Is 3" enough?
- Thread starter joe44va
- Start date
C Islander
Member
ContinentalOp
Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2009
- Messages
- 6,315
- Reaction score
- 12,822
No real downside I can see. At least with K-frames, a 3" barrel seems to give a good balance between ballistic performance, handling, and carry-ability. I personally think it's the most aesthetically pleasing combination. I used to have a 3" 65 and it was a great carry gun.
Not a fan of 3" J-frames, though. For me, the J-frame's biggest advantage is carry versatility (IWB/OWB/AIWB, pocket, ankle, shoulder, etc.), and that means a 2" barrel. I'm sure others will have differing opinions.
Don't really have an interest in revolvers larger than K-frames, so I can't really comment on those. I do have an interest in the 3" Ruger GP100 with fixed sights, but that's mostly because of its role as the standard issue sidearm for the US Marshals Service before the Glock 22.
Not a fan of 3" J-frames, though. For me, the J-frame's biggest advantage is carry versatility (IWB/OWB/AIWB, pocket, ankle, shoulder, etc.), and that means a 2" barrel. I'm sure others will have differing opinions.
Don't really have an interest in revolvers larger than K-frames, so I can't really comment on those. I do have an interest in the 3" Ruger GP100 with fixed sights, but that's mostly because of its role as the standard issue sidearm for the US Marshals Service before the Glock 22.
Is 3' enough
I consider 3 inches, on a revolver barrel to be the minimum for accuracy. I think it looks perfect on my model 65-5.
I consider 3 inches, on a revolver barrel to be the minimum for accuracy. I think it looks perfect on my model 65-5.
The_Truth
Member
I've got a 3" Model 29 and a 3" Model 13. Absolutely love them both and would hate to have to get rid of either!
The 3" fixed sighted K frame is especially sweet for carry.
The 3" fixed sighted K frame is especially sweet for carry.
Sistema1927
US Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2003
- Messages
- 3,635
- Reaction score
- 9,730
- City & State/Province
- "Land of Disenchantment"
I think that a 3" K-frame is perfect.
The only down side that I can see is the hit on your wallet by wanting to buy all of them.
The only down side that I can see is the hit on your wallet by wanting to buy all of them.
fishwishin
Member
Only if it is a service weapon is it a down side, to me a 4" just fits that role better. I'd also want a 6+" for a hunting application.
Outside of that I think K, L, and N frames with a 3" are the perfect carry specimens.
Outside of that I think K, L, and N frames with a 3" are the perfect carry specimens.
OP to answer your question, yes a 3" is enough. I only have one and I am very lucky that my wife likes it also. OK someone had to go there. 686-6 3", just to clarify.
Pisgah
Member
Compared to a 4-incher, you're one inch farther from your target...
The only downsides are reduced velocity when compared to more "traditional" lengths like 6" and a shorter sight radius.
One person posted that 3" is the minimum for accuracy. Shorter doesn't mean less intrinsic accuracy, shorter barreled guns are simply harder for the shooter to exploit the accuracy of the gun. Don
One person posted that 3" is the minimum for accuracy. Shorter doesn't mean less intrinsic accuracy, shorter barreled guns are simply harder for the shooter to exploit the accuracy of the gun. Don
Benchrest1
Member
I've got a couple, whats not to like.
For carry I like 3”on N frames, 2.5” on K/L frames.
BC38
Member
For my money a 3" barrel is about the perfect compromise.
Better sight radius for accuracy than a 2-1/2" and a little better velocity too.
Better concealability and easier draw/presentation than a 4".
I like revolvers with barrels around 3" long and have 4 of them
They are
S&W M65-5 357mag
Rossi M971 357mag (actually just over 2-3/4")
Charter Arms Bulldog 44spl
Jovino Terminator 44mag (also closer to 2-3/4")
Better sight radius for accuracy than a 2-1/2" and a little better velocity too.
Better concealability and easier draw/presentation than a 4".
I like revolvers with barrels around 3" long and have 4 of them
They are
S&W M65-5 357mag
Rossi M971 357mag (actually just over 2-3/4")
Charter Arms Bulldog 44spl
Jovino Terminator 44mag (also closer to 2-3/4")
Attachments
Last edited:
The fixed sight 3" guns are my favorites. I wish I had more of them.
Groo01
Member
Groo here
If you check bullistics by the inch,,,
you will find a larger jump in speed at about 3 inch and not much more at 4
Then again at 5in and 6 makin g the 3in and 5in about the best speed vs barrel length setup.
Originally 5 ,6 and 7 in was normal.
4in came about the time Cop's started to drive cars...
The longer barrels punched holes in seats and the but hit you in the ribs.
If you check bullistics by the inch,,,
you will find a larger jump in speed at about 3 inch and not much more at 4
Then again at 5in and 6 makin g the 3in and 5in about the best speed vs barrel length setup.
Originally 5 ,6 and 7 in was normal.
4in came about the time Cop's started to drive cars...
The longer barrels punched holes in seats and the but hit you in the ribs.
CCantu357
Member
I believe that the 3" revolver is great. It seems that a 3" is easier to conceal than a 4", and offers better ballistics and less recoil than a snub nosed.
Eddietruett
Member
kbm6893
Member
I had a 3” Model 65 that I should have never sold. Only thing close I have now is a 2.75” Ruger Speed Six. I like it a lot.
Not wrong..... I've got 3" 60s,65 and 66 J and K frames.
N-frames I've stuck to 4" guns because 3 1/2" guns are just too high priced and the extra 1/2" on a N-frame is nothing.
N-frames I've stuck to 4" guns because 3 1/2" guns are just too high priced and the extra 1/2" on a N-frame is nothing.
bananaman
Member
Where did you get that? I have a 586, no dash 4".
uncleted327
Member
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2012
- Messages
- 508
- Reaction score
- 793
There's nothing you can do with a 4" that you can't do with a 3". And the velocity differences in barrel lengths are way less substantial than people like to claim...
stansdds
Member
For carry, especially concealed, the 3 inch K and L frame S&W's are as easy to carry as the 2-1/2 inch barrels, but you get the benefit of the full length ejector rod found on 4 inch barrels.
The only downside that I can think of is that they are difficult to find and when you do find one, they seem to bring a premium price!
I am the current care taker of a Mod. 65 and a Mod. 29 with 3" barrels. The 610-2 is, as you know, a bit over the 3" mark but, handles like a dream!
I am the current care taker of a Mod. 65 and a Mod. 29 with 3" barrels. The 610-2 is, as you know, a bit over the 3" mark but, handles like a dream!
Attachments
Dale53
Member
"Back in the day", a 4" revolver was my perfect choice for field use with a longer barrel (generally 6") for range use. My two large game hunting revolvers were 8 3/8" and 7.5" with scopes.
Then, when the S&W 60-4 (.38 Special) hit the market, I bought one. I REALLY wanted a 4" Model 60, but thought I would give it a try. The first outing was 50' indoors due to bad weather. I could hardly believe the scores I was shooting. It was witnessed by several of our local gun clubs NRA Pistol shooters. They could not believe what they saw. Well, I was as surprised as they were.
When the weather moderated just a couple of weeks later, I hit the outdoor range and did the same thing at 25 yards, standing. I mean scores on the NRA Bullseye targets in the 90's with a SNUBBY?
I loaded a bunch of field loads with both a full charge wadcutter and a full load 158 gr. SWC and went hunting. Bunny wabbits and squirrels fell from distances of a few feet on sitting rabbits to 25 yards. "Bang, Flop".
From then on in, when I went Grouse hunting in Eastern Ohio to the Upper Peninsula in Michigan, the 60-4 was worn cross draw to avoid interference with my Beretta Silver Snipe O/U shotgun. It was a revelation, I really didn't know it was there until it was needed. Snowshoe wabbits were taken readily, along with sitting and wounded grouse. It was more than a success, it was a WINNER!
Yep, a "snubby" that was truly practical in the field.
I have had my 60-4 since the first year they were offered and you don't have enough money to buy it, now, even tho' I am too old and feeble to make those hunting trips any more.http://smith-wessonforum.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
FWIW
Dale53
Then, when the S&W 60-4 (.38 Special) hit the market, I bought one. I REALLY wanted a 4" Model 60, but thought I would give it a try. The first outing was 50' indoors due to bad weather. I could hardly believe the scores I was shooting. It was witnessed by several of our local gun clubs NRA Pistol shooters. They could not believe what they saw. Well, I was as surprised as they were.
When the weather moderated just a couple of weeks later, I hit the outdoor range and did the same thing at 25 yards, standing. I mean scores on the NRA Bullseye targets in the 90's with a SNUBBY?
I loaded a bunch of field loads with both a full charge wadcutter and a full load 158 gr. SWC and went hunting. Bunny wabbits and squirrels fell from distances of a few feet on sitting rabbits to 25 yards. "Bang, Flop".
From then on in, when I went Grouse hunting in Eastern Ohio to the Upper Peninsula in Michigan, the 60-4 was worn cross draw to avoid interference with my Beretta Silver Snipe O/U shotgun. It was a revelation, I really didn't know it was there until it was needed. Snowshoe wabbits were taken readily, along with sitting and wounded grouse. It was more than a success, it was a WINNER!
Yep, a "snubby" that was truly practical in the field.
I have had my 60-4 since the first year they were offered and you don't have enough money to buy it, now, even tho' I am too old and feeble to make those hunting trips any more.http://smith-wessonforum.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
FWIW
Dale53
Last edited:
I had a 3” 66-3. Didn’t feel The magic others feel for their 3” K frames. The full length ejector rod was nice, but I never had issues ejecting empties out of my 2 1/2” 66.
But for some reason, I really like my 3” model 60.
Makes no sense, just the way it is.
But for some reason, I really like my 3” model 60.
Makes no sense, just the way it is.
Last edited:
