460 Rowland

[Takem406]

I need a side arm for the Montana back country. I don't want to get into a "what's a better caliber for griz debate", because let's face it a tank is the obvious choice followed by a very large caliber rifle.

So I was looking at a 10mm and a 44. But this Rowland seems to bridge the gap.
I see you can get Rowland Glock barrels which would be nice for this Glock fan boy. Or I could get a deal on a Remington 1911...

I was just wondering how hard that round is on say a Glock or even a 1911. And how reliability is. I hate messing with recoil springs and guide rods.

But the Rowland has double the energy if a 10 and is in that 44 special range.

I'll probably get a Smith 69. Just looking at options.
Thanks boys

 

[gotboostvr]

As an unabashed SW wheel gun fan boy, you can't go wrong with the Smith M69.

The 460 rowland is a heckuva cartridge for sure though! I've got a norinco "model of the 1911" I've been considering coverting, but haven't because I've got a 629 that can handle anything I need in that power range.

 

[m0par]

Just my 2¢... and even that's likely overestimating the value.

If you're seriously needing to depend upon the firearm and you want a 460 Rowland, I'd go with a Wilson Hunter. $$$$ though, and you'll still want to put plenty of rounds of your chosen carry ammo through it to make sure it is dependable.

Next cheapest option would be having a competent smith do a conversion. I would consider a ramped barrel mandatory too.

I would not suggest a drop-in kit for anything but a range toy or a hunting pistol where defense is not a concern.

I know nothing about the glock barrels/conversions, but I don't like the standard, non-ramped 1911 conversion barrels. I had one and brass came out looking like 40S&W glock-guppy'd brass. Not confidence inspiring when doubling the chamber pressure of standard 45ACP.

 

[Takem406]

Thanks guys. Yeah that 69 seems like the best bet between power and being able to carry it. My father inlaw lent me his Ruger Redhawk and I'd almost buy it from him but the thing is just so darn heavy. I looked at the 41 mag or a 454 but still can't beat the 69 44 for weight.

 

[gotboostvr]

If you're real intrested in your power to weight ratio, look into the S&W 329. Scandium framed 44 mag on the N frame with a 4" barrel.
20 something ounces and full bore 44mag ammo sounds like a great "carry often, shoot little" type packing gun

 

[Takem406]

One shot off before the bear gets you kinda recoil?

 

[gotboostvr]

Shouldn't be that bad, especially if you're utilizing the over sized X frame grips. Makes shooting much more pleasant.
You're not gonna be seeing Jerry Miculek type split times for sure though

 

[eldon519]

What are you planning to do in Montana and for how long? If it is just a short trip or vacation, I'd either deal with the Redhawk or go with whatever is the cheapest option (like a Rowland barrel). If you just wanna buy something, keep an eye towards longterm use. A 329 would be great if this was a regular thing like you'd become a logger or something, but if it's just a short trip, I'd rather have something heavier like the 69 that might suck a little more to carry but in the long run would be a more enjoyable range gun.

I have a 69 and like it alot. Really not too bad with the X-frame grip, even with 300s. I think the 329 is a whole different animal. Paul105 would be the person to talk to if you are between those two models.

 

[Thompsoncustom]

I really like my S&W 500 6.5in for putting down anything and everything, I really don't find it bad to carry.

But I think my next choice would also be a 460 Rowland on a 1911. The right compensator, springs, flat firing pin stop, buffers and what not the recoil should be more than manageable and probably pretty pleasant to shoot.

 

[SHOOT1SAM]

Not sure it they still make them, but my buddy carries a Ruger Super (?) RedHawk Alaskan in .454 Casull. 2.5" barrel, light enough to comfortably carry, the power of the .454, and surprisingly accurate for such a short-barreled revolver.

Sam

 

[justin22885]

just be warned with the rowland you are significantly increasing the bolt thrust of the cartridge fired, heavier springs and a compensator do very little to negate this.. your frame is going to take a hell of a beating, thats why it should never be done on weaker framed pistols like those made of aluminum and i have my doubts that the steel reinforcements in a glock are significant enough to last very long

i would get something like a ruger redhawk in 45 colt which you can load up to beyond 44 magnum levels of energy.. might even be able to get some moon clips to allow you to chop down .308 brass to make ammo for dirt cheap

 

[gotboostvr]

Justin, that's a great suggestion. I forgot that was possible to chop 308 win brass for 460 level loads.
You do typically have to inside turn the mouth of the brass due to the thickness of the base of the 308 brass.

 

[Thompsoncustom]

I've always wondered with a conversion like this why not run a heavier hammer spring and a flat firing pin stop?