2.5" vs 3" revolvers

Styx

Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
3,800
Is there a significant advantage or difference in ballistics between a 2.5" vs 3" revolver, and how will the difference manifest itself when shooting or in common and realistic self-defense situations? I know 3" S&W revolvers generally have longer ejection rods, but let's assume everything is equal from the platform standpoint except for the barrel length. The revolvers are chambered in 38/357 and are L-frame/GP100 size.

FYI: Before it's suggested, I'm not interested in 4" revolvers because of the added weight, and they're impossible for me to conceal OWB under a T-shirt. I'm trying to make a decision between the two barrel sizes listed on this post only.
 
Is there a significant advantage or difference in ballistics between a 2.5" vs 3" revolver, and how will the difference manifest itself when shooting or in common and realistic self-defense situations? I know 3" S&W revolvers generally have longer ejection rods, but let's assume everything is equal from the platform standpoint except for the barrel length. The revolvers are chambered in 38/357 and are L-frame/GP100 size.

That's the best advantage I can think of, if everything else is equal.

Edit to add: I've noticed that S&W K-frame* holsters seem to be currently made for 3" barrels. So, even if you have a 2.5" K-frame and need a newly made holster, there's no length reduction in the holster. But what's a 1/2" more hanging on a belt? Might as well get the 3" barrel.

*I know you mentioned L-frame, but I haven't done any holster searching for L-frames.
 
Last edited:
The longer barrel has increased sight radius which makes accurate shooting easier. The full-length ejector rod is big advantage when firing +P, +P+ LE and .357 ammo.

A 1/2" to 1" longer barrel will increase velocity SLIGHTLY, about 35-50 fps with standard-pressure lead ammo, but barrel-cylinder gap is EVERY BIT as important as barrel length.

A 2-inch gun assembled to min tolerance of pass 0.003/ hold 0.004 will produce higher velocity than a 3-inch or 4-inch gun assembled at max pass 0.008"/ hold 0.009.

The expected Delta-V firing standard pressure lead bullet .38 Special loaded with powders similar to Bullseye, TiteGroup or 231 is 10 fps for each 0.001" change in B-C gap from Mean Assembly Tolerance. The difference is greater firing +P, +P+ LE or .357, and may be several times that depending upon powder type.
 
Last edited:
Two of my favorite revolvers are my 3.1" SP101 and my 2 3/4" Security Six. The SP, with up to +P 38s handles about like the SS with 357s. Killed a deer with the big one back in '05. (unusual opportunity during late season).
Don't much care for my 1.8" 442.
CCW neither. Prefer a flatter 9mm semi
 
At self defense distance, you won't notice any difference.
Depends on the ammo.

MANY current JHP personal defense loads which perform well from a 3 inch or longer barrel, in guns fitted up with a B-C gap at what used to be considered Mean Assembly Tolerance of pass 0.005/ hold 0.006 back in the 1980s, will fail miserably fired from brand new 2-inch guns as currently produced and shipped by S&W, said to be within commercial specs, having B-C gap at pass 0.009 / hold 0.010".

Sorry, wrong answer unless you use WADCUTTER! which produces adequate penetration of 12-16" even from a 2-inch below 700 fps. No expansion is expected or needed.
 
Last edited:
Depends on the ammo.

MANY current JHP personal defense loads which perform well from a 3 inch or longer barrel, in guns fitted up with a B-C gap at what used to be considered Mean Assembly Tolerance of pass 0.005/ hold 0.006 back in the 1980s, will fail miserably fired from brand new 2-inch guns as currently produced and shipped by S&W, said to be within commercial specs, having B-C gap at pass 0.009 / hold 0.010".

I just checked 2 new model 640s, their B-C gaps were .006" and .007". I had a Model 27-2 (1961-1982) with a .011" gap.
 
That's the best advantage I can think of, if everything else is equal.

Edit to add: I've noticed that S&W K-frame* holsters seem to be currently made for 3" barrels. So, even if you have a 2.5" K-frame and need a newly made holster, there's no length reduction in the holster. But what's a 1/2" more hanging on a belt? Might as well get the 3" barrel.

*I know you mentioned L-frame, but I haven't done any holster searching for L-frames.
I've used K/L-frame leather holsters interchangeably. It's typically harder for me to find L-frame holsters in general. 2.5" holsters are harder even harder to find vs. 3", but I've been able to find some. I'm not necessarily referring to S&W revolvers in the OP though.
 
The frame size, cylinder diameter, grips and sights have a greater effect on concealability than a little half an inch of barrel.

If you can't conceal, it you won't carry it.

The gun you carry is way more effective than the one you're not carrying. Pretty simple equation.

PS. Sound like you're trying to convince yourself of something.
 
I would think that the ballistics between a 2 1/2" or 3" barrel would be minimal. The 1/2" barrel length could be a bigger issue with carrying. You mentioned L frame. Is a K frame an option 🤔 just looking at the weight.
My Taurus 415 41mag with a 2 1/2" barrel carries easier in my pocket or pack pocket than my 686 3". I use the same OWB holster.

Taurus 415 41mag
20241201_072508.jpg

S&W 686 357mag and Taurus 605 357mag 20241201_072400.jpg

The Taurus 415 41mag is between an L and K frame in size.
 
I think it depends on the aspects of the individual models. T-shirt in the summer time requires a lot of thought with revolvers in regards to grips, cylinder width, loaded weight and carry style. Barrel length not so much.

I never thought much of these snubby L frames, GP-100s and God-forbid N frames, especially with big "combat" grips. Nice to look at, shoot well at the range. But it's a helluva big fat short round chunk of iron to be packing round. A 4" revolver in that size and weight range is as easy to carry. In LE I carried a 4" model 27 for several years - concealed. As soon as automatics were authorized, I dropped that like a hot potato. Very nice revolver, but a .45 steel-frame semi conceals better.

Had a peck of Charter Arms Bulldog 5-shot .44 Special revolvers. Most had 2.5" barrels. Then I bought a 3" Classic. Everywhere I could carry the 2.5", I could also carry the 3". This includes appendix IWB carry, and strongside OWB in an appropriate holster. Neither of these are pocket guns for modern-day pockets. Still my favorite 3" carry revolver and I pack it frequently IWB.

I also carried a 2-1/2" Model 19-5 back in the day of LE work. I didn't conceal any better than the 3" Model 13-3 I was issued. A few years ago, I bought a 2" Model 10-7... even though the frames and cylinder and grips were identical, that K-frame carried the easiest because it was slightly lighter, slighter shorter, and didn't have snaggy adjustable sights.

For awhile I had some Ruger SP-101s, with 2" and 3" barrels. Disliked the 2" gun as it didn't conceal any better than the 3", was nearly as heavy, and was more difficult to be accurate with.

Currently have a 3" barrel Colt Viper, and an almost identical frame/cylinder sized 2.2" barrel Charter Arm Police Undercover (also all steel), both 6-shots. With small frame-sized grips, the Charter is easier to conceal. The Colt has larger grips, and due to the weight range of these two guns, it doesn't work as well appendix carry.
 
Last edited:
Depends on the person.

I have various snub revolvers of various lengths.

At reasonable SD distances I can shoot a 2" or 2.5" almost as well as a 3", and for me they carry easier, so I normally carry a 2" or 2.5".

I must admit that the 3" ones tend to point and balance a little better for me. I have a 3" j-frame at the gunsmith right now, in fact, getting fancier sights put on it.

Depending on your size, body shape, hand size, etc, an extra 1/2" may or may not make much difference in ease of carry or accuracy.

Practically all of my k-frames are better shooters than my 2.5" CA Bulldog. But the difference is very small, and the CA is super light with a short barrel. It's the one I end up carrying, while the bigger heavier ones stay at home.
 
Back
Top