the 649 when I bought the 36.

Time for a change...
icon_biggrin.gif
 
Register to hide this ad
For a long time, my main "small" carry gun was my 649-1 with 2" barrel. Recently, I've been carrying a 36-1 with 3" heavy barrel.

Just wondering, is there any significant advantage to the extra 1" of barrel length on my Chiefs Special versus the Bodyguard?

I sort of "retired" the 649 when I bought the 36.

Time for a change...
icon_biggrin.gif
 
Somebody once posted a pic of a Bodyguard with a 3" bbl. and unfluted cylinder.
THAT was pretty unique.

I imagine there's a bit of differnce with the extra 1" of bbl., besides the 'look'.
Are you enjoying that new gun? Any difference in the way it carries?
 
Originally posted by BusMaster007: Are you enjoying that new gun? Any difference in the way it carries?
Click to expand...

I like the 36-1 a lot. The Galco belt holster (originally purchased for the 649) that I'm using holds the 36 in better. This is because the thumb-strap goes over the hammer, which is, of course, shrouded on the 649.

The heavy-barreled 36 feels more substantial in your hands. It shoots well. Patrick Grashorn made me a set of elk stags for it. I had him make them just a tiny bit wider than the factory wood grips. I've been alternating between those and a set of Spegels that I had on my 649. Both feel good, but I may try a T-grip with the elk stags.
 
Just wondering, is there any significant advantage to the extra 1" of barrel length on my Chiefs Special versus the Bodyguard?
Click to expand...

Very much depends on the load. Sometimes the difference is quite dramatic - it's always notable, in my experience.

I've posted dozens of chrono results for loads out of both 1 7/8" and 3" barrels (sometimes 2 1/8" as well). I'd post some examples, but my wife's still sleeping in the bedroom where I have my logbooks. I'd encourage you to run a search on my name and "chrono" or something like that to see what I'm talking about.

Edited: I just ran the search and the time parameters don't show any hits of use. Sorry. The data is here, though, and at Pete's ProGuns Forum where I used to post a lot.
 
I don't think the issue is so much ballistics as it is handling and shootability. A 3" J is easier to shoot well, all things being equal. You will probably get some additional fps but that's just frosting on the cake.
 
The rule of thumb has sort of always been 50 fps for each additional inch of barrel. Even if it always worked out that way another rule of thumb is that the difference between a "fast barrel and a "slow" barrel can be be as much as 100 fps in in the same barrel length of the same model of gun.

This is because some tubes are slicker or smoother than others. Unless you actually chronograph each of yours with the same load you can never tell, when the actual length is that close.

As posted above, the biggest difference is in balance and pointability.

the best

RWT
 
Here is little information that shows what difference you might expect between the two barrel lengths:

38 Special 148 gr DEWC 2.8 BE Crimped in groove

S&W Mod 37 1 7/8" High 657 Low 631 Avg 643 ES 26 SD 10

S&W Mod 36 3" High 708 Low 684 Avg 692 ES 24 SD 9
-------------
38 Special Remington 158 gr LSWHP +P

S&W 37-2 1 7/8" High 777 Low 758 Avg 770 ES 19 SD 7

S&W 36 3" High 883 Low 869 Avg 878 ES 14 SD 6


Velocities vary from gun to gun even with the same barrel length. I have an older 1 7/8" 36 that usually runs 20-30 fps faster than the 37-2.

deanc
 
I have been carrying a 3 inch Model 36/60 HB for over 35 years. I began with using it in a ankle holster as a BUG while working as a LEO and still carry one today.

Even when I was carrying a Glock 19 the model 60 3 inch HB was still my BUG.

The current carry one is a model 60-3, 3 inch DAO that S&W did a factory action job and chamfered the charge holes.

While S&W had it, I carried a 2 inch model 60 DAO and found that there was a distinct difference in feel between the two guns and the accuracy for me was not up to par. (10 inch steel plates at 35 yards)

I'm glad the 3 inch model 60-3 HB is back home.
icon_biggrin.gif


My wife also carries a model 36 HB, SB as her CCW and she tried numerous handguns before she settled on it.
 
I can see no justification for a 3" J Frame. These small frame revolvers are meant to be concealed in tight places and the 3" barrel prohibits this. Any ballistic gain is not justified, as far as I'm concerned.

Besides, I hear you can get some pretty impressive ballistics from a 2" barreled .38 Special and some SR4756...

Dave Sinko
 
Hi Dave,

I can think of several reasons for a 3" barreled J-frame . . . and sales of tens of thousands of them through the years confirm those reasons for various people.

However, the only one that truly means something to me . . . and this one means a whole lot . . . is that my wife likes her Model 37 3" one so well she'll finally tote a gun!

That's a very comforting feeling for me . . . especially as she works alone today at her office . . . and all those nights she had to work late leading her organization!

Automatics were ruled out by her and other revolvers were "too heavy," "too big," "to hard to shoot," etc. She shoots hers remarkably well . . . and she never said that, or demonstrated that, with my 1 7/8" J-frames.

So . . . THANKS S&W, for making the 3" version J-frame so my wife will finally be protected!

I'm sure, after reading my response David, that this is a great reason for that gun's existance!

Thanks for writing,

Tom
 
Originally posted by David Sinko:
I can see no justification for a 3" J Frame. These small frame revolvers are meant to be concealed in tight places and the 3" barrel prohibits this. Any ballistic gain is not justified, as far as I'm concerned.

Dave Sinko
Click to expand...

Have you shot, carried and concealed one of these? The 3" prohibits nothing. I put away my 1 7/8" 60 and will only carry the 3" SB 60HB now. Handling, feel, accuracy and controllablity is far superior in my estimation. To each his own.
 
In the Speer Number 9 reloading manual, there is an article titled, "Why Ballisticians Get Gray Hair." They round up about 20 different firearms chambered for .357 and chronograph them with the same ammo.

The results are educational. There was no way to guess ahead of time which handgun with the same barrel length would shoot the fastest or slowest. Some guns with shorter barrels shot faster than the same model with a longer barrel. With guns of the same barrel length, there was as much as a 200 fps difference, if I remember correctly.

It's due to a combination of dimensions and tolerances and barrel/bore finish. Some guns are just a lot faster or slower than other guns of the same make, model and poduction era.

This duplicated my experiences. 25 years ago, a friend and I rounded up all of the .357 Mag revolvers we could find and chrono'ed them. Some longer barrels were slower than some shorter barrels.

The only way you will know if the 3 incher shoots faster than the 2 incher, and by how much, is to shoot them over a chronograph.
 
Originally posted by s&wchad:
Check out this link on .44 Mag velocities. I would expect a 3" 38 Special to be around 10% faster. I'm sure the flash-gap and chambers have an effect and individual guns vary.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/5301039...941053851#8941053851
Click to expand...
Great test data there. I appreciate that the test was done with same tube/gun/ammo.
It clearly shows (as common sense suggests too) that the difference increases, as barrel shortens.
 
Gress: I'd have to argue. What it shows is that on the guns tested it resulted in that.

There is simply no way, as stated by others, to tell between individual guns, especially with guns that close in barrel length.

I might be willing to say that a 2" compared to a 8 3/8" but 40+ years of shooting and chrono loads wouldn't even "prove" that though the general "Rule of Thumb" might have enough difference to work with 6" of barrel length.

Even in rifles it doesn't always work. I have a 22-250 with a 22" barrel that is faster than nearly all the 26" 22-250s I have, with exactly the same load. The difference has more to do with the custom barrel that was well finished and bore lapped and............. it turned out faster than the others, period.

The only down side to a 3" "J" frame I've found is in the ability to carry concealed. I have both Models 36 and 60 with the full lug, 3" heavy barrels with adjustable sights from the 80s. They work great in a holster and I often carry the 36 in particular as a grouse gun when outside in the forest/desert.

The only conplaint I have is that I like to simply put one in the pocket of my vest in the fall/winter. A 2" "J" frame will stay, muzzle forward, grip to the rear for days. Withing an hour or so of moving around the 3" guns always end upside down. It must have to do with the weight and balance point. It's just a tad less handy than a 2", for me.

RWT
 
I have visions of a three inch j-frame in a shoulder holster while a two inch rides pocket or IWB. Same gun, same ammo. same speedloaders. A complete personal SD system. What else could Smith have been thinking, that people would sit around their keyboards and endlessly debate one barrel length or the other all the time?
icon_biggrin.gif
 
Wickahoney,
I have nothing but great respect for your many years of experience. I agree completely that the difference has to do much more with individual gun properties than the barrel length. I think nobody would argue though that in same gun/cartridge combination (like in the test referred) the shorter the barrel the lower the velocity of the bullet is. I just said that every inch difference plays bigger role as the overall barrel length goes down.
 
I have two 3 inch j-frames and one 2" (my wife has another). Except for pocket carry, I find the 3" guns MORE comfortable to carry, either IWB or OWB. I think the longer barrel has some stabilizing effect on the entire gun, reducing the tendency for the gun's grip to pull away from the body (OWB). I also find the 3" barrel more comfortable IWB due to the greater body contact it has.

Most importantly, I find the longer barrel MUCH easier to shoot accurately. The heavier 3" guns (especially the full-lugged ones) are also much less painfull to shoot with full-power ammo than the short 2" guns.
 
Gress: Yes, I think we pretty much agree on that, in general terms.

bhk: The big advantage to me is when you DON'T want to pack a holster. Once I've made the decision to pack it in a holster I almost always pack the 3" full lug Model 60, or something bigger.

the best

RWT
 
Several years ago, I was able to get an engineer at Federal to test both snub and three-inch S&W M-60's with their 129 grain Hydra-Shok JHP round.

The snub gave 865 FPS, and the three-inch delivered 936 FPS. That's an added 71 FPS for the longer barrel.

In the 1970's, Lee Jurras wrote to me that he got 995 FPS from his 110 grain Super Vel JHP in a snub, and 1,050 FPS in the longer gun.

A three-inch gun also balances differently, and allows a full-length extractor rod stroke. It has a longer sight radius. And it is easier to find a three-inch gun with adjustable sights, if you want a small trail gun.
 
Frankly, I used to hate the 2" J Frames for all kinds of reasons. Then I bought one with Eagle Secret Service grips and my whole attitude changed. Those grips single handedly transformed my opinion of these little revolvers and have greatly increased their shootability and effectiveness in my hands. I admit that I have been wrong about these guns for many years and have been wrongfully scorning them. I personally feel that a 2" gun with the right grips is far more versatile than any 3" gun and can be hidden much more easily, which to me is what these guns are all about. If a bigger, heavier 3" gun is what you feel is best for you, then I wouldn't disagree with your choice. If I'm going to carry something in a holster though, it's going to be my 4" 625. To me, a J Frame is a hideout gun and a 2" gun with the right grips is surprisingly shootable and comfortable. I was very ignorant about this for many years until the right set of grips set me straight.

As far as the ballistics go, I would never choose an extra inch in J Frame barrel length just for a perceived increase in performance, if you can manage the 2" gun.

Dave Sinko
 
  • Like
Reactions: njr
1. Please excuse my ignorance, but what is a

"full lug gun"?


2. Is the 3 inch gun any more accurate than the 2 inch version?


thanks,
opr1945
 
Originally posted by opr1945:
1. Please excuse my ignorance, but what is a

"full lug gun"?


2. Is the 3 inch gun any more accurate than the 2 inch version?


thanks,
opr1945
Click to expand...

1. The round part under the barrel (lug) goes all the way to the muzzle instead of stopping after the front cylinder lock.
2. While the inherent mechanical accuracy of the 3" barrel may be slightly greater, the human accuracy is enhanced by the better sights and longer radius, comparing a 442 to an adjustable sight 60, both of which I have.

The 442 is a superior pocket gun, while the 3" 60 rides easily in a holster. "You pays your money and you makes your choices."
 
The barrel length issue is one that I just recently dealt with. I found a really nice 36-1 a year or so ago, thought it would make a good companion to my other j-frame. I have an older 36 snub that was my fathers back-up piece when he served with the Ohio HP.

Bought it, took it home to clean, lube, etc and just loved the way it felt, looked and carried. Took it to the range, shot like a dream, 158gr. LSWC shot to the sights at @20-25ft and I was able to hold a decent group with it. Just one nagging factor, that 3" barrel. Yea, you get added velocity, good balance, longer sight radius blah, blah, blah. The only problem is that it wouldn't do anything my 2" can't do and the 2" has one ace in the hole, summer pocket carry. In the end I decided it was too big to be a little gun and too little to be a big gun, traded for a sweet 4" 586 no dash. Now I've got my big gun and my little gun and neither are having an identity crisis.
 
Heck, if I were to have only one J-frame it would have a 2" barrel. If I could have only two revolvers (any size) total, one would be a 2" J-frame and the other a 4-inch K or L frame. But nobody is limiting me to one or two revolvers. For J-frames, I use a 2" for pocket carry and 3 inchers for everything else I want a j-frame for. If I need a larger revolver - well, I have those too.
 
With the exception of pocket-carry, the 36-1 is every bit as easy to carry as a 1 7/8" gun, and it definitely is easier to shoot and hits harder. I carry it hiking up Bear Canyon, stoked with THE LOAD which throws a 158-grain TVB hardcast LSWC at 1185 fps from the 3" tube. That's cooking with gas, amigos.
icon_smile.gif
(The 1 7/8" guns do about 100 fps slower with THE LOAD.)

37-2212apr70010001resized.jpg
 
The 'Old' "Rule of Thumb" was something like 50fps per inch of barrel length. In practice; I think this holds fairly true until you get out the point where there isn't any more powder to be burned in the cartridge case.

Frankly, I doubt the critter on the receiving end will notice much difference one way or the other as long as you put the bullet where it belongs in the first place!
 
When my brother was on the NYPD they were testing rounds that would by design not lose velocity when used in the sub nosed off duty and backup revolvers.What became of that is the Speer Gold Dot 135 grain copper jacketed hollow point in 38+P.This round did not lose velocity and had excellent results in actual duty shootings.I use that round in my Model 640 with a 2 1/8th inch barrel......God Bless.....Mike
 
Originally posted by Erich:
With the exception of pocket-carry, the 36-1 is every bit as easy to carry as a 1 7/8" gun, and it definitely is easier to shoot and hits harder. I carry it hiking up Bear Canyon, stoked with THE LOAD which throws a 158-grain TVB hardcast LSWC at 1185 fps from the 3" tube. That's cooking with gas, amigos.
icon_smile.gif
(The 1 7/8" guns do about 100 fps slower with THE LOAD.)

37-2212apr70010001resized.jpg
Click to expand...


Erich-

With all due respect, and I do acknowledge that you are one of the brighter bulbs here, that load doesn't sound like you're "cooking with gas."

Sounds more like you're cooking with rocket fuel. That exceeds the old .38/44 load, and is definitely in .357 teritory...in
a .38 J-frame gun! Wow...

T-Star
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Etalksalot
Old School S&W Model Number List
2
Replies
55
Views
9K
Muss Muggins
Muss Muggins
AR_Black
BUFFALO BORE Chronograph Results - J-Frame
Replies
17
Views
5K
AR_Black
AR_Black
Retired W4
940 ballistics
Replies
17
Views
6K
tekarra
T
BigBoku
  • Locked
WTS: Holsters
Replies
4
Views
2K
BigBoku
BigBoku
Malysh
What I like about Airweight J frames - My 1962 Mod 37
Replies
22
Views
6K
Bat Guano
B

Latest posts

Back
Top