Is it just me, or does everyone go through barrel length phases ?

I am part of the young crowd

BUT I do like longer barrels for rifles (26"+) because I see the value of accuracy. I understand full velocity for a .308 at 22" and such but I still feel that the longer bull barrels are just putting the groups on paper waaaay out very nicely. So I like them

For shotguns I am drawn to the 22" tactical versions because they seem to hold a decent group while still being useful for defense.

I never got really too big on the caliber scene as I feel that .308 or 300 mag is as big a gun as I need because I dont hunt on Tundra or the continent of Africa

Right now I see the 40-50 generation at the range with the .416+ firearms.. and us "younger crowd" 20-40 with the SKS and NATO type calibers. Just my 2 cents

I'm currently in a mood for 38 S&W revolvers with 6" barrels, but I'm looking for .357 magnum revolvers with either 2.5"/3" barrels or 8 3/8" barrels. Go firgure. Next year I might be on a kick for revolvers with 5" barrels.

You might be ont to something there, Jeff. I too, thought anything less than a 6" barrel looked and felt "wrong" back in my youth. Then, I went through a 4" phase. Now I like 3" and 5" barrels. Not so much with the caliber phases though. I've been a diehard proponent of the .41 magnum since I was 15.

I've always like revolvers with 3" barrels and
semi auto's with 3.5-4" barrels.

I dunno. . .I've always preferred long barrels on both rifles and handguns.

Well, except for SBRs. . .and except for J-Frame Smiths. . .and except for 4" 686/586. . .and I sure do want a 3" 66. . . and except for. . .and except for. . .

Heck, I guess I'm in the "barrel phase". . .as long as it has a barrel, I want it.

I think "gun kwaziness" manifests itself in a variety of ways. I don't think you are alone in your thinking. Going thru phases - Its what makes it fun. It keeps my involvement fresh.

Regards,

My two revolvers are a 6" GP100 and a 7.5" Bisley.

Right now I want a 3" SP101 and a 4.5" Blackhawk.

I think when you're younger and less experienced, it's easier to get worked up over velocity and energy figures. Once you've had them a while and gain confidence in them, you realize a bullet from a 4.5" Blackhawk will kill something just as dead as it would have form the 7.5".

Also the longer barrels make in-the-hand accuracy easier which makes them for fun to shoot. Once you get experienced and develop the skill set, you can hit things with the shorter barrels too.

Just my $.02.

My early revolver purchases were all for plinking, target work, or hunting. As a result, I almost always chose a 6" barrel although my first Colt Diamondback was a 4". I buy now for many reasons and look at the short barreled revolvers with more interest than ever in the past. A good example was a Smith Model 34 with a 2" barrel. Really interested me a lot more than in days gone by. These days, I'm as likely to not shoot a gun as I am to shoot it after I buy it.

I am partial to 4" S&W revolvers... particularly the 'Mountain Gun' variant. It's odd - I replaced my ailing 629MG with a standard 4" 629 - it matched my existing 6" 629's hammer, trigger, and sights. I even sprung and gripped them the same (X-frame Hogues - great recoil aid!). Still, although I've had the 6" longer, when I grab one for a range trip, it's usually the 4"-er.

I need a 4" .38/.357M - I have a 6" 66 and both my 686+ h-l and JM PC627 V-Comp are 5"-ers. I also have a 2" 10 and 1.875" 642... I need a 4" here. Depending on how many body parts I have to sell, I may get either a new 686 SSR or a 620, both 4"-ers. Of course, I know where there is a pricey 65LS (3"), too...

Fickle about barrel length,

Stainz

I have long…



I have short…



I have medium…



I like them all.

I have always had a simple formula for wheelgun barrel lengths IMO the best combination for velocity/ease of handling and sight radius for the range used, I have tried other lengths, but they seem to not feel correct, I guess it makes about as much sense as any gun purchase I make
DA
44mag=6", 357mag=4" 38spl=2"

surprisingly enough all SA revolvers in 5.5" feel best to me, I guess there just isn't that much of a difference in each loadings "feel" 357mag, 45colt 44-40

this is only in the world according to Jeremy where not much seems to make sense

I too am feeling the need for a shorter tube. I have a 6 inch revolver but I am looking for a 4 inch replacement. I really like the 3 inch GP100 with full lug but I also want those adjustible sights.
I have a rifle to shoot long distance and a pistol really is a short range weapon. A shorter barrel is easier to move around.

just my $.02

i like lots of different barrel lengths for different purposes. i'm not sure i could settle on one "best" length, and i wouldn't want to.

HA ! If only I had any kind of money to go through 'phases'.

I have always favored N frames in 6 inch bbls
K frames with 4 inch bbls and J frames with 2 inchers just for balance and appearance sake.

That said, I carried a 4 inch Mdl 58 as a duty weapon, for 13 years and carry a 21/2" Mdl 19 now, go figger!!!

Howsomever, if a 3 inch K frame or a 5 in N frame happened to show up?????

Aw Heck! I like them all!!!

An 8 3/8" 617 turned me on to Smiths twenty years ago, and I followed it with the same length in full and partial lug 17's, then long 586's and 686's, then 29's and 629's - along with every other barrel length and finish in .22, .38, .357, and .44 Mag.

But the longest barrels seemed excessive for a non-hunter, as did the blued guns for a shooter (rather than a collector), so away went lots of revolvers. Now I have mostly 3" and 4" guns, except for a 6" 686 and a 2 1/2" 66. I've killed the N's as too large and the J's as too small, even though I had dozens of each.

I don't know what the next fascination will be, although I'm up to a half dozen CZ 75B's.

I did! Just referring to revolvers: When I was 18(1963) to 22 I used 6" Colt Officer's models because I could win bullseye matches and hit small game too!I bought an 8 3/8" Model 53 .22 Jet in 1966! From age 23-28 I was in situations that had me carrying issued Model 10's and 12's of 2" and my personal model 36 as a BUG. From 1974-78 I was issued a 2 3/4" model 19 and then a 3" model 65 carrying a Colt Cobra then an Agent as a BUG. I had to have an 8 3/8" Model 29 during this period for hunting

I went thru 6" and 5" custom guns from 1979-1989. I finally settled on 4" for allround carry and 2-2 3/4" for concealment.The only longer barrel guns I shoot lately is a 7.5" .17 Ruger Hunter and a 6" Model 17 with wadcutters.

I don't have many pistols...I just seem to have leanings toward certain things. I like six inch barrels on .22s.( thats one I do have)

I like (the idea) of 5" for .45 Colt
For .38 Specials...4" (another one I have)
For .357 or .44 mags...6" sounds right.

Wish I had a safe full to take to the range tomorrow.

Mark.

handguns were designed for close range personal protection....

anything that hindered that was deemed ill-advised and often the user was pointed in the direction of a shotgun or rifle.....

now even today the handgun is still primarily designed for close range personal protection, though some are made for long range hunting for those who find a rifle too easy.....


bottom line, if its a semiauto and bigger than a standard 1911, it just wont sell as well as others made smaller.....

and if its a revolver and bigger that an L frame 4", it too wont sell as well as a smaller counterpart.

more folks buy handguns to carry descretely for personal protection than they do for moderate range hunting/target shooting.

if this wasnt true the 2" J frames would be few and far in between while the 8 3/4" guns would be toted everywhere.....

I have always been partial to 3-4" barrelled revolvers except when bought for a purpose that required a longer barrel. Never really went through a phase though.

My first revolver was a S&W 25-5 with a 6" barrel, because I could not find a 4". Then I bought a Ruger Super Blackhawk with a 4 5/8" barrel. Both now gone.

I had had a 8" Python, my first gun for hunting whitetail deer here in Texas.

I had an 8 3/8" S&W 29, but always wanted a 4" S&W 57. Never found one!!

Bought my first Ruger Redhawk in 1985...a stainless 7.5" in 41mag for the specific purpose of big game hunting. Looked for a 5.5" stainless in 41mag for years, then last year found one and 6 months later found another that I cut the barrel to 4". I will carry these three to the grave.

I bought two SP-101's in .357mag...a 2" DAO for pocket carry and a 3" for IWB carry.

I recently picked up a repatriated stainless GP-100 with a 3" barrel.

I really like the balance of the Rugers with the 3-4" barrels. They are easily concealable and accurate.

bigmike45

HA ! If only I had any kind of money to go through 'phases'.

Click to expand...

And I'm another one.

Actually, in a double action revolver, I've always liked barrels no longer than 6"-6 1/2" and no shorter than 4". Never have been a snubbie fan.

Not really. I go by the frame size. The Smith N or K frames get a long tube, a J frame gets a 2". If a Colt, a python gets minimum of 4, better 6" D/S = 2" Diamondback 4 or 6." The shooters are best with 6" or above.

I think (imho, ymmv) an N frame with a 3" bbl is retarded. Remember, I said YMMV

Around 5" or longer for all my handguns.

Tried snub handguns and found that unless they were being carried(which they werent) all they offered me was lower velocity, more flip and less accuracy for me(due to a shorter sight radius).