Barrel length & accuracy

[Squirrel45]

For conversation sake let's assume both revolvers have the same optic sight. Same gun just with different barrels. Would a 5" barrel have greater accuracy then a 2.5" barrel? 

[Cuz]

Hmmm.  Are you talking about if they were both locked in a ransom rest?

If so, then I would think the question would be if the 2.5 inches of barrel length were enough to stabilize the particular bullet you were firing.

 

If the gun were being shot by a person, and assuming that 2.5" was enough to stabilize the bullet, then I think the shorter barrel might be more accurate as it will clear the gun and afford less time for the shooter to influence the shot off the target.

 

But, then again, what do I know???

 

[Farmer]

I was always in the camp that a longer bbl was more accurate but as of late I really can’t say that. I do know that a full power 357 or 44 mag is much more comfortable to shoot out of a 6” or longer bbl than a 2.5-3”. Not a revolver, but the difference between my 3.8”and 5.25” XDM 10mm is nil as far as accuracy goes. Even the vel between the two is only 50-75 fps. What Cuz says above may have some merit too as far as dwell time. 

[Dr. Phil]

This is a very interesting question Squirrel45! I am hoping to discover the answer following.

I have shot various length guns in 44 mag, all with open sights. I shot 2 different 6" model 29s in PPC over the year with 'warm' special loads. I also shot a friend's 2.5" Lew Horton model 29 which outshot both of mine on a 25-yard course. Might have to give it a try with the 3" ported 44?

Can't wait for the experts/engineers and the rest to weigh in.

Great question!

[Dr. Phil]

I would add that from some testing and from what I have read, the length doesn't matter much except somewhat in velocity and sometimes the stiffer (shorter) barrels become more accurate. I also see the trend to shorten (rifle) barrels to add a silencer and don't see any loss in accuracy so I wonder if pistol lengths would follow? I have tested different length Contender barrels in the past and length didn't seem to matter.

[pskys2]

For iron sights the longer a barrel it's easier to be more accurate due to length of sighting plane.

With optics the barrel length, sighting plane is not an issue.  So then it comes down to compatible loads, barrels and those pesky little things that can pop up.

[Toolguy]

I started shooting Metallic Silhouette with a 6" Model 19, K frame 357. Everyone else had a bigger caliber TC or bolt action pistol in a wildcat bottleneck caliber or a Dan Wesson revolver in 357 Super Mag or something starting with a 4. I was shooting DA, as always, not doing too badly. They were constantly telling me that a 6" barrel is too short, 357 mag is too wimpy, you can't hit anything DA, a revolver isn't accurate enough, and on and on. There are 10 of each kind of target, you get one shot per target, hit or miss, no makeup shots.

 

After 3 matches of that, I brought a 2" Model 15, K frame 38 special. I got 6 of the chickens (50m), 2 or 3 pigs (100m), no turkeys (150m) and one ram (200m). Once I figured out the elevation, most of the misses were in the general neighborhood. After that, the "6" isn't enough" died off. Mission accomplished.

 

I learned from that experience that a 2" barrel will shoot in as straight a line as a 20" barrel. What you are left to deal with with is sight radius, velocity and trajectory. For the rams, I was aiming halfway up some tall trees on top of the cliff that was the ram backstop. It took the bullets about 2.5 or 3 seconds to get there.

[Squirrel45]

This is all great information guys. He's my own angle with this. I'm currently running a 627" 4" for steel challenge (OSR). Looking at 627 2 5/8", it's about 1/4 pound lighter. I run around a 75 power factor. Was thinking that the lighter gun combined with shorter dwell would equal good things. I would consider an aluminum gun but hear to many stories of people wearing them down / barrel issues. 

 

Thanks again 

 

[Toolguy]

If you're running a dot sight, the iron sight radius doesn't matter. At 75 pf the weight of the gun doesn't matter. I think it would work like that. If using the iron sights, the short sight radius would be more difficult to get good hits with.

[Squirrel45]

Thanks toolguy, I know I'm grasping for little here but just feel the gun is a bit heavy especially at the end of a match. My other option is to have my 4" cut down but there seems to be few people working on them that can deliver in a "reasonable" time. 

[practical_man]

@Squirrel45

 

I started shooting ICORE last year after a very long period of not competing at all. I shot a 6” L frame and a 2” K Frame. My scores were generally better with the 2” K frame. Not always, but usually. YMMV

[Joe4d]

48 minutes ago, Squirrel45 said:

Thanks toolguy, I know I'm grasping for little here but just feel the gun is a bit heavy especially at the end of a match. My other option is to have my 4" cut down but there seems to be few people working on them that can deliver in a "reasonable" time. 

you thought about an L frame ?  I just simply dont like N frames. The just feel clunky.. Had a 6" 929,, traded it, have a 4" 627 pro series.. flat sidded barrel its alot batter,, but I still prefer the L frame 686 pro 5".. I mean yeh its only 7 shots, vs 8 but if you are firing 3 makeup shots I think your run is fubared anyways..
Few different L frame 7 shots out there.

[Squirrel45]

1 hour ago, practical_man said:

@Squirrel45

 

I started shooting ICORE last year after a very long period of not competing at all. I shot a 6” L frame and a 2” K Frame. My scores were generally better with the 2” K frame. Not always, but usually. YMMV

Interesting, any thoughts on why you would perform better with a smaller platform? 

[gargoil66]

17 hours ago, Squirrel45 said:

This is all great information guys. He's my own angle with this. I'm currently running a 627" 4" for steel challenge (OSR). Looking at 627 2 5/8", it's about 1/4 pound lighter. I run around a 75 power factor. Was thinking that the lighter gun combined with shorter dwell would equal good things. I would consider an aluminum gun but hear to many stories of people wearing them down / barrel issues. 

 

Thanks again 

 

S-45:

 

What TG said.  I will contend that a very short barrel may be marginal in terms of long range stability due to the lower velocity.  Luckily, pistol bullets are very forgiving in these terms.  

 

You may find three things about a shorter barrel like 3 inches or less that, in my opinion, will cause more problems than they are worth for long competitions.  First, you may find the balance not to your liking because not enough weight is hanging out there.  Second, the noise and muzzle flash will be greater and this leads to fatigue.  Third, the recoil will be greater and this adds up over long shooting sessions.  

 

I would stay with a four to six inch barrel on a 627 unless it was carbon fiber.  Then a six for sure.

 

GG

[pskys2]

You will gain more from how the gun balances and handles, ease of transitions.

But if you like how it feels it's a real possibility that it would be good.

[practical_man]

On 6/15/2024 at 4:15 PM, Squirrel45 said:

Interesting, any thoughts on why you would perform better with a smaller platform? 

I don’t really know why. Both are iron sights. My theory is that I worried less about perfect alignment on the short gun.