I think I screwed up, what should I do?

[bannockburn]

Though I have a 4" barrel on my Model 686 and love the way it handles, for hunting I would go with the 6" barrel.

 

[wagonburner]

Does it? The pistol with the shorter barrel is lighter. Less weight increases free recoil. However, a shorter barrel usually lowers velocity. Less velocity reduces free recoil. Now which one has less free recoil?

Aim1, the most important question has not been asked or answered- how does your new handgun shoot for you?

Your theory is incorrect. I own several 686s and have shot them back to back literally 100's of times. The shorter barreled revolvers recoil SIGNIFICANTLY more than the longer barreled ones.

 

[fxvr5]

Your theory is incorrect. I own several 686s and have shot them back to back literally 100's of times. The shorter barreled revolvers recoil SIGNIFICANTLY more than the longer barreled ones.

How much more? Thanks.

 

[MistWolf]

Your theory is incorrect. I own several 686s and have shot them back to back literally 100's of times. The shorter barreled revolvers recoil SIGNIFICANTLY more than the longer barreled ones.

View attachment 901089

It's not a theory. Free recoil is measurable and calculable. Free recoil calculators are available online. Input payload weight, pistol weight and muzzle velocity of each and the math will tell you what the free recoil is for each. It's possible the lighter weight of the shorter handguns is a greater factor than the velocity loss, but it's not a given.

If you have two handguns of identical weight shooting identical ammo and one makes less velocity because it has a shorter barrel, it has less free recoil. It's simple physics.

It's also possible for two firearms to generate the same free recoil, but have completely different felt recoil. One can be significantly sharper than the other, giving the shooter the impression it has greater recoil.

It's possible for one firearm to generate more free recoil yet have softer felt recoil, giving the shooter the impression it has less recoil. For example, a 30-06 generates the same free recoil with a recoil pad as it does with a steel buttplate. But felt recoil is softer with the recoil pad and shooting is more pleasant. Those who shoot both will tell you the 30-06 with the pad has less recoil when the math proves otherwise.

 

[Kingcreek]

Keep the 6” stop doubting your first decision and enjoy it. Its a better choice for your stated uses.

 

[chicharrones]

View attachment 900973 View attachment 900974

Aim1, I think it's time for you to show us the entire gun.

 

[bihj]

You did good. Stop fretting over it.

 

[Tilos]

Bought a new 6" SS ported/prelock for a range gun.
Way louder than my 6" GP100 at the covered outdoor range with same ammo.
It became a safe queen until I sold it.
Just recently bought another 6" SS/prelock, no port, much better noise wise.

I saw a ported/prelock online for sale recently and it was priced at quite a premium, I guess because of an only 3 year run of factory ported guns.
If you didn't pay a "premium" over the 4", I'd say keep the 6" as an investment and buy the 4"...if the noise bothers you like it did me.

 

[Legionnaire]

For your stated purpose, keep the 6-inch. The 4-inch would be easier to carry, but that's not what you want it for.

 

[buck460XVR]

It's also possible for two firearms to generate the same free recoil, but have completely different felt recoil. One can be significantly sharper than the other, giving the shooter the impression it has greater recoil.

This is something that I find readily apparent in my varied 686s. The amount of muzzle flip contributes to the impact on the web of my strong hand when I shoot. Thus, longer barrels and full lug revolvers that reduce the muzzle flip tend to be more pleasant for me to shoot. As I said in my first post, most folks that shoot my revolvers at my range go back to the 6" Power Port more times that most of the other revolvers I have(this includes not only the collection of 686s, but 629s and X-Frames). Not only does the longer barrel just shoot more accurately for them, it's just a more pleasant gun to shoot. Being more pleasant to shoot, also contributes to shooting more, which contributes to shooting more accurately. Hunting deer with a handgun takes practice and accuracy. As for the Port itself. It is not like most other magna-ported handguns or even compensated revolvers like my P.C. 629 Magnum Hunter and my P.C. .460 Compensated Hunted. The single port does not direct gases back at the shooter, nor does it throw dust off the bench. When shooting from a rest, it helps keep the gun on the rest( I always try to use a rest when deer hunting with my revolvers). I is not considerably louder than my other 686s, especially the shorter ones. My snub nosed 637 shooting .38+p is just as loud(and felt recoil is worse).

 

[Bill M.]

Heavy bullets and hunting charges the 6” is better. Forget recoil. You can shoot plinking loads. And check the handgun hunting laws in your state.

 

[wagonburner]

It's not a theory. Free recoil is measurable and calculable. Free recoil calculators are available online. Input payload weight, pistol weight and muzzle velocity of each and the math will tell you what the free recoil is for each. It's possible the lighter weight of the shorter handguns is a greater factor than the velocity loss, but it's not a given.

If you have two handguns of identical weight shooting identical ammo and one makes less velocity because it has a shorter barrel, it has less free recoil. It's simple physics.

It's also possible for two firearms to generate the same free recoil, but have completely different felt recoil. One can be significantly sharper than the other, giving the shooter the impression it has greater recoil.

It's possible for one firearm to generate more free recoil yet have softer felt recoil, giving the shooter the impression it has less recoil. For example, a 30-06 generates the same free recoil with a recoil pad as it does with a steel buttplate. But felt recoil is softer with the recoil pad and shooting is more pleasant. Those who shoot both will tell you the 30-06 with the pad has less recoil when the math proves otherwise.

Indeed? I guess I must have imagined that longer barreled handguns recoil less ... each and every time I was shooting the last 40 years. But hey, got to be true if you saw it on the Internet right? Besides, what do I know, I just happen to own the identical guns in question and shoot them back to back frequently.

On short barreled guns, due to the higher pressures of the charge during the first few inches of travel, the muzzle blast contributes more to the recoil than the bullet itself. As the bullet travels down the barrel the pressure drops, and the muzzle blast contribution drops exponentially.

Your theory doesn’t take that in consideration, ergo it’s baloney ( whether you thought it up yourself or got it off the internet )

 

[Aim1]

This is something that I find readily apparent in my varied 686s. The amount of muzzle flip contributes to the impact on the web of my strong hand when I shoot. Thus, longer barrels and full lug revolvers that reduce the muzzle flip tend to be more pleasant for me to shoot. As I said in my first post, most folks that shoot my revolvers at my range go back to the 6" Power Port more times that most of the other revolvers I have(this includes not only the collection of 686s, but 629s and X-Frames). Not only does the longer barrel just shoot more accurately for them, it's just a more pleasant gun to shoot. Being more pleasant to shoot, also contributes to shooting more, which contributes to shooting more accurately. Hunting deer with a handgun takes practice and accuracy. As for the Port itself. It is not like most other magna-ported handguns or even compensated revolvers like my P.C. 629 Magnum Hunter and my P.C. .460 Compensated Hunted. The single port does not direct gases back at the shooter, nor does it throw dust off the bench. When shooting from a rest, it helps keep the gun on the rest( I always try to use a rest when deer hunting with my revolvers). I is not considerably louder than my other 686s, especially the shorter ones. My snub nosed 637 shooting .38+p is just as loud(and felt recoil is worse).

Do you have the same Power Port as mine?

 

[buck460XVR]

Do you have the same Power Port as mine?

Yep.

 

[wagonburner]

How much more? Thanks.

I can only give you a subjective answer. The difference in recoil is immediately noticeable on the 686s, more so the heavier the load.

I have 2 454 cal Freedom Arms mod 83s. The one with a 7.5” barrel is pleasant to shoot with 300 gr Hornady XTP even one handed. The 4.25” barrel tries to break your wrists and I would never think trying to shoot one handed.

Another observation I made was that the shorter the barrel, the more the revolver wants to rotate or roll in your hand, and the more useful porting becomes.

 

[fxvr5]

I can only give you a subjective answer. The difference in recoil is immediately noticeable on the 686s, more so the heavier the load.

No problem. I understand it will be subjective and an estimate. Do you have an estimate of about how much more the recoil feels? 5%, 10%, etc.

I'm guessing your barrel lengths (in the photo) are 2.5", 4", 6" 7". Correct? Do you have an estimate of how much difference there is in recoil between the different barrel lengths?

Genuinely curious. Thanks again.

 

[wagonburner]

No problem. I understand it will be subjective and an estimate. Do you have an estimate of about how much more the recoil feels? 5%, 10%, etc.

I'm guessing your barrel lengths (in the photo) are 2.5", 4", 6" 7". Correct? Do you have an estimate of how much difference there is in recoil between the different barrel lengths?

Genuinely curious. Thanks again.

Correct.

The difference in recoil is most pronounced with shorter barrels. I have subsequently got rid of the 2.5” for a 3” as I felt the 3” recoiled a lot less without being much bigger. It was just so much nicer to shoot with hot loads than the 2.5”. I shot them back to back a couple of times and I just didn’t have a reason to keep the 2.5“ anymore.

i couldn’t feel much of a difference between the 6” and 7” 686s even with hot loads.

Percentages I don’t know. On the 2.5” to 3” maybe 20 - 30%, on my Freedom Arms maybe 200 - 300%.

 

[WestTexShooter]

Say the seller is a friend? Seems like he would let you shoot a couple of cylinders out of each.

 

[Aim1]

Say the seller is a friend? Seems like he would let you shoot a couple of cylinders out of each.

He's actually willing to let me. But we are both super busy with work and families and this dang COVID 19. So hopefully soon.

Luckily there is no rush.

 

[FROGO207]

Yeah this mess will settle down fairly soon I predict. I have owned a couple different 357 revolvers that were identical other than barrel length. No porting. The longer sight radius and longer barrel allowed me to shoot that one more accurately and seemed to recoil less sharply. Again that is what I observed. I sold the 4 inch one. YMMV

 

[MistWolf]

Indeed? I guess I must have imagined that longer barreled handguns recoil less ... each and every time I was shooting the last 40 years. But hey, got to be true if you saw it on the Internet right? Besides, what do I know, I just happen to own the identical guns in question and shoot them back to back frequently.

On short barreled guns, due to the higher pressures of the charge during the first few inches of travel, the muzzle blast contributes more to the recoil than the bullet itself. As the bullet travels down the barrel the pressure drops, and the muzzle blast contribution drops exponentially.

Your theory doesn’t take that in consideration, ergo it’s baloney ( whether you thought it up yourself or got it off the internet )

Heh! No, I didn't get it off the internet and I didn't make it up myself. I learned about recoil studying how firearms work and first came across the math formula in a reloading manual in the 80s. Yes, the math takes into account how much the gases add to recoil.

But- bless your heart- you have an imagination powerful enough to overcome the laws of physics, negate reality and insert your own. Stick to your guns (pun intended) and don't let facts keep you from doing you.

Aim1, didn't mean to derail your thread. Go shoot your new handgun and let us know how you like it.

 

[Brownie0351]

6 inches is always better than 4 inches!

 

[chicharrones]

6 inches is always better than 4 inches!

http://instantrimshot.com/

 

[benEzra]

It's not a theory. Free recoil is measurable and calculable. Free recoil calculators are available online. Input payload weight, pistol weight and muzzle velocity of each and the math will tell you what the free recoil is for each. It's possible the lighter weight of the shorter handguns is a greater factor than the velocity loss, but it's not a given.

Keep in mind that the shorter barrel doesn’t decrease the recoil component from the propellant gases at all, and that is significant with a .357. But a bigger contributor is probably the reduction in the moment of rotational inertia. If you measure free recoil as strictly the motion of the gun directly to the rear and ignore rotational recoil in the calculation, then that will shockingly underestimate the recoil difference between a 6” .357 and a 2” .357, to use an edge case.

 

[MistWolf]

Keep in mind that the shorter barrel doesn’t decrease the recoil component from the propellant gases at all, and that is significant with a .357.

Correct. The reduction in recoil in a handgun with a shorter barrel is due to reduced velocity of the bullet

But a bigger contributor is probably the reduction in the moment of rotational inertia. If you measure free recoil as strictly the motion of the gun directly to the rear and ignore rotational recoil in the calculation, then that will shockingly underestimate the recoil difference between a 6” .357 and a 2” .357, to use an edge case.

Free recoil does not take rotation, recoil pads, stock dimensions, action type or other such variables into account. Free recoil only takes into account bullet velocity, gas velocity, payload mass (including powder charge) and weapon mass. The other variables affect felt (perceived) recoil which is how the recoil feels to the shooter and do nothing to reduce the amount of recoil generated.