X-ray Crystallographic Study of the Ruthenium Blue Complexes [Ru(2)Cl(3)(tacn)(2)](PF(6))(2).4H(2)O, [Ru(2)Br(3)(tacn)(2)](PF(6))(2).2H(2)O, and [Ru(2)I(3)(tacn)(2)](PF(6))(2): Steric Interactions and the Ru-Ru "Bond Length"

X-ray crystal structures are reported for the following complexes: [Ru(2)Cl(3)(tacn)(2)](PF(6))(2).4H(2)O (tacn = 1,4,7-triazacyclononane), monoclinic P2(1)/n, Z = 4, a = 14.418(8) ?, b = 11.577(3) ?, c = 18.471(1) ?, beta = 91.08(5) degrees, V = 3082 ?(3), R(R(w)) = 0.039 (0.043) using 4067 unique data with I > 2.5sigma(I) at 293 K; [Ru(2)Br(3)(tacn)(2)](PF(6))(2).2H(2)O, monoclinic P2(1)/a, Z = 4, a = 13.638(4) ?, b = 12.283(4) ?, c = 18.679(6) ?, beta = 109.19(2) degrees, V = 3069.5 ?(3), R(R(w)) = 0.052 (0.054) using 3668 unique data with I > 2.5sigma(I) at 293 K; [Ru(2)I(3)(tacn)(2)](PF(6))(2), cubic P2(1)/3, Z = 3, a = 14.03(4) ?, beta = 90.0 degrees, V = 2763.1(1) ?(3), R (R(w)) = 0.022 (0.025) using 896 unique data with I > 2.5sigma(I) at 293 K. All of the cations have cofacial bioctahedral geometries, although [Ru(2)Cl(3)(tacn)(2)](PF(6))(2).4H(2)O, [Ru(2)Br(3)(tacn)(2)](PF(6))(2).2H(2)O, and [Ru(2)I(3)(tacn)(2)](PF(6))(2) are not isomorphous. Average bond lengths and angles for the cofacial bioctahedral cores, [N(3)Ru(&mgr;-X)(3)RuN(3)](2+), are compared to those for the analogous ammine complexes [Ru(2)Cl(3)(NH(3))(6)](BPh(4))(2) and [Ru(2)Br(3)(NH(3))(6)](ZnBr(4)). The Ru-Ru distances in the tacn complexes are longer than those in the equivalent ammine complexes, probably as a result of steric interactions.