I'm really debating between a 4 or 3 inch barrel on a .357. The 4" feels like a nice mix of portability and ballistic effectiveness, but the 3" might have a carry advantage. I think the 3" might be on a smaller frame? That might be easier for carry. But then there's the issue of capacity, because the smallest frames seem like they only have a 5 cap, where the mid frames have 6. What should I go for? Bigger package with 1 more on the cylinder, but it's harder to carry, or a smaller package that sacrifices a shot? Side note: I'd prefer not to spend more than $800.
4" or 3"? .357 for carry/home
- Thread starter Kylaen
- Start date
- Status
unclenunzie
Contributing Member
There are going to be a lot of very nice choices with that upper limit preference. Do you have particular models in mind?
Deus Machina
Member
For home and the range, 4" seems to be the standard. If it will get carried, I'd absolutely go 3" with a smaller frame if possible.
Clarifying from my point of view: I don't often carry a revolver lately, but I've found that a mid- or large-frame 4" is a very considerable extra weight over smaller frames and shorter barrels. 2" seems the most common for carry and is IMO the minimum effective length for any sort of JHP to work, but new designs are much more likely to.
For the extreme comparison, the S&W 586 I had (all-steel mid-large to large frame, 4" barrel with full underlug) weighed at least twice as much unloaded as the alloy 2.5" .38 I tuck in my pocket. I'm not nearly a big enough guy to comfortably conceal and carry that 586 all the time; it's a hefty gun. My 2.5" would weigh as much as the pistol I keep in a holster (Ruger SR9c) if it were steel. I wouldn't want to carry much more than that all the time in street clothes, and to me revolvers feel heavier than a comparable autoloader because of their thickness.
And FWIW, a barrel may be the least important dimension for concealability (again, IMO) but an extra inch at the end can be an appreciable chunk of length and weight depending on design.
Clarifying from my point of view: I don't often carry a revolver lately, but I've found that a mid- or large-frame 4" is a very considerable extra weight over smaller frames and shorter barrels. 2" seems the most common for carry and is IMO the minimum effective length for any sort of JHP to work, but new designs are much more likely to.
For the extreme comparison, the S&W 586 I had (all-steel mid-large to large frame, 4" barrel with full underlug) weighed at least twice as much unloaded as the alloy 2.5" .38 I tuck in my pocket. I'm not nearly a big enough guy to comfortably conceal and carry that 586 all the time; it's a hefty gun. My 2.5" would weigh as much as the pistol I keep in a holster (Ruger SR9c) if it were steel. I wouldn't want to carry much more than that all the time in street clothes, and to me revolvers feel heavier than a comparable autoloader because of their thickness.
And FWIW, a barrel may be the least important dimension for concealability (again, IMO) but an extra inch at the end can be an appreciable chunk of length and weight depending on design.
denton
Member
It might be helpful for you to look at http://ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html . You can see how barrel length affects muzzle velocity.
Bear in mind that in a revolver, the bullet gets the benefit of an additional inch or so of effective barrel length from the cylinder, but also suffers some drop in speed from gas escaping the cylinder gap. For revolvers, the data at the link will not be quite right. But it is still useful.
I'm really not a big fan of 2" 357s. Lots of bark, several extra ounces to carry around (vs. 38 Spl), and with a Federal 125 grain JHP, only 949 FPS. So I agree with your thinking that the 3" barrel is a good place to start, 1255 FPS with the same cartridge. 4" gives quite a nice gain, 1511 FPS.
Good luck with your choice. Let us know what you do.
Bear in mind that in a revolver, the bullet gets the benefit of an additional inch or so of effective barrel length from the cylinder, but also suffers some drop in speed from gas escaping the cylinder gap. For revolvers, the data at the link will not be quite right. But it is still useful.
I'm really not a big fan of 2" 357s. Lots of bark, several extra ounces to carry around (vs. 38 Spl), and with a Federal 125 grain JHP, only 949 FPS. So I agree with your thinking that the 3" barrel is a good place to start, 1255 FPS with the same cartridge. 4" gives quite a nice gain, 1511 FPS.
Good luck with your choice. Let us know what you do.
Dean C
Member
I have a Ruger SP101, .357 Mag. 3-1/8". Carries well and hides in house well too.
Deus Machina
Member
Oh, and an addendum that agrees with denton: I'm a fan of .357 revolves, but not with carrying them loaded with .357 for carry. Under 4", a .38 will be about as effective on people (debatable, but again IMO), and setting off a .357 in that situation will leave you deaf for some dime after (not good for involving police, obviously) and will probably leave you with tinnitus for the rest of your life. Most of what you get out a .357 in that situation is recoil, flash and noise, and therefore diminished vision and hearing. Especially from shorter barrels.
I set off my .38 in tight quarters. Once. I was deaf for an hour and still have tinnitus five years later. I'm sure concerts didn't help, but it's daily to hourly since. The .357 I had could be painful at the range with earplugs with some loads. I can only imagine how that would have left me.
A good .38 will do about the same job, you can get some +P if you want some extra oomph, and they shoot perfectly out of a .357 gun. Leave the actual .357 for the range and hiking in bear country.
I set off my .38 in tight quarters. Once. I was deaf for an hour and still have tinnitus five years later. I'm sure concerts didn't help, but it's daily to hourly since. The .357 I had could be painful at the range with earplugs with some loads. I can only imagine how that would have left me.
A good .38 will do about the same job, you can get some +P if you want some extra oomph, and they shoot perfectly out of a .357 gun. Leave the actual .357 for the range and hiking in bear country.
Last edited:
WrongHanded
Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2017
- Messages
- 4,771
There are pros and cons to various frame sizes and barrel lengths.
I think the 3" SP101 is a nice option on the compact end. Then there's the S&W model 69 [Edit: I meant 66] in either 3 - 4" barrels. I don't like the lock, but they come with it anyway.
Ruger does the GP100 in a 3" with fixed sights, and did a limited run of a 4" half lug with fixed sights. I like both very much, but they now belong to my wife. With more compact grips than the Hogue monstrosities they come with, they are quite concealable and can still hand .357 loads with ease. Partly because they're heavier options.
Then there's the new Colts and the Kimbers. I haven't even touched either of those.
A 3" barrel is an absolute minimum for me with .357 revolvers. I refuse to load .38 Specials for SD in any gun chambered for .357 magnum.
I think the 3" SP101 is a nice option on the compact end. Then there's the S&W model 69 [Edit: I meant 66] in either 3 - 4" barrels. I don't like the lock, but they come with it anyway.
Ruger does the GP100 in a 3" with fixed sights, and did a limited run of a 4" half lug with fixed sights. I like both very much, but they now belong to my wife. With more compact grips than the Hogue monstrosities they come with, they are quite concealable and can still hand .357 loads with ease. Partly because they're heavier options.
Then there's the new Colts and the Kimbers. I haven't even touched either of those.
A 3" barrel is an absolute minimum for me with .357 revolvers. I refuse to load .38 Specials for SD in any gun chambered for .357 magnum.
Last edited:
Garandimal
member
Think you need a reason to go < 4" on a .357 Mag.
Range buddy has a 4.2" Ruger SP-101 and it's sweet to both shoot and carry.
GR
Range buddy has a 4.2" Ruger SP-101 and it's sweet to both shoot and carry.
GR
fxvr5
Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2017
- Messages
- 3,268
The 2" ballistics (949 fps) you have in your description are not realistic by any stretch of the imagination.
Refer only to the ballistics from actual guns in the lower half of the page. The 125 Federal JHP get 1246 fps from a 3" revolver.
I get 1250+ fps in a 2" Colt with the Remington 125 SJHP, 1450+ fps from a 4" S&W and 1700+ fps from a Ruger Blackhawk 6.5" barrel. Those are real world ballistics.
fxvr5
Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2017
- Messages
- 3,268
The model 69 is a 44 Magnum. I think the OP is only looking at 357 Magnum.
WrongHanded
Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2017
- Messages
- 4,771
ontarget
Member
I only carry 2 inch snubs. I have the SP101 3 inch in 357 but dang is that thing heavy compared to my Taurus 85 Ultra lite. The Ruger is great for home or trail but I prefer a lightweight 38 for EDC. I'm carrying 16-18 hours per day every day so a few ounces make a huge difference.
Legionnaire
Contributing Member
I have both a 3-inch and a 4-inch GP100 in .357. The 3-inch is easier to conceal, and I prefer the 4-inch for field carry. I like both, but if I could only have one, I’d keep the 4-inch.
Zaydok Allen
Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 13,274
Personally I’d never try to do home defense and concealed carry with the same gun.
3” for carry. 5” or 6” for home defense and fun.
3” for carry. 5” or 6” for home defense and fun.
Last edited:
Frame size is more important and should be determined 1st. Then you can decide on barrel length.
A Smith on an "L" frame, which is the same size gun as GP-100 is a bigger, bulkier gun regardless of barrel length. That would be a good HD choice and open carry choice regardless of barrel length. I'd go with 4+ plus on those guns. They make 2 1/2" and 3" barreled versions of both, but the shorter barrels make less sense on a gun that big. The "N" frame guns are only slightly larger and many of them are available with 8 shot cylinders. Some of the "L" frame guns offer 7 shots. There is virtually no difference in size and weight between an "L" and "N" frame. The "L" frame guns have full length ejector rod housings and are often heavier even though the frame is slightly larger. I'd rather have the "N" frame.
If you go with one of the smaller framed 5 shot guns I find 3" to be a good compromise. Most of those come with 2" barrels, but the frames are so small the versions with 3" barrels aren't any harder to carry, but shoot better for most people. Any of these would be a great carry gun. Would still be OK for HD, but the smaller size limits capacity and most people don't shoot them quite as well as full size guns.
The Smith "K" frames are less common than they used to be. Size wise they fit between the tiny "J" frame 5 shot guns and the larger framed "L" and "N" frames and are the perfect compromise. They aren't that hard to carry even with a 4" barrel, hold 6 rounds and are still big enough to shoot accurately. One with a round butt and either a 3" or 4" barrel would be a great all around revolver.
Something like this
https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/model-66-combat-magnum
https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/model-66
A Smith on an "L" frame, which is the same size gun as GP-100 is a bigger, bulkier gun regardless of barrel length. That would be a good HD choice and open carry choice regardless of barrel length. I'd go with 4+ plus on those guns. They make 2 1/2" and 3" barreled versions of both, but the shorter barrels make less sense on a gun that big. The "N" frame guns are only slightly larger and many of them are available with 8 shot cylinders. Some of the "L" frame guns offer 7 shots. There is virtually no difference in size and weight between an "L" and "N" frame. The "L" frame guns have full length ejector rod housings and are often heavier even though the frame is slightly larger. I'd rather have the "N" frame.
If you go with one of the smaller framed 5 shot guns I find 3" to be a good compromise. Most of those come with 2" barrels, but the frames are so small the versions with 3" barrels aren't any harder to carry, but shoot better for most people. Any of these would be a great carry gun. Would still be OK for HD, but the smaller size limits capacity and most people don't shoot them quite as well as full size guns.
The Smith "K" frames are less common than they used to be. Size wise they fit between the tiny "J" frame 5 shot guns and the larger framed "L" and "N" frames and are the perfect compromise. They aren't that hard to carry even with a 4" barrel, hold 6 rounds and are still big enough to shoot accurately. One with a round butt and either a 3" or 4" barrel would be a great all around revolver.
Something like this
https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/model-66-combat-magnum
https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/model-66
bannockburn
Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 26,285
For primarily concealed carry I would go with a 2" barrel on a S&W J frame (Model 638), for concealed carry/home defense a 2 3/4"-3" barrel on a K frame (Model 66 new or Model 13 used), and for primarily home defense a 4" barrel on an L frame (Model 586 new or Model 686 used).
The longer barrels have a very substantial ballistic advantage, and because of this, allow you to shoot lighter charges of faster powders while getting the same velocities as hot loads of slow powders in the short barrels that are very unruly.
The longer barrels have a longer sight radius which makes accurate aiming much easier.
Even if you're not using sight-alignment, and just point-shooting, the longer barrel is easier to aim. Try pointing a toothpick versus a broom handle. It's a lot easier for the toothpick to be a bit too far off.
The longer barrel is heavier. A heavier gun has more inertia. That makes it steadier. It may be a little slower to swing it onto your target, but it's better at staying there on-target.
A larger mass also slows recoil velocity. Magnums are more controllable and follow-ups on-target earlier when recoil is a slow push versus a sharp jab. A heavy gun is less likely to disturb your grip under recoil.
Barrels are easy to conceal. I think many people believe it's the grip or the butt of the handgun that "prints" because it looks like a gun, whereas a barrel just looks like a stick, a rod, a cylinder, a flashlight, a bone, a pen, and many other things that shape, all of which are ordinary and don't draw any attention.
Higher capacity cylinders for a given cartridge diameter are "fatter" or larger around. An 8-shot N-frame or Super GP100 cylinder is fat compared to a 5 shot J frame. However, I've regularly carried a 6-shot single-action with a cylinder as fat as an N-frame's 8 shot cylinder and I never had trouble concealing it. In my experience, none of the cylinders are too big for concealed carry. But the large-diameter cylinders also result in a higher bore-axis which puts more torque on the hand under recoil. I don't have enough experience with N frames to say how much this matters. I think the main reason the N frame fell out of favor was the weight. The steel N frames weigh toward the upper end of what I think is comfortable to me. A Scandium 327 N frame is about the same as a K frame though. Most people willing to carry a revolver other than an Airweight won't find a reason to complain about that.
Have you carried other guns regularly before? Everyone starts somewhere. You don't want a gun that you'll avoid carrying.
How will you carry a revolver? I think a lot of people have a hard time figuring out how to carry a revolver concealed other than a J frame or LCR. I used to think it was impossible for me (a small, light dude). I started with an Airweight because I knew I would carry it and I knew it would be concealed. But a lot of it is mental. I don't trip anymore. I carry a huge gun now. Not because it's "badder" (it's just a .357 and I shoot reduced loads in it) but because it's easiest to shoot well. I want every advantage I can get, and I stopped being self-conscious about my retarded-handicap gun.
Your $800 budget is on the low-end for revolvers. If you could raise it to $1300, you would avoid excluding most production revolvers. I'm not saying you have to spend that much, but for that little bit of extra money, you expand your choices to almost every production gun out there. Whatever revolver you buy, plan on buying different grips because the factory ones are usually a cheap rubber grip. It can work well enough, but the factory anticipates buyers replacing them according to personal preferences. I don't recommend cheap "action jobs" or spring kits for a carry revolver because they achieve a lower trigger pull force by lightening the main spring or trigger return spring. That either results in lighter primer strikes and reduced ignition reliability or a slower trigger reset that slows second shots and increases the probability of over-running the trigger (pulling it before it's fully reset). Make sure any "action job" is appropriate for defensive use and not just recreation or competition. Save your money for ammo.
The longer barrels have a longer sight radius which makes accurate aiming much easier.
Even if you're not using sight-alignment, and just point-shooting, the longer barrel is easier to aim. Try pointing a toothpick versus a broom handle. It's a lot easier for the toothpick to be a bit too far off.
The longer barrel is heavier. A heavier gun has more inertia. That makes it steadier. It may be a little slower to swing it onto your target, but it's better at staying there on-target.
A larger mass also slows recoil velocity. Magnums are more controllable and follow-ups on-target earlier when recoil is a slow push versus a sharp jab. A heavy gun is less likely to disturb your grip under recoil.
Barrels are easy to conceal. I think many people believe it's the grip or the butt of the handgun that "prints" because it looks like a gun, whereas a barrel just looks like a stick, a rod, a cylinder, a flashlight, a bone, a pen, and many other things that shape, all of which are ordinary and don't draw any attention.
Higher capacity cylinders for a given cartridge diameter are "fatter" or larger around. An 8-shot N-frame or Super GP100 cylinder is fat compared to a 5 shot J frame. However, I've regularly carried a 6-shot single-action with a cylinder as fat as an N-frame's 8 shot cylinder and I never had trouble concealing it. In my experience, none of the cylinders are too big for concealed carry. But the large-diameter cylinders also result in a higher bore-axis which puts more torque on the hand under recoil. I don't have enough experience with N frames to say how much this matters. I think the main reason the N frame fell out of favor was the weight. The steel N frames weigh toward the upper end of what I think is comfortable to me. A Scandium 327 N frame is about the same as a K frame though. Most people willing to carry a revolver other than an Airweight won't find a reason to complain about that.
Have you carried other guns regularly before? Everyone starts somewhere. You don't want a gun that you'll avoid carrying.
How will you carry a revolver? I think a lot of people have a hard time figuring out how to carry a revolver concealed other than a J frame or LCR. I used to think it was impossible for me (a small, light dude). I started with an Airweight because I knew I would carry it and I knew it would be concealed. But a lot of it is mental. I don't trip anymore. I carry a huge gun now. Not because it's "badder" (it's just a .357 and I shoot reduced loads in it) but because it's easiest to shoot well. I want every advantage I can get, and I stopped being self-conscious about my retarded-handicap gun.
Your $800 budget is on the low-end for revolvers. If you could raise it to $1300, you would avoid excluding most production revolvers. I'm not saying you have to spend that much, but for that little bit of extra money, you expand your choices to almost every production gun out there. Whatever revolver you buy, plan on buying different grips because the factory ones are usually a cheap rubber grip. It can work well enough, but the factory anticipates buyers replacing them according to personal preferences. I don't recommend cheap "action jobs" or spring kits for a carry revolver because they achieve a lower trigger pull force by lightening the main spring or trigger return spring. That either results in lighter primer strikes and reduced ignition reliability or a slower trigger reset that slows second shots and increases the probability of over-running the trigger (pulling it before it's fully reset). Make sure any "action job" is appropriate for defensive use and not just recreation or competition. Save your money for ammo.
Last edited:
gotboostvr
Member
If I was gonna try and do both roles with one revolver, it'd be a 2-3" K frame.
Any bigger will be hard to conceal, any smaller and my shooting speed and accuracy start dropping rapidly.
I've got a 3" M60 and a 2 3/4" M19. There's a bigger difference in how the M60 and M19 handle than between my 2 3/4" M19 and my 4" with full size grips. The small difference in frame sizes despite being about the same overall size and weight make a big big difference in handling.
Any bigger will be hard to conceal, any smaller and my shooting speed and accuracy start dropping rapidly.
I've got a 3" M60 and a 2 3/4" M19. There's a bigger difference in how the M60 and M19 handle than between my 2 3/4" M19 and my 4" with full size grips. The small difference in frame sizes despite being about the same overall size and weight make a big big difference in handling.
mokin
Member
I really like my four inch barrel. It's not what I normally carry, but is only slightly larger than the "compact" Glock I usually do carry. Even though I shoot better at longer distances with the .357 (>25 yards), the Glock is easier to carry concealed and holds more ammunition. I would consider how I dress, how much I'm willing to change that, and the trade off on shooting ability.
steven58
Member
My EDC is a Kimber K6s 3”. It’s virtually the same size and weight as a steel 3” J frame but with 6 shots, real sights and a great trigger. Price is $700ish if you shop around and are patient.
I carry mine in jacket pockets with a Desantis Nemesis pocket holster or IWB in a Tucker Texas Heritage. Very comfortable all day.
I carry mine in jacket pockets with a Desantis Nemesis pocket holster or IWB in a Tucker Texas Heritage. Very comfortable all day.
Eddietruett
Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2018
- Messages
- 1,076
I would go with a 3" K Frame for home defense. It can be concealed almost as easily as a 2" if needed but the 3" balances perfect to me and one of the biggest advantages is a full length ejector rod for full extraction of spent brass. Also if you go with a fixed sight model like the 13 or 65, its going to have the heavy barrel which will help with recoil as well. The downside of a 3" is they are getting harder to find in a prelock because so many people are finding out how perfect they are and the prices are going up. You can find a 4" Model 13 or 65 much cheaper.
Sixgun-symphony
Member
Magnum cartridges really need longer barrel lengths
RealGun
Member
If you are going to use factory ammo, get the bigger gun. Too many of the smaller guns wind up being used for 38 Special because there just isn't enough gun there to handle the ammo. If a reloader, there are some fine loads for the smaller guns and which perform well above 38 Special.
As far as barrel length, if carrying OWB, the longer barrel will keep the gun from tipping away from your body. My 3" GP100 is top heavy for carrying high.
As far as barrel length, if carrying OWB, the longer barrel will keep the gun from tipping away from your body. My 3" GP100 is top heavy for carrying high.
My own personal experience with the .357 magnum is to NEVER go less than 4 inches. The first gun I was issued when I went into law enforcement was a 3 inch barreled .357 magnum S&W. It was nice to carry off duty because of that light weight, about 2 pounds, but not as effective as a 4 inch gun, so I bought a S&W 681 with a 4 inch barrel and my qualifications scores went up.
As a rule now, I do not own any snubbies, except for the .38 Special, 2 inch barreled J-frame size. I can pocket or ankle carry these, so that justifies their ownership for me, but that is the only reason I have them.
In my experience, the increase in muzzle blast, loss of velocity and thus effectiveness of each shot and the noise and recoil are just not justified to me. If I want to carry a harder hitting, more effective round, then I should also use a gun that makes each shot more effective and easier to control.
This is especially true of more powerful loads like the 125 grain jhp, which is a significant step up from the .38 Special +P+ and 9m.m. +P or even +P+ loads.
Realistically, if you are going to carry a six shot or seven shot revolver, you have to go up to the K-frame size. :You can buy one of the smaller guns like RUGER SP101 or KIMBER or even COLT KING COBRA, but are they really more effective with a 3 inch barrel than a 4 inch S&W model 19 or RUGER Security Six?
In my opinion, the short barrel + light weight of the gun and smaller size grip makes each shoot not only less powerful, but less effective.
Jim
As a rule now, I do not own any snubbies, except for the .38 Special, 2 inch barreled J-frame size. I can pocket or ankle carry these, so that justifies their ownership for me, but that is the only reason I have them.
In my experience, the increase in muzzle blast, loss of velocity and thus effectiveness of each shot and the noise and recoil are just not justified to me. If I want to carry a harder hitting, more effective round, then I should also use a gun that makes each shot more effective and easier to control.
This is especially true of more powerful loads like the 125 grain jhp, which is a significant step up from the .38 Special +P+ and 9m.m. +P or even +P+ loads.
Realistically, if you are going to carry a six shot or seven shot revolver, you have to go up to the K-frame size. :You can buy one of the smaller guns like RUGER SP101 or KIMBER or even COLT KING COBRA, but are they really more effective with a 3 inch barrel than a 4 inch S&W model 19 or RUGER Security Six?
In my opinion, the short barrel + light weight of the gun and smaller size grip makes each shoot not only less powerful, but less effective.
Jim
- Status
