Which .454 would you get?

BFR or Ruger Super Redhawk. The SRH is a great platform if a double-action is desired and they are generally quite good. The BFR is a fantastic piece all the way around. Here's my .454. I took this one to South Africa last year.

BFR all the way if that is an option. I'm speaking here for the .454 only. I don't really have a desire for a .45-70 pistol, but that's not to discount you wanting one. If I were to purchase one today, it would be .500 Linebaugh.
I did see the Super Blackhawk Bisley on Buds' site the other day for 8 bills. That would leave a couple hundred for .454 dies and brass.

I've shot my friend's Taurus Raging bull in 44 magnum, and I'm surprised at how much I like that gun. I was iffy on Taurus because they don't have the best reputation. Surprisingly, everything is quite tight and seems well made. Ugly as sin though. I know they make one in .454 Casul so if you want to avoid breaking the bank I'd say that's the ticket.

One thing though: the irons on that pistol are awful, so you might factor in cost of an upgrade on those or a scope.

TTv2 said:

I'm not hip to .50 caliber revolvers, the price just for the bullets to reload is double to triple that of .45 bullet that will do the job for any defensive use just as well.

Not gonna scope it, so if the iron sights suck, I'll go Ruger or BFR.

Click to expand...

Ruger or BFR it is then, because those things are no good. The front 'blade' is extremely wide; so much so that I can't shoot it with decent precision at least. It is also quite short. Maybe some like that sort of thing but it seems to me they cut some corners there.

Alright I'm going to be different, or contrary. SRH but not in 454. I would choose the 480 ruger because it works at a maximum of 48,000 PSI and is more pleasant to shoot. The 454 at 65,000 PSI gives me the shakes. The 410 grain WFN out of the 480 at about 1100 FPS gives more penetration then the 454 with a 360 grain slug at 1400 FPS. The difference isn't much, actually purely academic, it's just the recoil and pressure.
With lighter slugs the 480 falls behind, but, they are both serious killers. I just like recoil that's not snappy.
Yeah I know I'm going to catch it for this, but, that's just me. YMMV.

DocHolliday1886
I just don't like a 2" barrel on a high pressure magnum. My minimum would be 4".

If I was going to get a .454 handgun that was more powerful than I would ever need it would be a .460 S&W magnum (don't let the name fool you):

PERFORMANCE CENTER® MODEL 460XVR™ HI VIZ®FIBER OPTIC FRONT SIGHT:



https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/performance-center-model-460xvr-hi-viz-fiber-optic-front-sight

As for the price here's a used one on Gunbroker, started at $750 sold at $955

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/797898264

Then, just so it was sufficiently masochistic I would add a set of maple grips,

KnightHawk said:

The 410 grain WFN out of the 480 at about 1100 FPS gives more penetration then the 454 with a 360 grain slug at 1400 FPS. The difference isn't much, actually purely academic, it's just the recoil and pressure.
.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily. If the bullet is up to the task of handling the higher velocity, the .454 wins the penetration contest (in the scenario you laid out). Keep in mind I am a big proponent of the .480 and have killed quite a bit of game with various .480s.

MaxP said:

Not necessarily. If the bullet is up to the task of handling the higher velocity, the .454 wins the penetration contest (in the scenario you laid out). Keep in mind I am a big proponent of the .480 and have killed quite a bit of game with various .480s.

Click to expand...

Yeah, it does depend on the bullet no doubt. No my info certainly isn't scientific, just some penetration comparisons I've read. I know 454 does the job, but....................
Just never been a fan of the 454. Even more so for the 460 and 500 S&W Magnums. You might as well carry a short 45-70 rifle.

I would say whatever fits your hand better. a handgun with that kind of power/recoil had better fit your hand. I can shoot very hot loads in my super redhawk all day, but modest 45lc loads in my friends black hawk hurt my hand.

Having experience with Ruger since they began, with Taurus for a long time, and with only second hand experience with BFR (couple friends have them), I take issue with Ruger having quality problems, especially if compared to Taurus. That said, I remember having to return one out of four Smith and Wessons during the horror days of Bangor Punta.
Mid size and large size Taurus revolvers have been relatively problem free during my last ten years in firearm sales. The only Rugers we've returned were for refinish or to repair customer screwups. I'd be perfectly happy with a Super Redhawk, a Raging Bull, or any of them. I think if I was going to upsize from my 29-2 or my Super Blackhawk, it would be with a Redhawk. Also, six inch or longer. Just my opinions based on a lot of sales, feedback.

I'd go BFR for single action, Redhawk for double action.

If you feel Ruger QC is lacking, Taurus probably isn't for you either.

If you feel like you can heft the weight, the Smith X frames shoot real well especially when you're using less than their full capabilities. My 3" 500mag was real easy to shoot, considering I was lobing 560 grainers around 1100-1200 FPS.

Colt451871 said:

fair enough. correct me if i'm wrong but doesn't it also come in 7 and 1/2 inch barrel too?

Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, a 2" size Alaskan is easier to pack along.
2", 5", 7.5" and 9.5" I believe.

[QUOTE="gotboostvr, post:
If you feel like you can heft the weight, the Smith X frames shoot real well especially when you're using less than their full capabilities. My 3" 500mag was real easy to shoot, considering I was lobing 560 grainers around 1100-1200 FPS.[/QUOTE]

It's just me, but for the size and weight of the X frame guns, I personally would rather have a rifle. Ruger SRH are large and heavy enough.

I had a 454 raging bull, and it was a really good revolver. Suprised me actually. But if I was doing this (and I really, really want to) I would be looking at the BFR if the budget could handle it. Next would be a bisley frame super blackhawk, followed by a super Redhawk. I don't think I'd roll the dice again on a Taurus in this class of handgun. Imean, you have to look at it, and be seen with it right? Who wants an ugly handgun for that much money...

KnightHawk said:

Just never been a fan of the 454. Even more so for the 460 and 500 S&W Magnums. You might as well carry a short 45-70 rifle.

Click to expand...

But a .460 in a revolver will handily outpace a standard pressure .45/70 rifle....it’s all that.

I really like the look of the Bisley Ruger Lipseys .454 Super Blackhawk. I have not pulled the trigger on it yet because I am considering a BFR. Im trying to find a .454 BFR used. I know, I can wait.

.460 would really be cool....in a long gun. The thing that turns me off about them is the ginormous Xframe revolver but I know you need that big of a gun to control the round. Its just not for me I guess. I would buy one if I found one for around $750.

The BFR is a good choice and I would get it in either 454 Casull or .460 S&W Magnum.

If you weren't asking about the 454 Casull I would have suggested the .475 Linebaugh instead.

earlthegoat2 said:

I really like the look of the Bisley Ruger Lipseys .454 Super Blackhawk. I have not pulled the trigger on it yet because I am considering a BFR. Im trying to find a .454 BFR used. I know, I can wait.

.460 would really be cool....in a long gun. The thing that turns me off about them is the ginormous Xframe revolver but I know you need that big of a gun to control the round. Its just not for me I guess. I would buy one if I found one for around $750.

Click to expand...

I did jury testing for Ruger on the .454 Super Blackhawks, and think you will be much better served with a BFR in .454. I think the .454 Bisley makes a better .45 Colt +P revolver than a .454. That’s a lot of cartridge for the platform.

I recommend firing one, the handguns that operate at over 60,000 PSI are not enjoyable and transmit some of the vibrations right into the bones of your hand and forearm. In addition to having some strong recoil. Your hands, forearms, to your face feel the pressure wave.


The gun I find most appealing in that category is actually the S&W 460v performance center handgun. I find the trigger more enjoyable than other guns I think are still high quality in the category. And they look nicer in the models without the muzzle brake.
The 3 1/2" model handles, at least until you pull the trigger, like a 5" .357 GP100. I want one even though I know it makes little sense.
The 5" model looks classic with its dimensions and is about as long as I think is practical as a sidearm with the length of the cylinder added, and more appropriate than the 3 1/2" to at least have some velocity gains with the full 460 ammunition. However if you really want the power of a high velocity and high pressure round you benefit from the even longer barrels, like if actually planning to use factory 460 ammunition. At that point it is more of a compact primary arm you can carry on a sling or chest holster or a scabbard instead of a long gun than it is a sidearm. Easier to carry but harder to use than a rifle.
The look and feel of a super redhawk is nice, but the trigger on the S&W 460 feels as smooth as a smaller quality revolver and not like you are actually shooting a hand cannon with scaled up internals and resistance to being pulled.
It has had a recall though. Exploding barrels blamed on an aftermarket barrel maker. Imagine the barrel of a 65,000 PSI round exploding on you. I hope they survived and kept their hand.
Many that I see in gun stores also clearly show damage from the cylinder being closed roughly, and they sit in stores a long time and get checked out a lot.

The cylinder gap on those things can also cut your fingers off. It is not the singe or burn of a .357 or .44 magnum. You will not get to make that mistake more than once. It can even do serious damage to your forearm, torso, or leg if fired in close proximity from retention. That is one of the scariest things with this level of power in a revolver. Holding it like many hold an auto pistol can cause some people to cut off the tip of their thumb. The cylinder gap cuts things nearby for some inches. It is dangerous for 180 degrees. The barrel ahead at 12, and between the 8-10 and 2-4 o'clock position from the cylinder gap for some inches.



You will also destroy your hearing with these calibers without hearing protection. Yes most things might do some damage, but a full mag of those on a bear and you will probably suffer from tinnitus. They are worse than most rifles, having similar max pressures to many rifles, but short barrels and cylinder gaps that put you closer to the peak pressure, while on a rifle it has gone down tens of thousands of PSI before coming out the end of the gun. Many of the handgun models have a muzzle brake or compensator to insure that gas is directed closer to you and the sound waves will be bouncing back from anything to your sides.

I went through this process. I shot the Ruger SBH, Alaskan, Smith 460.
The 460 was too big. I mean the others are big, but it was ridiculous. I might still get one, because, well, .460. The Taurus Grips suck up recoil very well. It was just smoother and faster to shoot.

I like the sights, fully adjustable and good for me. I definitely do not regret it.

To give you an idea of scale, here is my Raging Bull .454 next to my 686. They are not tiny, but I am 6'5" so I am not exactly tiny either.

Oh one other thing. This type of revolver requires much more responsibility and added risk. You said you just want it to goof around as a range toy. They may not go further than many rifles, but they are close and a much smaller twist of the wrist puts their barrel over the horizon, and quick firing under the recoil can easily and unintentionally send rounds a long way beyond a backstop that pose a danger well beyond most handguns to bystanders. Practice safely.

So in addition to being more dangerous to you as I described earlier, it is more dangerous to others too. It is a rifle without a stock, limited grip, and you cannot hold it anywhere ahead of the cylinder gap without severe injuries. A disciplined hunter's weapon, not a fun plinker. Backpacking as a hunter is where such a thing excels. But mainly as an offensive weapon as the report is so damaging to your ears without hearing protection that I would rather defend myself with many other choices. There is no place better to appreciate good hearing than in the wilderness, whether to explore and appreciate the best environment our planet has to offer, or to hunt as a predator and keep from being prey.

You can however download them to whatever you want, and unlike an auto they will cycle on anything. So they become extremely versatile. A handloader's dream (as long as barrels that even explode on factory ammo are not maiming you). You can essentially choose your power, and with an upper level limit like that you can choose what you want. That brass designed to withstand 65,000 PSI force and protected by the cylinder walls of the revolver will also last forever at lower pressures if you anneal it and treat it well.
Of course if you download them too much you would have been served as well by a lighter gun, but hey it should last forever if built to last a long time with the full house rounds like they are from the quality manufacturers.
Flame cutting of the backstrap is going to be a primary concern if you actually use a lot of the hotter rounds.

Ruger Super Blackhawk in .454 Casull