[10-Ring]

Are these nicer, just as nice, worse than the Taurus? Which barrel length should I be looking for? What is a fair price?

[Jim March]

I'd say the Ruger 454 is significantly better than the Taurus. Factory grip ergonomics are about the only place the Ruger is NOT worlds better, they're about a tie but there's more aftermarket support for the Ruger (esp. since the grips are cross-compatible with the GP100 series).

There's a lot more aftermarket support for the Ruger, including sights, grips, holsters and speedloaders.

The real "complaint" with the Ruger 454 is the recoil, but that's psycho with any DA 454 :). At least in the lower 48, in my opinion these guns really don't need more horsepower than what the better 45LC+Ps can deliver, which is fine...you can use those for most of your work, saving full-house 454 for those rare cases it's called for (trip to Alaska in Griz country, fr'instance).

Barrel length? Dunno. Are you *hunting* critters, or defending against aggressive beasties? If the latter, fast handling and a short barrel is called for. If the former, the longer barrel will give a teensy bit more accuracy and some extra knock-down power, esp. if you run 45LC+P power levels (roughly 44Mag territory) that's OK on boar, deer or whatever but not by a huge margin.

What else...is this also going to be a self-defense gun against the dreaded "two-legged rattlesnake"? Carried concealed, or open? If concealed, you CAN hide the 5.5" tube under a jacket :). And that barrel will still hunt OK, but you'll be forced into 454 horsepower sooner to make up for the reduced velocity it'll spit 45LC+P at.

Do remember that you're basically buying THREE calibers here: 45LC is about the same power as 45ACP (ballpark) and can perform the same tasks including personal defense. 45LC+P is a big jump up, can throw a 325grain at 1,300fps with factory ammo and a 5" barrel, roughly 44Mag power levels, and then the 454s are a whole 'nuther thing past that :).

[Gordon]

My super redhawk is super indeed! I think the 7.5" barrell makes the most sense in this format. It will produce the best ballistics (which is the only reason to have this gun) without being ungainly. a 7.5 barrel can still be carried ok. Gun is pretty heavy if it was short barreled. Lastly with a scope of low power on top you can actually barely manage a few controllable 454 rounds with the extra weight.:)

[jjmorgan64]

As usual Jim nailed it,

I also love my 7.5" SRH

Unless I've been lazy at the bench however, mine sees nothing but 454's I like the kick:evil:

[10-Ring]

Thanks guys for the info. Now, it's just a matter of finding the right deal.

[gbran]

I bought mine because it's versatile due to all the .45 and .454 loads available. I also like the fact that the Casulls are very flat shooting and can actually perform farther than I'm able to shoot. I also bought it for hunting large game at distances of 75-100 yards. I've taken a 350+ pound boar at about 75 yds. One thing you need to be aware of is that your point of aim will differ greatly between .45 cwboy action loads vs. 300 grain Casulls due to recoil. With iron sights, you compensate, but with a scope, you really need to adjust. But I generally don't shoot the low-end 45's with the scope. I am really pleased with this gun.

[pahrumpcaveman]

I got the 7.5"and am quite impressed with it . The 454 full house rounds are punishing . I bought mine on gunbroker.com from youngguns .

[pahrumpcaveman]

Heck he's selling them cheaper now ! I paid 600$ . http://www.gunbroker.com/auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=8245432

[Drundel]

I traded a Raging Bull for my 9.5" SRH. No regrets, I got mine for hunting pigs and deer with open sights, have yet to do it (spent 45 days hunting dove and ducks last year) but I really like the gun.