Iíd like to challenge what appears to be prevalent thinking, about barrel lengths of Magnum Revolvers.
I really donít understand why so many people feel it is so important to have a short barrel on their revolver, when itís one you carry for Bear Defense. For Concealed Carry, sure, a longer barrel is harder to conceal.
Of the ones I carry, ostensibly for bear protection, one has a 6.5Ē barrel and the other a 6Ē barrel. Packing them has never been an issue in my mind. Iíve never left them behind, because they were too heavy or unhandy. Sometimes, I leave them behind when Iíve got my rifle
Itís my contention that if you have a short barrel you will pay for it in felt recoil, and velocity loss, the ability to shoot well, and greater ear damage, when and if, you ever fire it without ear protection, and maybe even then.
4Ē is considered a good compromise, but why compromise in the first place? Is a 4Ē barrel so much more handy, or macho, than a 6Ē, that you can draw it enough milliseconds faster to make a vital difference in whether you save yourself from a bear or not?
I really doubt it, and I donít see a great deal of difference in ease of carry either. How much does a couple of inches of barrel weigh anyways? Will a couple of inches more of hang-down make it that much more likely to get caught in the pucker brush?
Shoot-ability, Penetration, and Power, would seem to be more important than perceived handiness, or looks.
A few fps is important in a handgun when you donít have a lot of it to begin with.
Accurate shooting is important too, when you donít have a lot of time to shoot, or to practice.
To me, guns are for shooting, and I like ones that are practical to shoot, and that serve their intended purpose. Once, thatís covered, I donít mind packing them around.
Am I Right about this, or perish the thought, am I Wrong?
Thanks for your thoughts/perceptions.
Smitty of the North