Accuracy: 4.2" vs 6" revolver?

[1shot]

Good evening, I was wondering if any of you veteran shooters have come across this dilemma before. Realistic accuracy between a 4.2" vs 6" revolver.
There are a pair of GP100's winking at me, I can afford only one...

Assuming all things are equal, two revolvers side by side with ammunition tuned exactly as the individual fiream likes best.
If you clamped each revolver to a bench- taking human factor out of it I would imagine that there would be little to no noticeable difference in repeatable accuracy out to 50 yards.

So with that in mind (and remember I am asking the most experienced shooters)..
Take the four inch gun, notice how naturally it sits and balances there perfectly in your hand- point- bang!
Then the six inch gun longer with its longer sighting plane- by 30%! But she's a little nose heavy with that full underlug, settle the sights down and- bang!

The "obvious" winner I would assume would be the 6" gun.. Or would the more naturally pointing 4.2" do much the same by how it sits in your hand?

Your comments please, cheers! :popcorn:




BTW: The new 4.2" .357 GP100 is shortest legal "restricted" firearm length built for Canada. Thanks Ruger!

[btroj]

I have a 4 inch and really like it. Coworker bought a 6 inch, don't like it as well. Some of that is because I am familiar with the 4 inch and used to the balance of it.
Is this something you will ever carry in the field in a holster? If so, the shorter barrel will be the better choice.
I don't think you would ever be able to prove that one or the other was inherently more accurate. The longer sight radius on the 6 will help in this regard.

In the end it only matters which feels better to YOU. You will be happy with either one, that I am sure.

[Mk42gunner]

I had a six inch Gp-100, now I have a four inch. I shot the six inch one better, but I shot it a heck of a lot more too. I really regret selling the first one, when I went to replace it a few years later the four inch was all I could easily find.

I don't really have any complaints, except for not having enough trigger time with it. The shorter barrel is a little bit handier to carry, but a well made holster makes that point debatable.

I would say get the one that feels best to you, also don't be afraid to try different grips on it, I went though the stock ruger grips, a couple of Pachmayr's and two sets of Hogue monogrips before I found the one that suits me best.

Robert

[bhn22]

I have both. The 4 inch is quicker handling, and I prefer it for any use requiring quick target acquisition, such as shooting games. The 6 inch is a little steadier in my hand, and my long range shooting is a bit better with it, but target acquisition is noticeably slower. If I had only one, it would be the four inch.

[shooting on a shoestring]

I have a 4" GP100 that takes turns on the nightstand, and ocassionally goes CCW. Great gun for defense, carry and fast shoot, pretty much tops there. I have a 6" Model 19 that doesn't get carried and doesn't do nightstand duty, but is noticiably better at grouping in slow fire on the range.

I expect a 6" GP100 would be a bit more preferable on the range, the 4" better for all else.

[Walt]

Like btroj noted....all other things being equal, the 6" guns longer sight radius makes it the more accurate in the shooters hands.

[missionary5155]

Greetings
Several gun rags have taken long barreled revolvers and began cutting the barrels off 1" at a time. All the shooting was accomplished in a Ransom Rest with the same load. There was no accuracy difference from 10" barrels down to 2". Lots of velocity loss though.
Down here I have a S&W 19-5 357. I wanted a easier to carry gun so I wacked the barrel to 3.5". It was a 6". With a good steady forearm rest I cannot see any accuracy difference at 25 yards. At 50 yards then things do change as the sight radias does help me.
Mike in Peru

[rattletrap1970]

I really think it depends on whether you shoot irons or optics. With irons I light the longer sight radius, however, with optics this is not an issue. There have been many tests of accuracy vs. barrel Length. Other than the tendency to have higher velocities at longer barrel lengths, accuracy is largely unaffected.

Damn... Missionary beat me.

[MtGun44]

6" gives sight radius benefit, less noise, less muzzle flash, higher velocity, steadier holding
on target, less handy, a bit more awkward in a holster, esp when sitting.

I have two 6" .357s and a couple of 6" .38s, plus a few 4" versions of each. Generally, the
6" guns are significantly more accurate in real world shooting. Not sure about what you would
get from a machine rest, but with a person in the loop the 6" is typically a touch more accurate,
and for a lot of shooters more than a touch. In the holster, the long bbl is noticably
awkward, works by far the best in a crossdraw for me.

Bill

[Bass Ackward]

I'll give you more to think about that people NEVER address. Gun weight.

When people mount a scope on a handgun, they believe that the accuracy improvement is from the ability to see. This is a crutch unless you are truly blind. In my testing, 90% of the improvement is from the weight. Mount that much weight on a gun and you will shoot almost as well with open sights. (normal ranges of say 50 yards or less)

If your bullet has to bank off a wall (forcing cone) then you have a reaction of movement in the direction of that impact proportional to bullet vs gun weight. This must be controlled under recoil and is dependent upon us. If the gun is perfectly aligned, then this is minimized and the gun can be allowed to recoil freely with little accuracy penalty and is a joy to shoot.

The more a gun weighs, the easier it is to control under recoil and the better a human can shoot it. Where the WEIGHT is located is also a factor to how much more weight you need. And cartridge power obviously factors in which is why the boomers get more difficult to handle (shoot as well) as you go up in bullet weight.

Now if you are wanting to cast for it, then you have the two old adages that still hold true for flexibility. You always want to start a cast bullet off as easy as possible and use the longest barrel possible for lead.

So it just depends.

[Lloyd Smale]

I actually shoot short barrels better then long off hand. Most likely because thats what ive allways liked and bought and shot the most. I agree with Bass on the weight though. A heavy short barreled gun does best for me. A light long barrel gun does the worse. It seems to take differnt muscles to ballance a longer barrel then it does a short. Something like my all steal bisley 4 inch 500 linebaugh or a 4 inch smith balances best for me. Im all over the place with something like a new small framed ruger with a 7.5. I think part of this too is sight picture. With a longer barrel you see more movement in the sights. When to pull through and shoot is an instintive thing and all the movement makes me hesitate more. I think most of the prefernces differnt guys have comes from what they shoot. If you started on long barrels your probably going to prefer them but dont let the internet keyboard comandos tell you that ones better then the other. 98 percent of shooting any sixgun accurately is trigger control. Youll find when you really master that any gun is shootable.


I shot one of the long range competiions at a linebaugh seminar a few years back. They had a 1/2 scale steal buffalo out at 800 yards. they shot 41, 44 ,45 ,475 and 500 classes. I think kelley brost won the 41. I won the 44 and my buddy Al won the rest of them. Kelly had the only long barreled gun a reader 41gnr with a 8 inch barrel. I won the 44 class with a 5.5 inch bisley (Longest barreled sixgun i own) Al won the rest the 45 and 475 were with a 4 5/8s gun and the 500 class with his 4 inch gun. Lot of long barreled guns there buy no winners. Why because Al was there and like i said trigger control means alot more then barrel lenght and nobody i ever met shoots a sixgun as well as Al. Moral of the story is barrel lenght means about nothing in the big picture. It sure wont make up for pour technique.

[btroj]

Lloyd is right on that. Good pistol shooters are just that, good shooters. It isn't the equipment, it is the guy using it.
I agree on the weight. A really light pistol is nice to carry, bad to shoot. The weight keeps it from moving quite so much when sighting and shooting. Leave it to Bass to bring up the one thing everyone else missed.

[songdog53]

It realy depends on what your going to use firearm for, i have model 29 with 6" barrel and 629 in 4"the 29 is more accurate in slow fire at range where there is less muzle rise. The 629 is better at fast reqction shooting plus can be CC, so depends on just what your looking for. For all round everyday use i carry the 4" more because of ease of carry. Each has it's own special place in use.

[44man]

Barrel length itself means little for accuracy as long as a load matches the twist and loss of velocity from the short barrel.
Many like a huge caliber in a short barrel and claim powders like 296 work best but take a picture shooting at night and see how much is wasted out front.
As the barrel gets shorter, the powder should get faster and the alloy should be stronger.
To increase case capacity and keep shortening a barrel is far from sane. You would do better with a much smaller case. I even hear of guys with 4" 45-70 revolvers, a caliber that will drive you nuts with a 10". A .45 Colt would do better.
Then .500's in 2" to 4" barrels!!!!!! You can not make use of the powder capacity so will resort to Bullseye, Red Dot, Blue Dot and HS-6 in a huge case that should use very slow powders. You are at the point where a few more inches really means a lot.

[Larry Gibson]

As to intrisic accuracy length of a barrel of 4" vs 6" has nothing to do with accuracy, as mentioned.

Inside 50 yards a good handgun shot will do just as well with a 4" as a 6" barrel with most casual targets. However, look "back in the day" when revolvers ruled the handgun matches, ever see a 4" barrel used let alone to win with? Look at all the PPC matches, other tahn service revolver catagory, ever see a 4" PPC revolver? Look at many of the .45 Hardball guns with extended sight radius beyond the 5" barrels. The reason is the longer sight radius of the 6" barrels allows more accurate shooting because any equal error in sight alignment is less with a longer sight radius.

The longer barrel will give, with rare exception, better ballistics for better down range/terminal effect. The longer barrel will give a longer sight radius allowing you to shoot more accurately. Note in the discussions that a 5.5" barrel is a lot closer to 6" than it is to 4". Perhaps this is why a lot of older "expert" revolver shooters prefered a 5" barrel as it was a good compromise between barrel length, ballistics and carrying ease in a belt holster.

Personally, I own 2 revolvers of .357 Magnum persuasion. One is a M19 with 2.5' barrel that my wife uses. The other is a 6" barrel Ruger Security Six that I use a lot. I've had a lot of other .357 revolvers of various barrel lengths from 4" to 8 3/8". All have been traded off except for the M19 on the short end (kept for short range and concealabilty reasons) and the Ruger 6" barreled revolver for general purpose use.

I also have numerous other revolvers of various calibers from .22LR to .45 Colt. Most all of them have 5.5 to 6.5" barrels on them. I shoot better with them, using iron sights, than I do with any shorter barreled revolvers. My 4" Colt Annaconda .44 is intrisicly more accurate than either my 6 or 6.5" barreled revolvers yet I shoot the longer barreled revolvers at most any range more accurately. I've found that a good high ride quality holster (did I mention quality?) makes a 6" barreled revolver as easy to carry on a belt holster (also should be of "quality" and wide) as a 4" barreled revolver. I also find a 5.5 - 6.5" revolver with a barrel of normal contour (that means with no full length lug) to "balance' better than a shorter barreled revolver of equal barrel contour.

As mentioned, a certain amount of weight make a handgun balance and hold better. However, there can be too much or too little weight also. Fortuneately the spectrum in between is pretty large. I find the shape and fit of the grip to my hand to affect balance feel more than any weight hanging under the barrel. Of course, as mentioned, if you use optics then weight is added and barrel length becomes a moot point and most optic sighted handguns are carried via sling, crossdraw, shoulder or chest type holsters. As an example my 7.5" barreled .41 Magnum Ruger Bisley has a Burris FastFire on it and is carried in a shoulder holster.

Bottom line is unless you are an expert handgunner you will shoot better with the 6" barrel. Then when you become an expert handgunner you will still shoot more accurately with the 6" barrled revolver. The 6" barrel will give better ballistics with jacketed and cast bullets. Either the 4 or 6" barreled revolver will carry comfortably in a quality high ride holster on a quality belt. The only real advantage of the 4" barreled revolver over the 6" barreled revolver, in my opinion, is if concealabilty as a "carry gun" is an issue. Then the 4" barreled revolver has the advantage. Other than that I prefer the longer barreled revolvers of 5.5 to 6.5" because I shoot more accurately with them.

Larry Gibson

[Groo]

Groo here
As to barrel length, the trend to 4 inch barrels started when cops started to drive cars..
Before that 5s and 6s were common.
The barrel would hit the seat and jam you in the ribs [ a border patrol holster is angled to
fit is the seam between the seat and back]
The 4 inch was a middle of the road length.
The true correct length for a double action is a short 3 to 3 1/2 in and a long
5 to 5 1/2 in.
If you check online there are a few test on length vs bullet speed
the break points look to be at about 3 in and again at 5in.

[Lloyd Smale]

i dont really agree with the shorter barrrels needing faster powders. I still get the best velocity and accuracy in my 4 inch 500 linebaughs with powders like 110 4227 and aa9. Same goes for my 4 in 44s and 45 colts. Ive never seen where faster burning powders did better then slow ones loading top end loads in any barrel lenght. Sure you get some muzzle flash but you get that with powders like power pistol and lilgun too and ones slow and ones fast. Shoot a top end load with lilgun out of a 8 inch gun and then shoot a simular load using 110. You will have less muzzle blast wiht the 110. Does that mean the lilgun isnt as efficient. NOPE. 9 times out of 10 it will give bettter velocitys then 110. Excessive muzzle flash is as much about the makeup of the powder as it is with the burning rate.
Barrel length itself means little for accuracy as long as a load matches the twist and loss of velocity from the short barrel.
Many like a huge caliber in a short barrel and claim powders like 296 work best but take a picture shooting at night and see how much is wasted out front.
As the barrel gets shorter, the powder should get faster and the alloy should be stronger.
To increase case capacity and keep shortening a barrel is far from sane. You would do better with a much smaller case. I even hear of guys with 4" 45-70 revolvers, a caliber that will drive you nuts with a 10". A .45 Colt would do better.
Then .500's in 2" to 4" barrels!!!!!! You can not make use of the powder capacity so will resort to Bullseye, Red Dot, Blue Dot and HS-6 in a huge case that should use very slow powders. You are at the point where a few more inches really means a lot.

[subsonic]

The mechanical accuracy of each revolver will be a wash. There are other factors at play that are larger than 2" of barrel.

The "practical" accuracy for your average shooter will be slightly to moderately better with the longer barrel.

The longer barrel will recoil less, generate more velocity, be quieter(slightly), and be harder to manage in a holster.

The short barrel won't wear your arms out as fast if you shoot it a lot and will be a bit handier to wear due to a bit less weight and overall length. 4" barrels can be shot with more accuracy than is required by most people with a handgun and will provide more velocity than is usually required for the jobs a .357 is used for.

I would go for the 4", but I already have a 6" 686.

Pick the one you like best for the task you are purchasing it for. If you plan to carry it a lot, get the 4". If it's for hunting, go 6". Both will make holes in paper plates very well.

[Matthew 25]

1shot...how accurate do you want this revolver to be? I think that question needs to be answered before a strong argument is made for either length. SongDog summed it up....what are you going to use it for?

[44MAG#1]

It has been my experience that if one can shoot well barrel lenght within reason makes no difference.

[Bass Ackward]

The real advantage to a longer barrel with open sights is that as you move that brick that they call a front sight farther out. The front sight looks more precision relative to the target and you get more light through the back sight to position it.

The short barrel man who doesn't modify his sights will have to "guess" more often on less than ideal (correct size) targets than a longer barreled setup. Widen the back sight a little so that you can see relatively the same sight picture as you do with an 8 3/8ths and .... you .... pretty much shoot like you would with an 8 3/8ths.

Every decade or so somebody does a test that shows that the powder that is the velocity producing champ in a caliber with an 8 3/8s barrel will be the velocity champ in a 2" as well with bullets capable of handling the stress.

[Thumbcocker]

The mechanical accuracy aspect has been answered. What shoots better for you is the question. When I was 19 I got a Ruger 6 7/8" Mark II target. Put lots of rounds throught it. I have never had teh benefit of a coach so it was all a read Seyfried and try it process. I was able to regularly hit a penny within 3 shots at 30 yards with that gun. I had no idea what a group was just whether or not I was hitting. I killed a lot of squirrels with that gun when it was considered some sort of stunt to hunt anything with a handgun.

Fast forward to age 51 I now find 4" and 4 5/8" guns easier to get a clear sight picture on. 7.5" barrels result in fuzzy sights in less than perfect light. Hunting guns are 5 1/2 but most time is spent shooting shorter barrels.

Handguns are personal things. What feels best to you? what can you see the sights best with?

[btroj]

Yep, go with what feels best to you. This is a very personal thing. I just prefer the feel of the 4 inch over the 6 inch but I ain't you!
Either one will likely do whatever you need it to do. It is now all up to feel.

Go buy the thing already! Enjoy it, I sure do mine.

Brad

[ironhead7544]

For a general purpose gun in 357 I would get the six inch. For CCW the 4 inch. I used to have a Dan Wesson with interchangeable barrels and ended up with the 6 inch on it. The rest of the barrels just sat there.

[1shot]

This revolver will be a fun/range gun. For action games ODPL/IDPA I prefer semi-auto tupperware.

Thanks to all of you who provided both experience and personal opinion, I am leaning towards the 4.2" barrel based on upon balance. I feel that the loss of sighting length will be made up for in this way alone.

Today at the range I spoke at length with a respected IHMSA shooter- he seldom runs sub 34/40 scores, and when asked if he would shoot a 4" gun out to 100 yards responded by explaining that longer guns have more pronounced (unsupported) front-sight movement which will tend to play games with your mind.. And while the shorter gun is still subject to this- the sights will not show it as readily, end result being that you shoot more naturally and not stay in the aim, over-compensating yourself into a miss.

That made a great deal of sense to me.

[Larry Gibson]

1shot

Not sure about that "mess with the mind". I shot a lot of IPSC matches (I was a Class A competitor back in the day) and shot "police duty weapon" class many times also with a 4", 5" and 6" M15 S&W. My scores were always higher with the 5 and 6" revolvers. I also shot a lot of TRC and PPC matches and qualifications with the same revolvers and always shot much better with the 6" barrel than any of the others. How many 4" barrels are used in PPC or target matches? None. Thus from the accuracy stand point it is well proven most everyone will shoot better with a longer barrled revolver, within reason. I was pretty good with a handgun back then. I also was an advanced firearms instructor for the police in my state for some years. I took many an issue Chief Special or 2" M10 from women and gave them a longer barreled M15, many times my own 5" M15, to train with and qualify with. I have smaller hands and had cut down target grips on the M15 which fit many or I put the issue grips with a grip adapter back on for those with smaller hands. They could not qualify with their isuue revolvers because of poor trigger pulls, poor grips, poor balance and too short of a sight radius. I refused to "pencil" qualify them and found all of them could handle and shoot the longer 5" barreled M15 just fine, at least fine enough to qualify for real. Being issued a really short barreled revolver they could not use but which some manly sergeant or chief thought is what a "woman" needed is what "messed with their minds". You'd be surprised at what I turned down from several of those woman officers for that 5" M15.

As many have mentioned, the balance difference between the 4 and 6" revolver is subjective and only you can answer that question. Grips do make a difference in balance "feel" also. Make your decision based on what your needs are and what feels comfortable in your hand and when you "present" the revolver. If you plan on hunting or target shooting then consider what hunters and target shooters are using. If you are going to shoot combat matches then look at what revvolver shooters use in those matches are using. I'd suggest finding a range that has both to rent and try or a freind with both to try at the type of shooting you want to do before you make up your mind. Buying a revolver that a combat match shooter might use to go deer hunting or visa versa is a poor compromise. A good pistol shooter will do well with either but as a new shooter I suggest the revolver that fits your game, not someone elses.

Larry Gibson

[Thumbcocker]

I'd suggest finding a range that has both to rent and try or a freind with both to try at the type of shooting you want to do before you make up your mind.


Hard to argue with that.

[44man]

I shot IHMSA for many, many years and my SBH has a 10" barrel and except for bolt guns, so do my single shot pistols. My Mark II is 10". My Mark II stainless squirrel gun is 6-7/8".
One reason is the sight clicks are 1, 2, 3, and 4. 1" at 50 meters and 4" at 200 with a 10" barrel.
Shorter barrels will move the POI a great distance for each click.
As I got older, the sights had to move farther and farther from my eyes and is now at the point I can't see them for beans from a bench so I need longer arms.
For hunting 6" works nice but I still like 7-1/2" best.
Short barrels sight in decent for close range but if you extend the range to the point you can't regulate the sights without going way under or way over, it calls for hold off. Same holds true for windage.
Short barrels with fixed sights present so many problems when hunting to find a load that not only is accurate but also shoots to the sights.
Hunting is a whole lot different then standing 7 yards from paper or 15 yards from steel plates.

[9.3X62AL]

I'll be not one bit of help, at all. The 357s at my house have 2.5", 4", 6.5", and 7.5" barrels--and I enjoy them all. I can hit well with all of them. If I had to limit myself to ONE of those barrel lengths.......the 4" Model 686 would get the nod. No handgun platform on earth does so many things so well as a quality double-action 4" 357 Magnum revolver. That GP-100 is a top-shelf choice.

That 686 x 4" has been my back-country companion since the late 1990s. It is listed on my CCW, and I would have zero hesitation about harvesting one of our local mini-muleys with it to 50 yards. Several coyotes and dozens of jackrabbits have fallen at its bark. It has become a close friend.

[MT Gianni]

For me the bbl length is secondary to the fit of the grips and the balance of the gun. My signature line came from the way I learned to shoot a pistol. If you can't concentrate on the front sight and make the trigger break the same way every time you might just as well throw a rock. Of course that was when I had young eyes.

[waksupi]

I'll be not one bit of help, at all. The 357s at my house have 2.5", 4", 6.5", and 7.5" barrels--and I enjoy them all. I can hit well with all of them. If I had to limit myself to ONE of those barrel lengths.......the 4" Model 686 would get the nod. No handgun platform on earth does so many things so well as a quality double-action 4" 357 Magnum revolver. That GP-100 is a top-shelf choice.



What he said.

[44MAG#1]

As I stated previously I have found from observation that if one can shoot well they can shoot well regardless of barrel lenght within any reasonable lenght.

[44man]

As I stated previously I have found from observation that if one can shoot well they can shoot well regardless of barrel lenght within any reasonable lenght.
That's right but with my eyes today, the little 4" would look funny with a 30mm red dot on it. :groner:
I would need to put the front sight on a stick taped to the barrel and also move the rear out onto the barrel! :kidding:

[Bass Ackward]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm. Cheatin doesn't bother you but looks does.

Is there a moral dilemma here? :kidding:

[williamwaco]

I agree with all the above. Ther is no intrinsic difference in accuracy with the exception that some guns are more accurate than others due to factors other than barrel length.

A lot depeds on your age and eyesight. A 25 year old will shoot almost as well with the four inch as the six up to about 20 yards. The longer the distance, the greater the advantage to the 6 inch. This is caused by two things, 1, the distance between the front and rear sight. Longer distance means smaller sighting errors. 2 and most importance is that after about 35 to 40 years of age, your eye begins to lose the ability to focus on both sights ( Some people say it switches focus back and forth from front sight to back sight then back to front sight.) I don't believe that. Lenses have a characteristic called the f value that is related to depth of field. Older eyes have less depth of field. ( depth of field is the distance between the closest thing that is in sharp focus and the farthest. )

Thus, the most important factor in the shooting accuracy between the two will be your age/eyesight. If you are over 40 you will shoot the 6" noticably better.

[Dframe]

I long ago got over my long barrel problem. I no longer own anything longer than 6 inches and find the 6 inch barrels cumbersome. The 4 inch far handier.

[44man]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm. Cheatin doesn't bother you but looks does.

Is there a moral dilemma here? :kidding:
Yep, this is my go to, long range, short barrel gun!

[1shot]

UPDATE!

Today I have my brand new Ruger GP100 in .357 with the 4.2" barrel and could not be any happier. I threw together some mild 158gr boolits over 4.3 grains of Unique and easily kept them within a 4" circle at 25 yards standing off-hand.
Not prize winning accuracy, but good enough to start with and base much improvement upon.

Thanks again guys