Anything larger than .454 Casull in 6-shooters?

I would not buy one of the pre-production Rugers in .480 with 6-shots...From the reason they gave alone on why they stopped production is enough to scare me. I think I'll just stick with .44 Magnum.

Click to expand...

It just goes to show how much people know. The reason Ruger stopped producing the 480 Ruger was not because of problems, but lack of sales. It was a business decision.

I wish people would do some research before posting misinformation.

Sorry, I got the party late.
Once upon a time there were huge 6 shot revolvers made by Century MFG.
They made big 6 shot revolvers in 45-70, .444 Marlin and even a 50-70.
There was rumors a while back about the name being bought and production was to start up again, but I have not heard anything lately.
The Century model shown (bottom) is a 6 shot in 50-70 Government as compared to the little 5 shot 500 magnum S&W above.



Jeff (GUNKWAZY)

ChCx2744, the 454 Casull runs at a much higher pressure than the 480 Ruger. Ruger is still making 6 shot 454 Casull's. The problem with the 480 Ruger was, lack of sales. The made a business decision based on simple economics. I phone call to Ruger could clear this up for you.

As far as the stuck cases, the 454 Casull had the same issues.

But if you find the article, please post it.

Century sold the rights to Super Six Ltd, who still makes the Bison Bull Super Six to this day:

www.bisonbull.com

I found the Ruger sight eight+ years ago to answer the question of why some Hornady and MagTech .454s stuck in my early-production 7.5" .454 SRH. That Ruger SRH was bought because of the engineering report I read re it's design and machining. It's SS, and the .480 Ruger, is a NASA offshoot, not the similar to 4140 castings used in the .44 SRH. The .454 SRH was tested to 120kpsi+. I didn't investigate the .480 Ruger variant - it didn't interest me - then. Oh yeah, the sticking cases - Hornady admitted to using softer brass - easier to subsequently resize. They would replace the '99 and '00 lots with good hard brass - and I never had another stick. Later MagTechs were better, too. The RMS roughness of that .454 SRH's as-delivered chambers was uncannily low - as mirror like as a S&W. The only Ruger I sold - and missed.

The Alaskan short barrel SRH's arrived. After shooting the .454 - then the .480 Ruger - I had to have the latter. That first run was it. They announced a later run of it and the long .480 SRHs - in 5-shot. They may have gone to 4140 - or something similar. Anyway, no .475 Linebaugh-Special, aka .480 Ruger, here - I have never even seen a 5-shot.

Now - about math. My favorite .454 Casull round was the Hornady 240gr XTP - which I chrono-ed at 1.995 kfps - that hits 2130 ft-lb. The .460 Round - 200gr at 2.3 kfps - is nearly 10% higher - but that's it. The promises of a gain-twist rifling getting 2.6+ kfps just couldn't be realized. If I wanted more oomph than a .454, I'd go to the S&W .500 Magnum. Of course, as I near 61 years, I am enjoying 'smaller' pleasures, my last revolver being a 617 (.22 LR).

Still... if I found an Alaskan in .480 Ruger, I'd be tempted... I think it is a far better addition to our revolver world than the .327 Magnum Ruger co-authored... but what do I know... I thought Edsels were neat!

Stainz

........always amazes me how virtually every question turns into a caliber "war" or a "my gun is better than your gun" regardless of what the original post was.


I believe Kind of Blued answer the original question correctly in reply #6.

I don't see where this is a mine is better then your's thread.

Hell I own every caliber talked about here.

I think everyone of most knows why large calibers in revolvers are held to 5 shots. Cylinder space and strength. It is that simple.

My problem with the .480 is that it doesn't provide the feature I want.

The .475 bore kills ready access to cheap bulk cast lead bullets for general shooting. That makes it less desirable to people like me who want to be able to shoot mostly cheapish light loads and still have the option of high power at need.

Regarding the original question: I wonder how much that 6th chamber worth in real use? Not much for me.

I never bought a big bore caliber handgun to shoot light loads. I bought big bore handguns to hunt with. If I want to shoot light loads, I shoot my 357 Mag.

Why not hunt with the .357? Many do as far as I can tell.

Because I find the 357 Mag marginal at best for deer. Sure it will kill a deer, but as long as shots are under 30 yards.

I am not going to get into a debate as to why I feel this way, but that is how I feel about the 357 Mag. Plus I like bigger holes in the animals I hunt.

Last thing I want to do is shoot a black bear with a 357 Mag, and have to track it in the dark not knowing if the bullet did the job, when I know if I shoot it with a larger bore bullet, I can expect more damage. And I am not saying shot placement does not matter, because I believe, no matter what you are using, shot placement is key.

It all comes down to personal preference.

That last line is what I was fishing for. I was worried for a second that you wouldn't include it.

My personal preference for pistol plinking is moderate weight (250ish grain) subsonic loads....but if I can use the same gun to nudge something with over 1500 ft-lbs of impact energy... hey, I'm not going to say no.

I think a lot more people shoot guns for fun than hunt with them. I could be wrong but assuming I'm not... the 480 ruger, because it doesn't offer the load options and has no "gateway" cartridge anyone is likely to fire, seems like a really hard sell.

Sure I like to just shoot my handguns, but I got my big bore handguns for hunting. If I want to just plink, I will grab one of my .22 LR handguns.

As for your comment on the 480 Ruger, if you want to shoot light loads, reload.

As for your gateway cartridge, what are you referring to, a lighter round that can be used, such as the 38 in a 357 Mag?

I don't buy big caliber handgun with the intent on using a special or lighter loads in it.

Once upon a time there were huge 6 shot revolvers made by Century MFG.
They made big 6 shot revolvers in 45-70, .444 Marlin and even a 50-70.
There was rumors a while back about the name being bought and production was to start up again, but I have not heard anything lately.

Click to expand...

That's true. A friend of mine is a partner in that company. They're not quite to the production point yet, but they're working on it. He's a member here, I'll link him to the thread and see if he has anything to say.

Here's a picture of one of their prototypes in .45-70 next to my 629. The .45-70 is actually a softer shooter, but that square trigger guard will get you.

Sure I like to just shoot my handguns, but I got my big bore handguns for hunting. If I want to just plink, I will grab one of my .22 LR handguns.

As for your comment on the 480 Ruger, if you want to shoot light loads, reload.

As for your gateway cartridge, what are you referring to, a lighter round that can be used, such as the 38 in a 357 Mag?

I don't buy big caliber handgun with the intent on using a special or lighter loads in it.

Click to expand...

Umm... okay....

"Reload"? You miss the point. .475 bullets cost $0.186 each (and average around $0.50 each). .45 are pretty commonly around $0.125. Everything else will cost more for the .475. The price difference is basically the fact that the .454 shooter can ride the coattails of far more popular rounds to cheap shooting. Not a big deal for you? I bet you don't buy the $0.186/ea bullets either. Individuals differ.

Gateway cartridge: popular cartridge which creates a market for a magnum version appealing to shooters who say, "it's like buying another of what I already have/like/have ammo and components for, but more." Examples: .38 special, .32 H&R (arguably .32S&W), .44 special, .45 colt. .480 Ruger does not have one.

I wasn't trying to tell you why YOU used something. I was pretty sure I meant "me" to refer to, well, me from my perspective.

Ruger's .454 six shooter is more than strong enough, as I recall they proof test the loads at 90,000psi, the .454's max saami pressure a "puny" 65,000psi ain't gonna hurt that gun. Heard of issues in the Taurus's though. I don't deny that the 460 has more oompth but it ain't by much unless factory loads are just too light. As long as that case is I figured they could hit that 2500fps threshold. I can zing a 240gr xtp out at 2000fps in my Ruger but that's as far as I'll push it!

Century sold the rights to Super Six Ltd, who still makes the Bison Bull Super Six to this day:

www.bisonbull.com

Click to expand...

The Super Six Ltd line of .45-70 revolvers comes from the fact that the original owners of Century MFG, the company that made the original .45-70 revolvers in Evansville, IN, had a "falling-out" and split companies. One owner stayed in Evansville and continued making .45-70 and other caliber revolvers under the Century MFG name while the other owner left and possibly sold the rights to Super Six Ltd. I am not sure of the Super Six Ltd history, as I am only familiar with the company records from Century Mfg, which was bought and moved to Greenfield, IN by a Dr. Paul Majors, then was bought and moved to Knightstown, IN. It was again bought and moved back to Greenfield where the name was changed to New Century MFG and is currently in pre-production due to a design change. The new design will implement a transfer-bar safety instead of the original cross-bolt safety, as the Super Six Ltd still uses. Production dates are still undetermined. The first batch of production revolvers will be chambered in .45-70, with more options developing later.

All previous Century Mfg revolvers, maybe except for the ones chambered in more exotic calibers, were 6 shooters, to the best of my knowledge.

Main innate advantage of 5 shot, AFAIK, is the cylinder stop grooves can be offset further from the chamber. If you look at a typical 6-shot cylinder the cylinder stop cutouts are basically aligned with the chambers. 5 shots almost put those cutouts between the chambers.

That means even if the chamber walls can be of more uniform thickness without really bulking up the cylinder.