revolver 4" vs 6" which would you choose?

M

mudgolem

Member
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
39   0   0
If you had to keep only one revolver to be used strictly for fun at the range which length and why?

I have a 686 no dash in 6" which I thought is the length I wanted in but now I think the 4" looks better and may be a little more fun to shoot.

That being said if I had a 4" instead of 6" I could be saying the opposite.

I do not care for marginally better accuracy you may gain from 6". I just want to know which one to you is better looking and more fun to shoot for any reason.
 
Last edited:
6", no question.
Reasons (for me), in no particular order:
- better accuracy (which I actually think is considerable, especially in hotter calibres like .357mag),
- a little more oomph (velocity) so that target will hurt more,
- better control (less flip/less felt recoil),
- better looking IMO (relationship of barrel length to the rest of the gun).

I think the only reason small barrels came along was for the "carry" crowd (even way back when), and it was a compomise even then, or else all revolvers would have short barrels. Then it became the "the thing to have" and thus the 4.2" barrels for Canadians, some of whom like the look or want to use them for IDPA, or whatever. Try shooting a 4.2" barrelled .357 mag loaded hot and I don't think you will consider it much fun after a cylinder or two, especially when you are fighting to get any kind of a decent grouping. Just my opinion. Good luck with you decision, hope you have fun with it.
 
I have been in the market for a 686 and have handled and shot both. I find the 4.2" to be more balanced in my hand than the 6" but i was much more accurate with the 6". I am still undecided myself. They are both great guns.
 
This question has been asked and answered many times. A search will yield tonnes of info for you.
 
NVShooter said:
6", no question.
Reasons (for me), in no particular order:
- better accuracy (which I actually think is considerable, especially in hotter calibres like .357mag),
- a little more oomph (velocity) so that target will hurt more,
- better control (less flip/less felt recoil),
- better looking IMO (relationship of barrel length to the rest of the gun).

I think the only reason small barrels came along was for the "carry" crowd (even way back when), and it was a compomise even then, or else all revolvers would have short barrels. Then it became the "the thing to have" and thus the 4.2" barrels for Canadians, some of whom like the look or want to use them for IDPA, or whatever. Try shooting a 4.2" barrelled .357 mag loaded hot and I don't think you will consider it much fun after a cylinder or two, especially when you are fighting to get any kind of a decent grouping. Just my opinion. Good luck with you decision, hope you have fun with it.
Click to expand...

I would agree , I have a Ruger GP 100 stainless wth a 6 in. barrel....a very good shooter and looks good as well......
 
I like the 5.5" barrel on my Ruger Redhawk, and I think 5" is generally a good compromise. I don't care for a barrel longer than 6" on a handgun. It can make you more accurate, but they start to become unhandy, which defeats the purpose of a handgun. Less than 4" is sacrificing that accuracy for concealment, which I'd accept for concealed carry for personal protection, but that's not relevant here. I'm content to settle for a barrel anywhere from 4" to 6".
 
Last edited:
I really prefer the look and feel of the 6" buut being how I shoot IdPA, it has to be 4.2".

In fact I just ordered a new GP100 today..
 
6" for all the reasons posted above. I can't understand the desire in Canada to have Compact frames and/or short(ish) barrelled handguns. We will never be able to carry, so if you're only going to shoot it at the range (or at home, heaven forbid) why not have as much gun as possible? More velocity, more accuracy, more gooder.
 
Both. I own a 6" 586. After handling a 4.2" 686, I may have to own that too. It felt right and pointed nicely.

Edit: I missed the "You can only have one" part. I would go with 6" because I like the weight of it. But since I can have as many guns as I can afford/hide from the wife... Both.
 
Last edited:
If you stand still and shoot, get the 6", if you run around a bunch get the 4.25". I have not shot a bunch of revolvers, but my dads 6" Taurus is slow to point compared to my Shadow. I have not shot my new GP 4.2" yet but it handles nice and is neutral feeling.
 
Here is an argument (?) for the shorter barrels...the other day I read a post where someone indicated that the longer the barrel, the more chance of it (the barrel) being warped and thus the gun not shooting straight. Not sure he/she was speaking from experience or just providing a theoretical point of view...but there you go. Aren't you glad you have all the pros and cons now :)
 
Silly logic. By that logic rifles would be warping left right and center because they are longer right?

NVShooter said:
Here is an argument (?) for the shorter barrels...the other day I read a post where someone indicated that the longer the barrel, the more chance of it (the barrel) being warped and thus the gun not shooting straight. Not sure he/she was speaking from experience or just providing a theoretical point of view...but there you go. Aren't you glad you have all the pros and cons now :)
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom