4 vs 6 inch

Neither, Match Champion breh, got that great trigger out of the box and sexy frame and cylinder chamfering so it’s easy to holster and draw.

Have a 4 inch security six and I like it, but I always wished the barrel was longer.

Have a 6" and love it, no need to go short on a fullsize target revolver. It's not like the GP100 would be pleasant to carry anyway.

My Manhurin MR73 is a 5 1/4" and it's dope as fuck and better than 4 or 6 inch.

>not pictured Dan Wesson Model 14 .357mag

Attached: revoverls.png (1440x1080, 2.91M)

Colt SAA in .357 Mag

Attached: 1536617517702.png (720x555, 609K)

6

Fun fact folks. Rugers have the “Hillary Hole” as well. They’re just under the grips ;)

a three incher

neither.
My gun needs to be bigger than my cock

Prove it.

Depends on the type of Revolver.
On old revolvers: Longer barrels.
On modern revolvers: Shorter barrels.
Both for mostly aesthetic reasons.

Attached: guns_revolvers_ammo_desktop_3000x3000_wallpaper-372373.jpg (1600x1600, 741K)

>Proficiently
Good answer.

Attached: tenor.gif (498x278, 998K)

If I could only have one it would be a 4" for sure.
Enough barrel length to get good velocity, adequate sight radius, enough weight to absorb some recoil.
But because the barrel is shorter it points better, carries better and draws a little faster. Might even make the difference if I ever have to conceal carry.
If you can get a 4" 28-2 Highway Patrolman that'd be good because classic Smiths are where it's at, but paying top dollar for a Hillary Hole gun just doesn't make sense to me when you can spend less and get better quality.

N-Frame weighs like a brick tho. I'd rather stick with a K-Frame

>choosing a revolver that looks like a piece of shit

what's the one on top with the red grips?

Exactly. A 4" revolver is not a practical carry piece.

You're not going to find one "do it all" gun. Figure out which role you want to fill.

Full underlug, adjustable rear sight, pinned front sight.... 686 variant with aftermarket grips?

4

>Unironically choosing Ruger over Smith and Wesson for wheel gats in any day and age

Do you want a nice revolver with a great aftermarket trigger job and accurate? S&W 4" ..... Do you want to be able to use it as a club to beat a tank to death with after you have ran out of ammo? Ruger 6"..... I have a s&w 19-3 combat in .357, I love that pistol .... I also have a Redhawk in .44mag 7.5" with a Leopold pistol scope... I also love that tank killer ..

only correct answer.

6” will be a little softer shooting with the additonal mass and muzzle blast being a little father away, but neither are really significant unless you shot them side by side. Id pick 4” becuase if you look at them in person, the 6” looks too long. Especially for a manlet like me, it makes me look like in compensating

This.

I have a SW686+ that is a 3 inch and I think its the perfect barrel length...Also the most aesthetic.

Attached: sw686.jpg (481x640, 75K)

I've been giving you false advise throughout 3, maybe 4 threads now. How's anonymous posting for ya !

Attached: hqdefault.jpg (480x360, 23K)

>Proficiently
You know you're on Jow Forums right

Sorry it took so long to respond. It's a 3in 629 no dash in .44 mag with an undiluted cylinder. It's a very rare configuration. 1,500 made.

Wait, I may have lied about the no dash. The 686 with the red grips in the middle is a no dash, the 629 up top may be a -2 or something. I'll check later.

The lack of Colt itt is disgusting, if you're only going to have one it should be a 4" Python

>paying $3k for a fragile revolver

He's right, there is a lock, but it doesn't interfere with the function or aesthetic like s&w.

6. You're going to be shooting magnums.

3"-4" is peak revolver pointability and aesthetic

Attached: 635975147015236338.jpg (736x588, 50K)

Why pay for cast frames and janky triggers?

>being poor

Why do boomers use ellipses so much? It's annoying as fuck.

It is one of the most universal signals of boomerdom and also the most bizarre
Just start a new line or use commas ffs

carry rugers
compete with smiths
collect colts

stop being poor

This is close to what I do, except carry both Colts and Smiths, and hunt with my Ruger Super Blackhawk. Have a few doubles for the colts, one Collector and other for 2700 competition and carry.

6 inch for increased sight radius

it's so satisfying to reliably hit 4 inch plates at 50 yards

I own a $3,200 MR73. I'm not gonna spend that kind of money on a Python that will fail with a hot diet when I already have a revolver worth more than some cars that will last 300 years of steady use.

All of the above.

Attached: wm_7652211.jpg (2848x2848, 817K)

jesus man wipe the finger prints off them barrel shrouds

Attached: muh gat.png (2014x1037, 2.86M)

Honestly this. Who carries a revolv in 2019 except pipe smoking zippoccarrying fedora wearingnnumales

Here we are everyone. Granted, the smiths lock might not be nice to look at aesthetically BUT they’re easier to access if you have to for some reason.

Attached: CFF5BD79-5AEC-4AE1-9FF7-A4821F3D30C9.jpg (640x451, 100K)

Literally why though? You couldn't possibly try to tell me that's a safety measure to keep kidz from blapping yo gat. That requires a full grip removal.

Yeah for .357 snub nose (

so they're covered by the grip? That actually sounds pretty good for long term storage since most thieves I guess wouldn't know to disassemble the grips and access the lock with a key, and it's invisible from the outside.

That's really fucking great

Dude go 5.1" Schofield