Yay for 4 inch Python, Boo for 6 inch Highway Patrolman

barrel&velocity

Real world ballistics don't always follow the "rules" like "longer barrel = more velocity." Personally, I'd say "don't sweat it." Nothing you ever shoot is going to know the difference. Strive for consistency and accuracy and don't spend too much time worrying about a few fps one way or the other. JMO, of course.

I had a chance to talk to J.D. Jones about this phenomenon , He said he had NEVER seen an 8 3/8 model 29 produce more velocity with a given load than a 6 in one. He also remarked that he had on occasion seen 4s out perform either. J.D. has as much experience in this as anybody still alive. We have proved here on my range that out of a Ransom Rest you get the same groups from 2 inch guns as you do from 8 3/8, another thing easily proved. The bullet "don't know" how long the barl is.
 
I have 5 diff 4" 357, all give diff vel. Some are closer than others but one is a full 120-130fps slower with all loads. That is my Smolt with Python bbl, slower than my 4" Python, go figure.
 
Last edited:
THAT GAVE ME A CHUCKLE, brucev. I AGREE WITH YOU IN THEORY, ALTHOUGH THE FACT THAT THE PYTHONS WERE HAND FITTED MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH IT. I WOULD ALSO TRY THE SAME LOADS OUT OF A DIFFERENT S&W OF THE SAME MODEL AND BARREL LENGTH IF POSSIBLE……...
There is no need to :shout". R:cool:eally.
 
I've never been able to document a major difference in accuracy between the two guns. In all fairness I love my Python and have always thought the N frame S&Ws were a bit bulky and heavy for 36 calibre. I prefer the K/L frames for the calibre.
 
THAT GAVE ME A CHUCKLE, brucev. I AGREE WITH YOU IN THEORY, ALTHOUGH THE FACT THAT THE PYTHONS WERE HAND FITTED MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH IT. I WOULD ALSO TRY THE SAME LOADS OUT OF A DIFFERENT S&W OF THE SAME MODEL AND BARREL LENGTH IF POSSIBLE……...

Hey Joe, is your caps lock broken?
 
Man, that barely.....

Real world ballistics don't always follow the "rules" like "longer barrel = more velocity." Personally, I'd say "don't sweat it." Nothing you ever shoot is going to know the difference. Strive for consistency and accuracy and don't spend too much time worrying about a few fps one way or the other. JMO, of course.

Perp hit by .357: "Man, that barely hit 1200 fps, PAW HAW HAW!"
 
A lot of the loads in reloading manuals are optimized with a particular length barrel. As such, barrels very much longer will actually cause some degradation in muzzle velocity. If the powder has a complete burn in a shorter barrel, say 4", then barrels longer than that will not accelerate the projectile; the longer barrel will cause friction and actually slow down the bullet.

There are also instances where the velocity is determined with a gun having a closed breech. That also changes the results.
 
I fail to see the problem.

Am I missing something?

Not really. Most modern gun experts didn't know the old timers that really knew a lot about handloading. They did know Elmer Keith, or about him, who's main passion was developing hot loads and cartridges for hunting at long ranges. So that's all they know to write about...Velocity. That's all that matters.
 
A lot of the loads in reloading manuals are optimized with a particular length barrel. As such, barrels very much longer will actually cause some degradation in muzzle velocity. If the powder has a complete burn in a shorter barrel, say 4", then barrels longer than that will not accelerate the projectile; the longer barrel will cause friction and actually slow down the bullet.

There are also instances where the velocity is determined with a gun having a closed breech. That also changes the results.

Dennis, this may be true with some calibers using the extremely fast handgun powders but in the case of the 357 Magnum this is NOT true.

I have two 357 Magnum revolvers, a 4 inch 620 and a 6 inch Dan Wesson 15-2. I also have two 357 magnum rifles with 20 inch barrels, a Rossi M92 and an original Winchester 1892 re-barreled in 357 Magnum.

I have chronographed many different loads with both handguns and both rifles and one consistently predictable result is that every single load has produced MORE velocitiy from the Rifles than the Handguns. Powders used range from Accurate #5, 7, & 9, Vihtavouri 3N37, to 4227 and H110/W296.

Now, I will grant that the faster powders don't produce as much of a velocity gain as the slower powders but every single one of these powders does shoot a minimum of 200 fps faster from the rifles. At a guess I would say the velocity peak for Accurate #5 would probably be with a barrel in the 14-16 inch range but that is nothing more than a guess.
 
Finish only....

Y And a Python has earned the name of "Rolls Royce of Revolvers" (and the Highway Patrolman is officially a "budget gun" although I think this has more to do with irrelevant touchups compared to the M27)

But still, Python aside, I was expecting a little more out of the S&W 6 inch. On average, more or less, most ballistics I've read of tend to have 100 ft per second difference every 2 inches you take or add to the barrel length. (I know it's not written in stone)

I was expecting to at least be well over 1300 ft per second with the 6 inch barrel. So I thought closing the gap between cylinder and cone might optimize the gun

The difference between a Highway Patrolman and a model 27 is less finish and lack of some checkering on the top strap to save $$$. Entirely cosmetic. I'd buy one in a minute, but hey, if the Colts generally do better in the velocity department, so be it. On my budget I might be able to afford a mod 28.:)
 
Some additional Python 4 inch readings I did this afternoon:

158 gr, LSWC (Hard)

14.3 grains 2400: 1220, 1256, 1220, 1263, 1200, 1178

14.4 grains 2400: 1258, 1219, 1219 (nonread?), ERR 2, ERR2,

14.5 grains 2400:1311, 1341, 1323, 1333, ERR2, ERR2

14.6 grains 2400: 1353, 1345

180 gr SJHP Remington
.357 Magnum 180 gr. SJHP 4 inch 1980 Colt Python 4 inch

1129, 1131, 1125, 1123, 1123
 
scooter has hit the nail squarely on the head with his post above. With the 357 Mag, you will see a velocity increase with the longer barrel, all else being equal. I actually plan to do some chrono work on 357 Mag with my Coonan Classic and my Rossi 92SRC. Both are non-vented platforms, so any increase in velocity (or lack of) should be directly comparable since neither weapon has a cylinder gap. And I'm thinking of doing the same thing for 9 MM since I have an Uzi with 16" barrel and a Beretta. I think the 357 will show a sizable velocity increase with the slower powders such as Accurate #9 and 296. For 9 MM, I don't think there will be as much difference, if any to speak of.
 
Considering the massive price difference between a Python vs. a Model 28, I would hope the Python is better at something...

Jim
 
Most of the work I've seen on the gains from a standard 4 inch combat barrel to an 18 inch rifle barrel is, almost invariably, around a 2:1 power difference. I should buy a chrono myself, but from my shooting of magnum rounds out my Winchester 94ae, all I can say is the difference is night and day. The same 158 grain jacketed semi wadcutters, American Eagle, that I've shot as a budget round, would cut nice holes out of concrete blocks out of my 6 1/2 inch Rossi, and the rifle would turn them into an impressive pile of broken concrete and dust. Every animal I've killed with my Rossi would drop in its tracks, but every small game animal I shot with the rifle almost blew up, skinning squirrels, blowing up racoons, doing high power rifle grade damage. Even without a chronograph, I can tell there is a world of difference in that sealed chamber, and with the longer barrel.

With all the talk about powders, what about bullets? The OP noted hard cast bullets, which will perform better from a naturally tighter barrel, but will perform much worse in a slightly looser barrel. Its been noted that too hard a cast can lead to the bullet not expanding into grooves correctly, with resulting gas leakage, and subsequent loss of pressure. Indeed, it has been noted that harder bullets do not always lead to less leading, but instead sometimes more, via the poor seal's escaping gas burning off lead from the sides into the barrel.

Perhaps if the shooter were to do the same exact loads, but with many castings of the same exact bullet of different hardness, the results could easily flip around, and could be very informative, and surprising. Perhaps a softer bullet would seal better in the 28 and outdo the Colt, perhaps not. But it is a very important factor.

This thread has made excellent points that every gun is different on a small level, enough to throw off the idea of universally equal results from the same barrel lengths of firearm models. In order to figure out the "perfect" load for your individual revolver, one must not only experiment with various loads, but if one casts, the perfect hardness and lubrication to fit the exact nature of that particular firearm.
 
Dennis, this may be true with some calibers using the extremely fast handgun powders but in the case of the 357 Magnum this is NOT true.

I have two 357 Magnum revolvers, a 4 inch 620 and a 6 inch Dan Wesson 15-2. I also have two 357 magnum rifles with 20 inch barrels, a Rossi M92 and an original Winchester 1892 re-barreled in 357 Magnum.

I have chronographed many different loads with both handguns and both rifles and one consistently predictable result is that every single load has produced MORE velocitiy from the Rifles than the Handguns. Powders used range from Accurate #5, 7, & 9, Vihtavouri 3N37, to 4227 and H110/W296.

Now, I will grant that the faster powders don't produce as much of a velocity gain as the slower powders but every single one of these powders does shoot a minimum of 200 fps faster from the rifles. At a guess I would say the velocity peak for Accurate #5 would probably be with a barrel in the 14-16 inch range but that is nothing more than a guess.
Your experience proves a few things:
  • If you're getting consistent 200FPS increases in using the same load for both guns, then it proves that those loads in revolvers are very inefficient. The revolver loads are leaking gas through the barrel/cylinder gap (normal), and that the rifles are benefiting from a "sealed" chamber (again, normal).
  • Ergo, any comparison between a rifle and a revolver amounts to the "apples/oranges" analogy.
  • Revolver loads are necessarily inefficient because larger doses of slower burning powders are needed to generate desired velocities.
My point was to note that any load, in any gun, achieves an optimum velocity using a particular type of powder/bullet/primer combination. Once that powder burn has been completed, no further velocity is possible and the projectile starts to slow from friction with the barrel. That's pure mechanical physics. Granted, it's in the field of the hypothetical to a point, and may not affect your results in your tests.
 
Doug,

Be careful about pushing the pythons to hard. They go from fine to sticky extraction quickly in the range you are in. 14.2 grns is my limit on my Pythons after I wised up a few years back. Keep the 14.5 grns and up in the N frames or the Redhawks with 158's.

No need to stress a fine revolver with more than it likes.
 
Count me as another to have had a 4in run slightly faster than a 6in .

There are expected rules of thumb , but within any bbl length expect a potential +/- 50fps for cumulative variables in chamber , throat , forcing cone , and bore. Sometimes it will be +50 on the 4in and -50 on the 6in , and they meet in the middle. Theoretically someone somewhere will have a slow 4in and a fast 6in and see a 200fps difference. As noted B/9 gap is only one factor , and may not be the particularily limiting one. My "slow" 6in above was a DW , and closing the gap to .003 made no noticable increase.

For the OP , if both guns give good accuraccy , and vels within the useful range , don't sweat it.
 
Doug,

Be careful about pushing the pythons to hard. They go from fine to sticky extraction quickly in the range you are in. 14.2 grns is my limit on my Pythons after I wised up a few years back. Keep the 14.5 grns and up in the N frames or the Redhawks with 158's.

No need to stress a fine revolver with more than it likes.

I remember us discussing this over on the Colt forum.

Once in a blue moon I'll have a cartridge feel a little sticky (meaning a spent case won't just fall out, it will need a tad of force before it "pops" out). But most of the time it's fine.

I decided the other day not to go above 14.5 with the Python as I had reached my desired velocity (1300+). But I sure don't want to beat up a fine gun such as that. I would die if I damaged the Python.
 
Is this about velocity or accuracy?

He beat me to it.

And IF you can add 40 or 50 fps to the M-28, what will that do for you? I doubt any paper target will know the difference? NO game animal will tell a difference either.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top