New Revolver?

[CarolinaJack88]

I'm thinking my next gun purchase is probably going to be some kind of "big" revolver. It'll mostly be for personal enjoyment and shooting (when I have the money) but possibly protection for hiking (I live in black bear country) where I can't or am not able to carry my shotgun.

I have been thinking a 44 Mag with around a six inch barrel. Definitely no snubby or anything like that. I am ruling out the .357 because I don't feel like its as big of a caliber as I want. I am wondering if there is anything I would be missing in the larger calibers like the .454, .460, .500 magnum? It doesnt seem like these guns are ultra common and surely the ammo is worth its weight in gold but that isnt really the issue. I am just looking for any missed benefits with rounds more powerful than the .44 mag.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Depends on what you're doing with it. The advantages to more power are directly related to it's intended use.

I have a .454 in a Ruger SRH. It's a big, heavy revolver that I hate carrying. Lots of recoil and flash, kinda fun at times, but it doesn't come out very often. And it's expensive to feed, even when you reload.

.460 and .500 are those things and more. The X-frame is a gigantic gun, and you won't find loaded ammo for less than $1.50/round, as high as $4.50.

.44, OTOH, will come in a lighter, more ergonomic package and ammunition can still be had for ~$35/box of 50. If you want to take it up a notch, Buffalo bore offers some sledgehammer loads.

If I had to choose between my SRH .454 and my S&W 629 .44 Mag., I'd be saying farewell to the Ruger without thinking twice.

 

[oldfool]

if truly serious about big bore revolvers, you ought hunt up some threads here including members like Prosser, Craig C, BCrider et. al., genuine expertise based on a wealth of experience to be had
(your thread title is just not a real eye catcher re: BIG bores)

but if merely curious and unfamiliar with the nature of the beasts, MachIV is on target, Consider a 44 mag or 45 LC, both can do a whole lot of BIG, and can be quite versatile; enough boom-n-bang for most folks, and more than enough for many. Even Dirty Harry "settled" for 44 special (and blackie ain't brownie)

 

[StrawHat]

I went through a "Magnumitis" stage. I used and carried a 44 Magnum for hunting and hiking. A 6" S&W, and while the lightest of the then available 44s it was still a long revolver to carry. After several years hunting with it, I learned the 45 long Colt loaded to the original ballistics was a lot of fun to use, easier to carry and all I needed for hunting and protection. Eventually, I built a 4" barreled N frame chambered for the 45 ACP and load it to the same ballistics as the 45 long Colt, 260 grain Keith at 900 fps. Plenty of mass and energy to get the job done.

Good luck with your next purchase, wading through all the info and making a deceision is part of the fun.

 

[DM~]

I've been shooting and hunting with my S&W M-29's in 44 mag. since the 70's. It's a great choise, but you will need TON'S of practise to get good with one. Best part about the 44's is, you can load them down for practise and small game, then use near power loads for hunting.

DM

 

[Smaug]

CarolinaJack: Are you a handloader? That makes a difference.

I feel like .44 Magnum or .454 Casull would be the way to go. With either one, you can carry the hot loads for bear protection or big game hunting, or the lighter loads for shooting at the range or home protection or carry.

They are both prohibitively expensive for the non hand-loader. This is why so many folks go for .357 Magnum. I believe it is enough for black bear, with the right ammo. Heavier bullets that are not hollow point and the magnum powder charge are all that is needed. Black bear aren't that big. .38 Special is positively pleasant to shoot at the range.

 

[Smaug]

Just for reference, here are the ammo prices I recall:

.38 Special: $16
.357 Magnum: $25
.44 Magnum: $35
.44 Special: $35 (if you can find it)
.45 Colt: $38
.454 Casull: $40+

Handloading will easily cut those costs in half. The learning curve is pretty short, and I find it fun, too.

 

[Jonah71]

Even though I traded it, I did enjoy shooting the Ruger BH 45LC/acp Convertable. They can be had at a decent price. Test fire one if you get a chance. You may like it.

 

[Smaug]

Single action though for a defense gun? I'm not so sure that is a good idea. Double actions are much quicker.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Just for reference, here are the ammo prices I recall:

.38 Special: $16
.357 Magnum: $25
.44 Magnum: $35
.44 Special: $35 (if you can find it)
.45 Colt: $38
.454 Casull: $40+

The cheapest I've ever found loaded Casull is $28/box of 20. That'd be $70/50 rounds. It's barely cheaper than .460 S&W.

Handloading will save you money once you have the brass, which runs about $0.60/case.

Of course, if you do handload, you can run .45 Colt to .44 Mag level in a Casull Revolver.

 

[22-rimfire]

I have been thinking a 44 Mag with around a six inch barrel. Definitely no snubby or anything like that. I am ruling out the .357 because I don't feel like its as big of a caliber as I want. I am wondering if there is anything I would be missing in the larger calibers like the .454, .460, .500 magnum? It doesnt seem like these guns are ultra common and surely the ammo is worth its weight in gold but that isnt really the issue. I am just looking for any missed benefits with rounds more powerful than the .44 mag.

I think a 41 or 44 magnum is the revolver for you. I would choose a Smith & Wesson product-steel N-frame with a 4" or longer barrel. The 4" will be a lot easier to lug around out in the woods and works well at the range. The 6-6.5" barrel length is harder to carry in the field, but probably a little more pleasant to shoot at the range but not significantly so.

Are you missing something? Depends on your experience mostly and what you want out of the gun. But you'd be mostly missing a lot of un-necessary recoil for the most part and spending more money on ammunition relative to the 44 mag.

I don't claim to be an expert big bore shooter or have vast experience to draw from, but I do shoot a Ruger SRH in 480 Ruger and it's about all the bigger bore I have the tolerance for. The first time I shot the revolver, I ripped the web of my right hand and was pretty bloody after maybe 10 rounds. Sound fun? You missing something? I now wear a shooting glove when I shoot this revolver. It is possible to shoot it without causing hand damage, but the glove makes it easier.

Folks have magnumitis. I don't blame them really because in the back of my mind, I would still like to get a 4" S&W 500 revolver. But I know I won't shoot it much, so for the most part, I'm keeping that $1000 in my pocket. I would like to get a BFR in 475 Linebaugh/480 Ruger to feed the urge for that even bigger recoil experience at times. But it's pretty much un-necessary based on my use and likely future use.

My personal opinion is that if you have not shoot a 357 mag much, you don't want to go any bigger than a 44 mag revolver until you learn how to shoot the 44. I used to think the 357 mag had a lot of recoil and it took me a number of years to move larger. I simply didn't shoot the 357 mag because I could not see the benefit at the time. My favorite big bore is the 41 magnum in a Model 57 or 657 Smith. It gives me all the thrill I need and I shoot it well after some practice. The 480 SRH does not get shot much and when I do shoot it, it is primarily for practice for deer hunting. The 41 does everything I need without the recoil of the larger caliber. But I still would like to have a 500 S&W.... go figure. I know I won't shoot it much.

 

[Fred40]

I recently picked up my first revolver. A 6" S&W Model 57 .41 Magnum.

It's a ton of fun to shoot. I tried everything from 800fps cowboy loads to commercial Winchester 240gr platinum tipped hollow points at 1250fps.

Right now my favorite load is a 215gr LSWC over 15.5grs of 2400. Ton of fun and super accurate out to 100 yards.

I'm having a blast with this revolver and considering picking up a .41 lever action rifle and a 7.5" Ruger Blackhawk in .41.

You really have to reload when considering the .41 magnum though.

 

[BCRider]

Well, for shooting at the range we can tolerate a big gun because we know we're not carrying it around for long. But when hiking in the woods you KNOW that hunk o' iron on your hip or shoulder is going to feel ten time heavier by the end of the day. So for me "IF" I were allowed to carry a woods handgun where I live the choice would be a .44Mag for all the reasons already said. Yes it's a slight compromise but it's not as much of a gun that'll weigh you down by the end of the day. And then there's the aspect of all that adrenaline in an actual situation. I'd rather have a gun for such a time where I have practiced a lot and know how to draw and shoot that all important first shot decently well. After all the adrenaline is going to open up that group significantly.

SA or DA... that's a tougher question. If it were me I'd have to go with DA for two reasons.

For some reason of hand fit and natural grip I find that I naturally hold and shoot DA style guns very well and find that they have a natural pointing tendency. I've been using a Model 10 in some IDPA now for a bit over a month and my first shots off the draw are not too shabby and pretty much as good as my semi auto first shots off the draw. The SA style grips, on the other hand, are proving to be difficult to come to terms with. I'm learning, but I'm finding that the proper hold to avoid the rounds hitting well to the left is very, very different from my semis and DA revolvers. I've pretty much got it down pat now but the hold required is VERY different and I'll need to work on grabbing the gun the right way from the holster for my Cowboy Action shooting now. Now this is purely for me. It seems like a lot of folks don't have any problem at all with the SA grips and shooting straight. So it's one of those YMMV things and it would be nice to try out examples of both DA and SA guns before you leap in.

The second reason for me that I'd go with DA is the natural use of a DA pull in a bear or other big game attack situation. I'm getting pretty good at drawing, presenting and squeezing off the trigger all at the same time I'm extending the gun out and gaining the sights on target. But with my SA guns this process is not as clean. Mind you there's two reasons for that. One is thet I've chosen to shoot duelist style for my Cowboy Action shooting so only one hand is used to cock and shoot. Second is that now that I've ingrained the "finger along the frame" for IPSC and IDPA and general holster use at the range I'm loathe to side step this aspect and stick my finger into the SA revolver frame even though I know it's safe up until the hammer over the empty gets cocked. So I end up with some fumbling with my SA's off the draw since the grip to trigger guard is so closely spaced.

Of course lots of other folks can draw and shoot SA guns just fine. What you get and how you practice this counts for more than our opinions by a country mile. But if we can give you enough observations then at least you can be better informed to ask yourself the sort of questions that you need to ask.

Oldfool, I thankyou heartily for including me in with that list of "experts". But I've only been shooting for just less than 3 years. However I'm fortunate enough to have been able to assemble a fairly nice and widely diverse "arsenal" in that time and have buddies with lots of "fringe" guns such as .460's and .500's. Perhaps it's because I'm learning a lot and it's all still fresh in my mind that my posts come across as well informed. Often when I write something it's something I just learned or tried within the past month. I also try to be very analytical and observant in what I experience so I like to think that not much escapes my notice when I'm trying something out. And if my observations and experiences can help some others out then great.

I'm quickly finding that THR is my "go to first spot" for looking for new information. It's nice to find a forum such as this where so many experienced folks are willing to help out. So I feel like my own offerings are just giving back a little for all I've gotten.

 

[Water-Man]

Ruger Redhawk 5.5" barrel .44Mag.
Check out Garrett Ammo if you want something really hot.

 

[Smaug]

Of course, if you do handload, you can run .45 Colt to .44 Mag level in a Casull Revolver.

...and well BEYOND .44 Magnum. I seem to recall that .454 Casull has about double the muzzle energy of .44 Magnum.

That ol' Dick Casull was either shooting some BIG animals, or was shooting at much longer ranges. Or, he just wanted his name on a cartridge, hehehe.

 

[CarolinaJack88]

WOW. I never expected so much information so quickly!

I'm gathering that I won't really be losing anything with the difference in muzzle energy from the .44 and its bigger brothers, given my circumstances.

Also I'm gathering that this is one of those instances where you really do benefit financially from hand loading. I have researched that quite a bit lately, as well, and have been trying to determine whether it was right for me. I mostly shoot, right now, .45acp, 12 gauge and a bunch of .22lr (with these ammo prices, I assume .22 sales have gone up).

I think it seems safe to say that without experience in slightly larger bores and magnum loads, I might be getting myself in too deep with anything much bigger than a .44 mag.

I agree with some of you that I do WANT a .500 mag but I can be honest with myself and say that I probably won't shoot it that much. So for now, that's on the bottom of the list.

For the record, where I am at (western NC) black bears are relatively common but rarely dangerous. I know any good woodsman (not saying that I am) doesn't really need a gun to feel safe in the woods but I like to be prepared. I trust my .45 for a lot of things but stopping a pissed off mama bear isn't one of them.

I appreciate everything that everyone had to offer.

 

[CarolinaJack88]

I forgot to mention that for me, right now, DA is probably the way I will go. Nothing against the SAs out there but with the few amount of guns that I am able to currently buy, I have to think VERY hard and literally get the most bang for my buck.

 

[MachIVshooter]

and well BEYOND .44 Magnum. I seem to recall that .454 Casull has about double the muzzle energy of .44 Magnum

Two things:

One, .45 Colt brass can't handle Casull pressure levels or even hot .44 mag pressures. If you want more than 1,000 or so ft/lbs, use Casull brass.

Second, Casull data is often printed having used pressure barrels. 7.5" revolvers will top out around 1,700 ft/lbs. Heavy .44 Mag can hit 1,400 from the same barrel length. Casull is still more potent, but not double.

 

[olafhardtB]

new handgun

l think this is significant. During the recent ammo crisis l would check to see what the stores had. They all had 44 mag even when they were out of 22 lr. Other ubiquitous ammo included most shotgun, 22-250, 270,30-30 and 30-06. The 223,308, 45acp. 380, and 9mm were the first to go. We had a 45 colt super blackhawk and always had trouble finding ammo for it. If you want a real boomer you can get 44 mag at wally world. Any of the othets, you, may have to scratch arround.

 

[StrawHat]

MachIVshooter ... .45 Colt brass can't handle Casull pressure levels or even hot .44 mag pressures. If you want more than 1,000 or so ft/lbs, use Casull brass.

Dick Casull did all his reseach and load development using 45 long Colt brass. What has changed that makes it no longer acceptable?

The factories all make brass the same, they do not specifically make 45 brass weaker, section some brass sometime. The heads are the same on 44 and 45 as well as the other magnum cartridges.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

IMHO, if black bear are all you will be worried about, then a .44 is probably just fine. If you will regularly be hiking in grizzly territory, you may want to consider a .454 or larger.

That being said, when I chose to by a big bore revolver, I went with a 5” 460 S&W. It is a large (almost 4 lbs.) gun, but loads of fun to shoot. .45LC feels like .22’s in that gun, and the added bonus of being able to shoot .454 and 460 out of it is wonderfully versatile. The ammo costs are rather excessive though as others have stated. I have saved every bit of brass I can for it, and can’t wait to start reloading .45 cal ammo. It should be fun to develop some interesting loads.

The weight of the gun doesn’t bother me, but I am a large man. (6’3”, 210lbs.) I carry it cross draw, on the hip, in a Desantes holster. If you aren’t a bigger guy, this may get a little annoyingly heavy. Also, I have only ever carried it for day hikes where I’m not carrying much else but a snack or two, and some water. I’ve never gone backpacking or camping with it. I suspect carrying this gun for more than a day at a time would get a little bothersome. I hope this helps.

One other note. As others have stated, when ammo demand is high, .45 cal ammo gets really hard to come by. I usually patrol the local stores, and when I find a decent deal on .45 LC, .454 Casull, or 460 S&W, I usually end up buying at least $100 worth. It's usually more like $150 - $200. This seems to be the only way I can keep some in my stock so I can shoot it whenever I want. If you aren't prepared for that kind of ammo purchasing, (unexpected binge buying) the .44 may be a better way to go.

 

[Smaug]

I don't get the concern on brass strength either. In a revolver especially, it is the cylinder that controls the pressure. Only the back of the case is unsupported. Are you saying that .45 Colt brass is apt to blow out at the back?


"Well begun is half done."
-Aristotle

 

[USSR]

I learned the 45 long Colt loaded to the original ballistics was a lot of fun to use, easier to carry and all I needed for hunting and protection.

+1. With 265gr cast HP .454" diameter bullets at 800 - 1000fps, what more is really needed?

 

[MachIVshooter]

Dick Casull did all his reseach and load development using 45 long Colt brass. What has changed that makes it no longer acceptable?

Dick also sent a lot of revolvers to handgun heaven developing his loads.

The factories all make brass the same, they do not specifically make 45 brass weaker, section some brass sometime. The heads are the same on 44 and 45 as well as the other magnum cartridges.

I've got cross sectioned cases that say otherwise. The .454 has a thicker head and web than .45 Colt, in addition to using SRP instead of LPP.

 

[Smaug]

+1. With 265gr cast HP .454" diameter bullets at 800 - 1000fps, what more is really needed?

1000 fps and 265 gr. doesn't sound like an original load to me. It sounds AWFULLY hot for a 120 year old Colt Single Action Army revolver!