Accuracy with short barrels

[TIROyRECARGA]

Some time ago, one of our users did an interesting question.
He showed us a photo of a snub nose and commented this:

"I guess the reason for a short barrel is to make more transportable and concealable a weapon.
Obviously nobody buy them thinking about competing in precision shooting, but how much accuracy you lose with it, or you don't lose accuracy?
Leaving aside the human error, can a revolver with a 2" barrel be as precise as one with a 4" or 6"?
What is the ideal or the most balanced? 2"? 2.5"? 3"?
What things determine the accuracy in a revolver?
The twist rate? The muzzle speed?
What happens if you have two revolvers of equal quality (match quality) but with different barrel lengths?
Is the ammunition designed to be more accuracy in a 4" barrel?
And if you customize the ammunition to set it up for a snubbie?
Is there any company that did this kind of test? S&W? Ruger? Taurus? Colt?

How accurate do you think is a gun like this?"

 

[TIROyRECARGA]

Then, someone posted this video:

Bob Munden -- Impossible 200 Yard Shot

 

[DiscoRacing]

i lean towards the longer barrels myself

 

[David Sinko]

I am beginning to notice some tipping and out of round holes when I use my 2" Model 64. It seems to happen with cast and plated bullets but never jacketed. So far I can not figure it out. But it never happens with my 3" 625.

Dave Sinko

 

[Milton]

Short barreled revolvers can be as accurate or more accurate than long barreled ones.There is probably some point when a very short barrel will not shoot as accurate as a long one but finding that out would take a lot of work and research!Probably one thing that above all causes people to believe that short barrels are inaccurate is that "they" can't shoot them accurately! With a very short sight radius it takes a very good shot to have the ability to evaluate the true accuracy of a short barreled gun.
When I began Metallic Silhouettes many years ago I was amazed to see handguns with 6 to 10 inch barrels out shoot rifles with long barrels out to and beyond 200 meters.
With custom loaded ammo who knows ,it would be an interesting experiment .

 

[Jellybean]

]"I guess the reason for a short barrel is to make more transportable and concealable a weapon.
Obviously nobody buy them thinking about competing in precision shooting, but how much accuracy you lose with it, or you don't lose accuracy?
Leaving aside the human error, can a revolver with a 2" barrel be as precise as one with a 4" or 6"?

Yes, barrel length doesn't affect accuracy. As Milton stated the short sight radius makes sight alignment errors more pronounced. I prefer shorter barrels because the short sight radius also makes it easier to focus on both sights at the same time.

What is the ideal or the most balanced? 2"? 2.5"? 3"?

Different people like different balances, some like even balance some, like me prefer butt heavy, and it seems quite a few prefer barrel heavy. I like the shortest barrel I can get, but for a self defense firearm I prefer the extractor to be able to fully extract an empty case, so I usually go to a little longer barrel.

What things determine the accuracy in a revolver?
The twist rate? The muzzle speed?

Rate of twist and muzzle velocity does need to be compatible with the type of bullet used. Some bullets are more forgiving than others. A good quality barrel that is properly sized to the cylinder will generally shoot better than most shooters are capable of matching.

What happens if you have two revolvers of equal quality (match quality) but with different barrel lengths?

With everything else being equal the only difference you should see is a loss of accuracy in the shorter barrel.

Is the ammunition designed to be more accuracy in a 4" barrel?

I don't believe so.

And if you customize the ammunition to set it up for a snubbie?
Is there any company that did this kind of test? S&W? Ruger? Taurus? Colt?

You can tailor your ammo to a specific firearm, the barrel lenght really wouldn't make a difference. And I've never heard of any gun manufacturer trying it, but that doesn't mean it never happened.

How accurate do you think is a gun like this?"

I don't have much experience with a lot of S&Ws newer products so my opinion doesn't count for much on this one. If their quality is anywhere near where it used to be it should shoot a lot better than it looks.

edit:

With everything else being equal the only difference you should see is a loss of accuracy in the shorter barrel.

My apologies, this should have said velocity instead of accuracy.

 

[TIROyRECARGA]

Dear Jellybean:

Thank you very much for your response (same to Milton and the other kindly people).
But after reading your answer I have new doubts:

Yes, barrel length doesn't affect accuracy.

It's sound reasonable, but when you answered about same quality gun with differents barrel lengths you said:

With everything else being equal the only difference you should see is a loss of accuracy in the shorter barrel.

Why? Could you tell me if you had a chance to check it?

I know it is a complicated theme (but very interesting) and the user who formulated it in our forum is trying to find some empirical evidence from someone who has done this complicated kind of test and I am trying to help him.

In our forum, some people believe that a short barrel will always be less accurate than a long one, however, others believe that the only sure thing you will lose is speed in the bullet, but this should not affect accuracy.

Thinking in a synergistic manner, I'm posting this topic in other forums. I promise to share here the results obtained.

Regards

 

[TIROyRECARGA]

Strictly speaking about the accuracy of the barrel's gun (not shooter's accuracy), leaving aside all the factors related with human errors (as the sight radius, or others) I believe that the way to achieve this is thinking in mount the revolver on a fixed bench, like a Ransom Rest.

I would like to know if someone here had experimented with this tool.
Theoretically, with a Ransom Rest you could left aside the errors caused by humans.
The idea that a long barrel will be more accurate than a shorter, sounds reasonable, at least in theory, but is this really true in revolvers?
A bullet fired in a revolver really needs some inches extra to be more accurate?
How much inches?

Maybe, we need to start thinking only in a short barrel mounted in a bench to isolate all other external elements.

Regards and thanks again.

Look at this video to see how it works:
Gunblast.com - Ransom Master Series Handgun Rest

 

[Black_Sheep]

This guy seems to do OK with a 1 7/8" 642

YMMV!

YouTube - 642 S&W .38 Special (Airweight J frame)

 

[OKFC05]

And if you customize the ammunition to set it up for a snubbie?
Is there any company that did this kind of test?

Speer did a lot of testing in develping their Short Barrel (SB) series of ammunition, generally optimized for less than 4" barrels.
Their ammunition uses bullets and powder specifically designed for performance from the short barrels, both internal and terminal ballistics.

Anecdotally, some things are obvious to a serious reloader, such as the inefficiency and lost of consistency when very slow powders are used in short barrels. While a large amount of slow powder will produce somewhat more velocity than a smaller amount of fast powder in a short barrel, it is at the expense of higher muzzle blast, high SD, and more unburnt powder due to not developing ful pressure before the bullets exits. The lack of consistency implies a potential loss of accuracy. But higher SD does not translate directly to a certain loss of accuracy, especially at typical defense handgun distances.

Internal ballistics are so complicated that it is hard to make absolute statements that powder X will be Y amount less accurate than powder Z. The qualifier "all else being the same" must immediately be followed by "and no two guns are absolutely identical." That's why you don't really know what you have until you test a specific load in a specific gun. Ask anyone who uses a chronograph routinely.

As a practical matter handgun accuracy depends some on the ammunition, more on the gun, and the shooter's error is typically the dominant factor. It does not matter much whether you have a 1" potential ammo or a 2" ammo if the shooter can't keep his shots in an 8" circle.
The inverse square of the total error is equal to the sum of the inverse squares of the individual error contributions; you can't just add error contributions together and get the right answer.

 

[H Richard]

Practically speaking, any revolver with less than a 6" barrel wasn't intended to be shot much more than 25 yards. 3" and less barrels were intended to be shot at fighting distances, out to 20-25 ft. A portion of the accuracy is the ability to properly sight the gun, and the longer the sighting radius the better it can be sighted.

So, practically speaking, short barrel guns should have decent accuracy at distances within a normal lining room.

I found no practical difference between 4" and 2" Mod 15's at 30 ft.

 

[Jellybean]

Why? Could you tell me if you had a chance to check it?

TIROyRECARGA.COM, My apologies for the brain fart there, I meant to say "velocity" and I'll go back up and change it. Babysitting a four year old and her new puppy is driving me a little more insane than normal.

I've heard of the Speer Short Barrel ammo OKFC05 mentions but I have never had a chance to shoot any of it yet. I don't know for sure if they did in fact do testing on it or just printed a fancy label for it. In Speers 14th edition of their loading manual they list data for their 135 gr. GDHP-SB bullet. They have data for use in both the 6" test firearms and for 2" and 2.5" short barreled revolvers. All the data is exactly the same for caliber except the velocities. I doubt there is much difference between their SB bullet and anyone elses bullets in the same weight class. From the ones I've shot they've usually worked over a wide range of velocities.

I've never noticed a lot of difference in how ammo performs from a 2" to 4" barrel, other than a slight loss of velocity. But when shooting .22 lr ammo out of a 4" barrel at 100 yards there was an obvious difference. Federal Gold Medal Match ammo that would shoot a nice tight group at 25 yards would string out vertically and just about cut the paper in half while CCI stingers that didn't group all that well at 25 yards from my 4" K-22 could be all grouped in an area about the size of a 3"X5" card.

The girl and puppy are both awake and yipping at me so there may be more typos.