Does a 4" K frame just balance better than a 3"?

[aterry33]

Took some revolvers to the range today. I seem to consistently shoot the 4" K frames better than the 3" ones (although the 3" K frame is one of my favorite revolvers).

I tend to shoot high with the 3" version and the 4" seems better balanced. Does anyone else have similar experiences?

Now, I'm thinking this may have more to do with the fact that my 3" K frames are round butt, and the 4" K frames are square butt. I have never been a round butt fan although the round butt does help for concealment.

By the way, does anyone know what the relative rarity (i.e. percentage of production) is in terms of 3" K frames with square butts?

 

[Hearsedriver]

You could always try some round to square butt conversion grips to see if it makes a difference.

 

[roaddog28]

I shoot my 4 inch K frames better than any revolver I have ever owned. I don't shoot short barrel revolvers well at all. I do believe the 4 inch K frame is the best balanced and best handling revolver I have ever used.
But that is me,
Regards,
Howard

 

[crsides]

I like my 3" mod 13 so much, I got rid of my 4" K frames.

But I carry alot more than I shoot.


Charlie

 

[oldafsp]

The 3 inchers need a very firm grip.

Watch your hand position between the 4 in and the 3.

With the stock round butt you may find yourself holding too
low on the stocks,during your DA trigger pull that can cause
the muzzle to lift.

A grip adapter like the Tyler solved that issue for me.

 

[jim8115]

We have a 4"model 67, 4"model 10, and a 3"model 10. To me, nothing shoots and handles like a 4" K frame... But thats just me

 

[bmcgilvray]

The 3-inch has the cult following these days but I'm more of a fan of the 4-inch K-Frames myself.

 

[Water-Man]

I'm partial to the 3". Position your hand as high as possible with the shorter barrel.

 

[Jeff45]

My best groups are with the 4", and yes it does seem to have a better balance for me. Maybe it's the center of gravity is a bit more foreward, or it's just the longer sight plane.

 

[Sportsterguy]

I'm partial to the 3". Position your hand as high as possible with the shorter barrel.

Same here and good advice. Use that grip for all of my shooting. I love the balance of the 3" guns and can shoot them as well as my longer tubed revolvers, but everyone is different so go with what you shoot the best.

Any 4" S&W revolver is concealable with the right holster, belt and shirt.

 

[357larry]

I always preferred 4 inch tubes over the 2 1/2 inch ones, just could not shoot the short ones that well. But then I got a 3 inch Model 66 and whoa, I can shoot that thing better than the 4 inch and the balance just seems to be perfect. If I had started out with the 3 inch gun, I never would have bought a 4 inch one.

 

[Neumann]

I think 4" is the best compromise between performance, shootability and concealability. No question but a 3" or shorter barrel is easier to conceal and quicker to point.

A shorter barrel is going to recoil more than a longer barrel due to weight, and the effect on point of aim is proportionally greater. You may get more muzzle rise with a round butt than a square one, but that effect seems to be minor. My 4" .44 magnum Mountain gun recoils approximately 1/16" more than my 6" 629 by the time the bullet leave the muzzle. How do I know this? Compare the height of the bore when you rest both guns on a flat surface, supported by the sights, when both are sighted to the same point-of-aim at 25 yards.

Lighter guns are less comfortable to shoot, and you may be reacting differently. What happens when you click on an empty chamber? For an unbiased test, have someone else load for you.