snub nose BIG bore?

[moooose102]

can somebody explain the rationality behind snub nose ultra powerful revolvers? i simply do not understand this. why would you want a 454, 460, or 500 magnum in a short barrel where it would develop way less power than it should. i understand not wanting a 10" + barrel, but it just does not make sense to me to buy a revolver like that which needs at least a 6" barrel to develop most of its power. it seems like if you are going to use this for a survival anti-bear gun, you would want it to make as much power as it could while still being carryable. i understand the concealability of a snub nose, but do we need to ccw for a bear? it seems like this is the role even the manufacturer intends for them, as they call them "alaskans". i really dont see the need for one of these for ccw in the urban jungle. people are easy to kill. it seems like all you are accoplishing with a snub nose is making a lot of noise and a huge fireball when you shoot it.

 

[steveracer]

Because a 3" .500 Magnum makes more power than a 6" .44 mag. The cartridge is where the power resides, not the barrel length.

 

[XD9WBT]

Cause mine needs to be bigger than yorn.

 

[ArmedBear]

The cartridge is where the power resides, not the barrel length

LOL

mooose102- It's because people think recoil and a big case=power out of the muzzle, and that energy = effectiveness.

The snubbies do not make a lot of sense, by the numbers, or when you shoot them.

Furthermore, the .500 is hard to shoot in a big revolver. A gun shop/range where I used to shoot a lot had one. Sold it at least 4 times. Each time, someone would get all hot and bothered about having to have the .500. Then he'd shoot it, and return it to the shop to exchange for something else that was more "shootable."

If a .44 Magnum with heavy hardcast bullets doesn't do the trick, I'm not sure that any handgun would.

But they're a cool gimmick. Have you seen S&W's "Emergency Survival Kit"? Gotta love it: comes with a book about bear attacks. Great reading if you're lost in the woods someplace, isn't it?

That's a 3 1/2 lb. snubbie. Not exactly a great carry gun. A slung Marlin Guide Gun would be easier to carry, and a lot easier to shoot, as well. I'd love to see someone put a few on target fast with a .500 snubbie.

What also makes little sense to me is the Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan .44M. It weighs as much as a standard 4" 629, and a bit more than a Mountain Gun. The 4" barrel is good for significantly more velocity, meaning you can shoot a lighter load that's easier to get on target repeatedly, while getting the same ballistics.

Maybe people forget that these are high-volume cases, and it takes time for that powder to burn. 4" is a short-enough barrel, for any Magnum.

 

[Old Fuff]

I once ask one of Ruger’s upper level executives about their then new Alaskan model, which was supposedly for defense against bears and other dangerous animals. I considered this massive snubby to be high up on my list of absolutely useless firearms – especially for the stated purpose, and I still do.

He replied to the effect that the company was in the business of making and selling firearms, and they were taking orders for the Alaskan faster then they make them. He also observed that most of the orders were coming from areas where it was highly unlikely one would see a bear-critter outside of a zoo.

Clearly the real market for the revolver was as novelty or for someone with a bigger-must-always-be-best mentality who wanted ultimate bragging rights. I call it the “Dirty Harry Factor (DHF), named after the movie of that name in which Clint Eastwood used a S&W .44 Magnum. It did wonders for their sales.

Never ever for a moment think that all handgun buyers make purchase decisions based on common sense…

 

[ArmedBear]

I've seen a few .500 and .460 S&Ws in the hands of people who just wanted a BIG gun. Can't say I've met anyone who actually bought it for hunting, and there weren't any bears around there, but there were many people around with extra money, during the real estate boom in San Diego.

I think it's important to remember a few things...

The .44 was developed as a practical revolver hunting cartridge. It may still be the largest practical handgun round, meaning that it can be treated more or less like a .38 Special with more recoil. There are no spec's that state that the crimp may not hold if more than 4 rounds are discharged next to a cartridge before it is fired. It can be handled in a steel gun by a reasonably strong person.

Elmer Keith was a character in his own right, but he grew up farming and ranching. He had a real practical streak to him, even if he did like his revolvers engraved and stocked in carved ivory. He wasn't one to want a cartridge that took too much babying. (He wasn't recoil-shy, given some of the long guns he used.)

The .454 was developed as a specialized cartridge for large game. Dick Casull never intended it for general-purpose use, AFAIK.

The .475 Linebaugh is like the .454 Casull, but much more so. It's meant for the rare big game hunter who will willingly deal with the monster's technical and other shortcomings in return for its power (much like, say, one of H&H's Nitro Express cartridges in a little double rifle).

The .480 Ruger is the Linebaugh, scaled back to the point of being a practical cartridge. And it actually is. It could be the one practical cartridge that's bigger than the .44, but it appears that it's going off to the Happy Hunting Ground in the Sky, sadly.

The .500 killed it in the marketplace, I think, because your average dude with extra money just wants the biggest. .500 is a bigger number than .480, even if the .480 is an immensely more desirable cartridge for actual field use. Ruger misjudged something: a lot of people want to buy BIG, and fewer were interested in a big but practical hunting gun, which the .480 SRH actually was.

Smith hit the jackpot with the .500. People buy it for the hell of it, and all the guns chambered in .500 are expensive.

And Ruger is doing the same thing with a gun, not a cartridge: the "Alaskan."

 

[twoclones]

As for myself, I use the 500 S&W in a 4" barrel rather than the 6 1/2" or longer barrel for ease of handling in dense undergrowth and ease of carrying with a backpack. It would really suck to be struggling with a long barrel revolver when I needed to be pulling the trigger.

Not everyone needs a big bore and not everyone can handle one. Still, they have their uses.

 

[madcratebuilder]

Cause mine needs to be bigger than yorn.

Jackpot!

 

[cpirtle]

If you must have a short barrel, easy to carry revolver then I can see the purpose.

I have not seen numbers to back this up but I would expect that a 500 S&W fired from a 2.5" barrel would have a similar drop in ballistics as a .357 shot from a 2.5" barrel when compared to being fired from say a 6" barrel.

I think the beauty of these guns and what many people are missing is that we have (er.. had?) a country that allows us to have so many firearm choices that manufacturers feel comfortable "exploring" variety.

Some day when we are all limited to small bore calibers and limited capacities we may wonder why we picked on the guys who liked oddball or useless guns.

 

[MDG1976]

What's the answer to 99% of all question? Money.

They make big bore snub nosed revolevers because people buy them. My local Cabelas (Missouri) has an entire shelf of them.

 

[Hawk]

I like monster snubs - probably won't ever own one but I like anything that encourages the sale of new product.

Let's face it: if the general buying public had the same purchasing priorities of most of the folks that hang out in the revolver forum, myself included, there would be no new revolvers and that would be a shame.

A snub-nosed monster will be handier than a longer barreled version and that would be of import to some folks. I believe WildWest is doing a land office business in the things but they have real bears up there and some of their customers think the Co-Pilot is too big.

Nothing wrong with novelty for the sake of novelty either. As Jeff Cooper noted, firearms last forever if properly cared for and the manufacturer's have a task coming up with stuff that makes us unhappy with what we already have. I doubt artillery grade snubbies answer fewer real needs than, say, the super short and fat cartridges the rifle folks floated recently.

If I might be permitted some wild internet speculation, I believe the Taurus Judge has introduced more new folks to handguns than any other single product in 100 years (based on the new members starting "judge" threads). Hooray for new blood and Taurus profits. Never mind it would rate my personal waffenposselhaft award as terminally compromised .45 Colt combined with a useless shotgun.

Piffle on practical.

 

[xxxstarmaniac]

+1 Hawk

Personally I like the big bore snubs, and being a biggin' myself they fit me like the smaller ones fit the majority out there. Most people do WANT not NEED bigger (i.e. SUVs) but for those of us monsters living in a midgets world, they fit and feel the same as a 357 mag k frame in an average persons hand.

Recoil is not an issue, and I DO enjoy the envy that spawns threads like this. Hmmm, seems to remind me of another envy...LOL.

Enjoy what you have, and I'll enjoy what you don't.

 

[xxxstarmaniac]

And when you think about it, the biggest thing in the smallest package is what society is today = Big Bore Small Barrel.

 

[Mainsail]

When I was looking for a hiking gun, I looked at the Glock 20 in 10mm and the Ruger Redhawk Alaskan in .44 magnum. I wasn’t interested in the bigger bore Alaskans as I didn’t see them as being practical. If I were being attacked by something, I’d have to weigh the risk of shooting and blowing out my eardrums or just take my mauling like a man. I do a lot of off-trail hiking, so I wasn’t entirely comfortable going unarmed, or returning to the trailhead unarmed (I’ve seen a few scary looking folks at the trailheads). My gun shop had the Alaskan at a good price so I jumped on it. It’s very manageable with average load 44 magnums, and I’m going to be hand-loading soon so I’ll get to practice with it more often. It also makes a great open carry sidearm as well!

EDIT to add: I don't carry it concealed when I'm hiking either.

 

[xxxstarmaniac]

Mainsail,
Hunting and Hiking are two different pursuits, but handgun hunting is more of a challenge and more intense than using a rifle (i.e. bow vs crossbow), and the shorter the barrel/sight distance the harder the shot. Using a .480 SRH Alaskan on my last hunting trip I encountered a 10 point white tail. I fired a warning shot in the air to let it know I meant business, and it dropped dead instantly because it didn't want to feel the pain from my follow up shot.
If your hiking experience ends up like my hunting one, you'd know that bigger is better.

 

[Mainsail]

LOL! I'm still trying to figure out how to shoot it with my fingers in my ears.

 

[cpirtle]

Mainsail - you ought to do some reasearch on B.A.R. (Body Alarm Response).

If you are ever in a situation where you need to use your hand cannon to defend yourself you will probably not even hear the gun go off.

Cool gun and happy/safe shooting!

 

[twoclones]

I do a lot of off-trail hiking, so I wasn’t entirely comfortable going unarmed

The off-trail experience is probably something most hikers and even some hunters do not have a grasp of. When surveying remote locations, I sometimes HAVE TO go down into the middle of that berry thicket with the drinking water in it. It may be 3 miles from the nearest road, smell like bear skat and have no easy way out but my job requires me to put a stake in the ground at that location.

It's a whole different world from walking trails and I require a short barreled big bore gun to smooth the hair on the back of my neck when going in...

 

[goodtime]

"people are easy to kill . . ."

FOR LEGAL REASONS: Remember, we don't shoot people to Kill, we shoot to Stop the Threat they present. The difference in verbiage (following an incident) can mean the difference between a successful law suit against you, and no suit at all.

 

[ArmedBear]

It's a whole different world from walking trails and I require a short barreled big bore gun to smooth the hair on the back of my neck when going in...

That's actuallly QUITE understandable.

The question, for me, is not whether to carry a gun or some chopsticks, but whether a snubbie with a larger bore or a lighter, 4" .44 (with heavy hardcast bullets) will be the better choice.

I made that purchasing decision recently, and it was not in favor of the snubbie with a somewhat bigger bore. There were several reasons for this, which I think that several of us have detailed above. If any of us has to try to stop a bear, I guess we'll find out what works best.

Nobody is recommending a .38 Short Colt for big bears, here. That's not the point.

 

[xxxstarmaniac]

Armed Bear,

Ever notice how all your discussions turn to what to use for bears? Are you really an armed bear trying to get people lulled into security using less than what they are comfortable with?

 

[ArmedBear]

The OP asked about the rationale for the guns.

There is no other rationale. Both S&W and Ruger market the guns for bear defense.

Doesn't mean you can't buy one for some other reason, but that is the rationale for the design.

 

[atlanticfire]

I have alot of big cals, but non in a snub. All this talk about large bore hand guns and Mr Redhawk is now where to be found

 

[xxxstarmaniac]

I know a bear is something to be concerned about in the field, but a moose can be a dangerous animal with the weight a car behind its temper.

I can fire full load 454s from the srh alaskan and a 4" 44mag S&W and experience the same recoil and similar shot placement/timing with both. And yes, the 329pd is quite a handful to some people I've let shoot it. Both the 329pd and 454 alaskan can be painful, but if you're big enough you can handle them both, and to some an N frame 357 is too much.

It is all about perspective, preference and personal choice. What works for some may be a novelty to others, but if it wasn't selling, you would not see them. Whatever the reason, I am glad to have the option and choice, unlike others who can't be happy with what they have so they try to place logic and rationale from their point of view as to why something that IS better ISN'T.

 

[xxxstarmaniac]

Whether a big bore revolver, ccw handgun or high capacity auto, there is a compromise inherent to all, but to each of us the compromise may be different.
Rejoice in the choice, or conform to the voice of the sheep.