4" or 6"
- Thread starter hsc
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 27,669
- Reaction score
- 21,359
To me a full-lug 4" L-frame .357 is pleasingly muzzle-heavy, but the 6" is too much of a good thing in that department.
Chuck Jones
Member
Agree 100% 6 inch L frames are way muzzle heavy and can't be shot in most matches. (but I own 2 anyway)
/c
/c
Invictus357
Member
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2012
- Messages
- 567
- Reaction score
- 515
I believe you had/have 2 guns that are 6 inchers.
You probably have a better idea than I if you want a 6 or 4 inch 586.
Personally I'd go with the 6 inch. Only because I have a 686 3" for carry/portability already.
You probably have a better idea than I if you want a 6 or 4 inch 586.
Personally I'd go with the 6 inch. Only because I have a 686 3" for carry/portability already.
Daimler1989
Member
Hi,
I personally think that a 4" is more versatile than a 6" in nearly every respect, except when you need all the muzzle energy you can get from your 357 Magnum. There is no difference in accuracy (although the shorter barrel shortens the sighting line with negative effect when there is a sighting error), but I don't like how the 6" twists in recoil because of the longer barrel which means more prying effect with heavy loads. And don't forget the 4" has the far better balance. I swapped all my 6" revolvers to 4" (except for my 17-2) and never looked back.
regards
Ulrich
I personally think that a 4" is more versatile than a 6" in nearly every respect, except when you need all the muzzle energy you can get from your 357 Magnum. There is no difference in accuracy (although the shorter barrel shortens the sighting line with negative effect when there is a sighting error), but I don't like how the 6" twists in recoil because of the longer barrel which means more prying effect with heavy loads. And don't forget the 4" has the far better balance. I swapped all my 6" revolvers to 4" (except for my 17-2) and never looked back.
regards
Ulrich
Hillbilly77
Member
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2012
- Messages
- 6,183
- Reaction score
- 18,481
I have a 686 4" and a 586 6", both no-dash.
The 4" is better balanced and the 6" feels a bit too front-end heavy. I can shoot a fist-sized group offhand at 40 yards with the 4" barrel - good enough for me.
I vote for the 4". You won't regret it.
The 4" is better balanced and the 6" feels a bit too front-end heavy. I can shoot a fist-sized group offhand at 40 yards with the 4" barrel - good enough for me.
I vote for the 4". You won't regret it.
Last edited:
snubbiefan
Member
I'll join-in. I believe the majority so far vote for the 4-inch. Having experience with both the 6 and the 4.......so do I. Take the 4. The 4 holsters better, carries better and simply just feels better IMHO.
RobsTV
Member
Shooting distance?
Here, for easiest to achieve great accuracy, I have generally found that:
3" 10 yards or less.
4" 25 yards or less.
6" 50 yards or less.
8" 100 yards or less.
Here, for easiest to achieve great accuracy, I have generally found that:
3" 10 yards or less.
4" 25 yards or less.
6" 50 yards or less.
8" 100 yards or less.
I prefer the 4" full lug barrel and the 6" no lug barrel, those combinations just balance better for me.
6" is a good compromise for a "do all" gun, hunting, target shooting and etc., but 4" guns are pretty hard to beat.
OK Hog Shooter
Member
I'd vote for any N frame mountain gun.... oops... Wrong model! Well.... at least it's a 4" bbl... 
JCS&W
US Veteran
Personally, I believe the 4" is the better choice. The 6", while a great piece, is just not what I like. I find the 4" better looking, easier to handle at the range, and easier to carry, although not by much. Just my opinion. Go with what YOU like and fits you best.
I have to respectfully disagree. I shoot my 3" with accuracy all the time at 25 yards. I don't really see the point of shooting targets at less than that distance.
I'ts sight picture not barrel length that gives accuracy.
Sparrowbird
Member
If this would be your one and only revolver (yeah right) then I'd go 4 inch. If you're wanting a sweet shooter and own others that are shorter and easier to pack, then I'd go 6 inch. I have a 2 1/2, 3, and a 6 inch so I cover a big range. I shoot my 3 inch the most, but I really like my 6.
Florida Guy
Member
I would also choose the 4" based simply on weight on front end.
Rapidray
Member
You do not say what you are going to be using it for.
Range gun? 4 inch or 6 inch
CCW? 4 inch
Hunting? 6 inch
Or get them both.
Range gun? 4 inch or 6 inch
CCW? 4 inch
Hunting? 6 inch
Or get them both.
feralmerril
Absent Comrade
Years ago when cops carried revolvers, I would guess 85% carried 4"s and 15% 6"s. That told me a lot 50 years ago. Most of mine are 4"s.
You have to pack em. I noticed something yesterday. I was carrying my 4" 25-5 (45 colt) in the house in its holster unloading from a quad ride. I thought man, I wore these for 35 years and it didnt seem to weigh a third as much. I have been retired for over 12 years and I guess you get used to packing, but you get away from it and you sure notice the differance. Thats why I like short barrels and lighter guns when possible. Maybe if I was hunting deer I might go 6"s, but then it wouldnt be with a .357 to start with.
You have to pack em. I noticed something yesterday. I was carrying my 4" 25-5 (45 colt) in the house in its holster unloading from a quad ride. I thought man, I wore these for 35 years and it didnt seem to weigh a third as much. I have been retired for over 12 years and I guess you get used to packing, but you get away from it and you sure notice the differance. Thats why I like short barrels and lighter guns when possible. Maybe if I was hunting deer I might go 6"s, but then it wouldnt be with a .357 to start with.
Moonman
Member
Maybe you should just look for a 5" model 27.
