Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Help me pick a Magnum

Discussion in 'Handguns: Revolvers' started by imas, Sep 6, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. imas

    imas Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Messages:
    232
    Ok I have been thinking of buying some wheel guns but which one should I buy first?

    - S&W 44Mag AirLite with a 4in barrel
    OR
    - S&W 500Mag with the 4in barrel

    I just don't have any really powerful handguns and its time to get one. I'm leaning towards the 44 because of weight and size but the ballistics on the 500 are amazing. The 500 would be much more effective against large animals. But many think the 44 would be enough. I suppose I will buy them both eventually anyway.

    Pricing is very close so it is a non issue. Since I don't plan on shooting it alot ammo prices won't be a big deal either.
     
    Last edited: Sep 6, 2005
  2. Buck Snort

    Buck Snort Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    1,171
    Location:
    N. CA.
    You didn't say what you'd be using the gun for but I'm really skeptical of this idea of making bigbore handguns in "light" formats. If you'll only be shooting it occasionally then PERHAPS a light bigbore can be justified but it just does not make any sense to me. My 44 mag Anaconda with a 6" barrel weighs about 56 OZ and the recoil with heavy loads is manageable. I can't imagine using those same loads in a lightweight gun.
     
  3. 04SilverSCFX4

    04SilverSCFX4 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    90
    Location:
    TX
    I'd go with the 500 magnum for concealed carry. The 44mag is a great purse gun for the wife. Good luck!

    PS, make sure you don't get short-changed and get the sling. :D
     
  4. Black Majik

    Black Majik Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2003
    Messages:
    5,031
    Location:
    Orange County, California
    I big thing to consider now ammo costs. The cost to shoot the .500 S&W cartridge is considerably more expensive than the .44 magnum.

    Plus, what are the needs for the gun? Hunting? Range fun? umm... CCW? :D

    Honestly I'd say go with the .44 magnum first. It'll be shot more, and its powerful enough for most applications. Next, I'd suggest something not so lightweight. Look into either a 629 Mountain gun or a older Model 29.
     
  5. fisherman66

    fisherman66 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2005
    Messages:
    379
    460

    Quick Look: the S&W .460 Magnum

    By Chuck Hawks

    Smith & Wesson has done the obvious by introducing a .45 caliber cartridge for their X-Frame 5-shot revolver. Hornady and Cor-Bon did the cartridge and load development.

    The new cartridge is a lengthened version of the .454 Casull, itself a lengthened version of the .45 Long Colt. So both of those cartridges can be fired in a revolver chambered for the .460 Magnum.

    The basic dimensions of the new .460 Magnum are as follows: bullet diameter .454", rim diameter .520", case diameter .478", overall case length 1.800", cartridge overall length (COL) 2.300". The official SAAMI maximum average pressure (MAP) is 65,000 psi!

    The .460's COL is too long to permit the cartridge to be chambered in existing Colt, Freedom Arms, Ruger, and Taurus revolvers, so its popularity is automatically limited to those consumers with memories so short that they are willing to do business with Smith & Wesson.

    Forsaking all common sense, which would indicate the heaviest pistol bullets available in the caliber for such a large case, the basic factory specifications call for a 200 grain bullet at a MV of 2330 fps and ME of 2400 ft. lbs. A 200 grain bullet in such a big case is just about the poorest possible choice for what is, realistically, a moose and elk gun.

    Fortunately, there are many heavier and more suitable hunting bullets from Hornady, Speer, Sierra, Nosler, and Barnes available to the reloader. .460 reloading information is basically impossible to come by at this writing, but Hodgdon data shows that the .454 Casull cartridge can launch a 300 grain bullet at about MV of over 1700 fps with a MAP of around 53,000 cup. I would estimate that the .460 Magnum could exceed that velocity by about 100 fps. That would be the kind of load that makes sense when using the .460 Mag. for hunting the largest North American antlered game.
     
  6. rick_reno

    rick_reno member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    3,027
    If size is important, look at the Ruger Alaskan. It's not a "magnum", but few would argue that the .454 or .480 puts in the class with magnums. 2 1/4 inch barrel. I looked at the S&W, it's size (length, weight) is too much for me to want to lug around.
     
  7. Technosavant

    Technosavant Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Messages:
    2,011
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    You are wanting a S&W 329 for range use?

    You say you won't be shooting it much; that's for dang sure. I have a pre-29 4" .44 magnum, and that thing just isn't pleasant to shoot for any length of time. The lightweight flavors have gotta leave a welt. Those are for backpacking- enough punch for large carnivores, but light enough to carry. For range use, get something heavier to tame the recoil.

    Do you reload? If yes, then I would probably lean towards the .500 S&W. If not, keep in mind what the ammo prices will be. .44 Magnum isn't cheap, but it is nowhere near the price of the .500 S&W.
     
  8. fisherman66

    fisherman66 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2005
    Messages:
    379
    I reread the original post. This will be your first revolver?

    357 mag all the way.

    Why do you want a 500?
     
  9. 22-rimfire

    22-rimfire Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Messages:
    11,450
    Location:
    TN
    Unless you are just looking for the ocassional thrill of shooting a big magnum like the 500, I would start with a 357. Plenty of power and has the flexibility to shoot 38spl's through it. Step up to the 500 or 460 later. Prices are coming down on the 500's and the same should happen to the 460's in about a year or so.

    Frankly, not everyone can shoot one of the big magnums well. I am partial to the 41 magnum, but the recoil is medium stout in that. The S&W Model 57 or 657 are very sweet shooting guns. Skip the light weight magnums unless you have a lot of experience. Otherwise, you'll just sell it or toss it in a drawer and forget about it except to show your friends about the BIG magnum that you have.

    I also have a 480 Ruger SRH which has considerably more recoil. I shoot and I have trouble with the 480 after about 3 or 4 cylinder fulls of shooting. I can't honestly say the 480 is close to pleasant to shoot.

    The 500 is more unpleasant to shoot in large weight bullets. But, I have shot one with the long barrel (preformance center piece) and they shoot very nicely and the recoil didn't seem any worse than my 480. In case you don't know, the higher the bullet weight, the more recoil.
     
  10. MachIVshooter

    MachIVshooter Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,651
    Location:
    Elbert County, CO
    The ballistics you read are for the 8-3/8" model. In the 4" (actually 3" + compensator) these numbers suffer quite a bit. The 2,600 FPE generated form the full length gun will drop to around 1,700 FPE from the short barrel. That drops it to the level of .454 Casull fired from a 5" tube.

    The Ruger SRH Alaskan will still give you 1,200-1,300 FPE with stiff loads from a 6 round gun that is considerably smaller and lighter than the .500 4". And save you about $400 on the gun and $1 per cartridge.0

    IMO, the .500 S&W cartridge needs at least 6" of barrel to generate enough performance to make such a large gun feasible. The 4" model is a pecker extension.
     
  11. imas

    imas Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Messages:
    232
    No it won't be my first revolver. By first I mean I don't have a 454, 44, or any other powerful handguns.

    I am looking for a good back up for large game hunting and a good gun for remote areas. It won't be a range gun. It will be my wilderness gun and will likely never be needed. Bear attacks are few and far between. Also when hunting the rifle should do the job the first time. This is just a last chance blaster.

    Again the ammo cost means nothing. I'll put some rounds through it occasionally for function testing but thats it. I don't reload.

    I'm guessing that out of a 4in barrel the 500 is going to be more effective than the 44. But I like the weight and feel of the 44 better.

    It will not be used as a pecker extension or for concealed carry. I normally carry a 9mm but I don't think that will be the best choice for bear.
     
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2005
  12. Majic

    Majic Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2003
    Messages:
    5,370
    Location:
    Virginia
    Instead of just using your imagination I think you should experience shooting your choices. There will be a world of difference between a 9mm and a lightweight .44 magnum or .500 S&W. Those are handguns of seasoned magnum shooters not someone new to big bore magnums.
     
  13. imas

    imas Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Messages:
    232
    So what should a pansy like me use for bear?
     
  14. rick_reno

    rick_reno member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    3,027
    What kind of bear? Black bear, a .357 will work - brown bear, something bigger. You're choice, there are a lot of them to choose from.
     
  15. imas

    imas Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Messages:
    232
    I have a GP-100 and I would like to have something a little larger than a 357 when I have a 1500 pound moose bearing down on me.

    If you think a 44 Magnum is too much for me what then shall I buy?
     
  16. Stainz

    Stainz Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Messages:
    3,117
    Location:
    Pinson, AL
    After my share of .45 ACP evil bottom feeders, I 'discovered' the purity of the 'round gun'. Then, after a few SA Ruger .45 Colts, I added my first DA - a .454 SRH. I survived - quite well, actually, as it's ergonomics are super. I would think a Ruger .454 SRH 'Alaskan' would do just fine for your application. You could carry the 200gr 1,100 fps .45 Colt Gold Dots from GA Arms for thin skins - some real .454's for thick. I've shot a friend's both ways - it does have a significant muzzle rise under recoil, predictable considering they all but forgot to put a barrel on it. Expect a huge muzzle and b/c flash.

    Now... if you want a .44 Magnum, I'd avoid the 329... because of it's Ti cylinder. I have one - in my .44 Special Airweight 296 - and wish it was SS. A very easily carried .44 Magnum is once again available from S&W - their 629 Mountain Gun. It weighs nearly 50% more than the 329 - some 39.5oz. It has a 4" tapered tube, partial lug, and chamfered cylinder - all in bright SS. Change the grips to the backstrap-enclosing .500 Magnum style, available from S&W, and you have a real .44 Magnum. Mine so equipped still has some predictable muzzle rise, but it is easily shot with real Magnums.

    I haven't shot the .500 Magnum... somehow, that 3" (plus comp) variant is alluring...

    Stainz
     
  17. Majic

    Majic Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2003
    Messages:
    5,370
    Location:
    Virginia
    I'm not saying the .44 mag will be too much gun for you, just that your choice of the light weight model may be a problem. While most shooters can handle the recoil in a 50 oz revolver (6" N-frame), cut the weight in half and it turns into a real beast.
     
  18. casual

    casual Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2003
    Messages:
    69
    Location:
    chicago area
    i agree with the gentlemen recommending the 629 Mountain Gun for your stated purposes

    i don't do a lot of backpacking (so weight is not an issue for me), but the idea of regularly shooting a Airlite .44 mag doesn't appeal to me


    casual
     
  19. imas

    imas Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Messages:
    232
    Well I think you guys have me sold on a Super Redhawk in 454. But for now I think I'm probably going to buy a smith 629 Mountain Gun.
     
  20. RyanM

    RyanM Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,412
    Location:
    PA
  21. fisherman66

    fisherman66 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2005
    Messages:
    379
    imas, the 454 is nice "no mas" the 460 will shoot 454 and give you the room to grow or shoot 45lc which is no pansy round itself. Little extra heft is good on the big boys.
     
  22. Strongbad

    Strongbad Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2005
    Messages:
    692
    Location:
    Austin, Tx
    Imas, this may be a little late in the game but I thought I'd mention it anyway.

    As the other fellows mentioned, the 500 or 460 S&W's are probably going to be overkill. You don't know how hard it is for me to say that since I own a 500 but... :)

    However! If you want one of those big pistols then get one! Yes they're a handful, but if you want one of those babies then do this... get the 460 and then shoot either 454 ammo or 45 colt through it! That'll solve your expensive ammo problem and you could work into the 460 loads gradually, then if in the future you wanted to step up to full 460 loads, you'd be good to go! Since the 460 isn't currently available in the 4" model like the 500 you could get the 460 with a 6 1/2 inch barrel. That way you've still got decent barrel length but you don't have the cumbersome longer barrel of the 8" model like mine. Anyway, I guess it all depends on how much you want to spend since the 460's and 500's, especially the PC models aren't cheap. If I wasn't getting the 460, then I wouldn't bother with the 454. I'd just go straight to 44. At that point you can take your pick of the gazillion 44 mag revolvers out there. :)

    Anyway, I hope this helps. Good luck. Let us know what you pick.
     
  23. 22-rimfire

    22-rimfire Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Messages:
    11,450
    Location:
    TN
    629 Mountain Gun... excellent choice. I like the Model 57 Mountain Gun (have one) and it would also be very suited for your purposes. We didn't know that you had experience with any of the magnum revolvers which is why I suggested the 357. I also have a GP100 (3") which I like but it certainly isn't a colt or a Smith.
     
  24. imas

    imas Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Messages:
    232
    I guess I don't consider the 357 to be in the same league with the 44mag and 454.

    I made up my mind I'm going to buy the Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan AND the S&W 629 Mountain Gun.

    Since I'm getting ready to start reloading it will be fun to work up some hot 45 Colts for the Alaskan. I think I'm also going to buy a full size Super Redhawk in a couple months.

    Thanks I've never heard of the Alaskan before this. :D
     
  25. Marshall

    Marshall Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    5,569
    Location:
    Oklahoma, Green Country
    Go feel a .44Mag Ruger Redhawk in 5 1/2" and 7 1/2". Try it with Hogue rubber and you're set. Great feel, not too heavy, handles the kick very well and is a strong and accurate gun!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page