SRH 44Mag for Hunting: How to mount optics?

[98Redline]

Same answer as before regarding the grips, different strokes for different folks.

The Hogues work well for some and not so well for the others. If you have the older type of grips with the wood side panels you should try shooting with them first. Those original Lett grips are really pretty good. I have a set on my .480 SRH and I prefer them over the Pachmyrs or the Hogues but once again, that is just me.

From a quality standpoint, there is no difference. AFAIK the SRH platform has never had any quality issues or systemic problems with the design so a first year or this year's SRH are the same quality wise. The only thing that is different is the older guns were roll marked, the new ones are laser engraved. I actually prefer the look of the roll marks myself.

I think buying a used gun is a great way to go. Someone else takes a big hit on the price and you get a gun that other than a couple of minor surface blemishes functions as well as a brand new one.

 

[hardluk1]

Huntolive Check your PM. Try the grips on the revolver. Some like them fine and then like 98redline covered , grips can be a very personal thang. I prefer hogues soft rubber grips and pachmyers. Good that we have choices. Atleast you can walk in to many LGS and finger a new ruger with the factory made for ruger hogues they use today to deside if you like the fit. And go from there.

 

[98Redline]

Handling them in the LGS does not tell the entire story though.
Until you put a few rounds down the pipe you really can't tell whether they will work for you or not.

Case in point, my 5.5" Redhawk. The standard grips felt great in my hand, pointed well and I was content with keeping them on the gun. That all ended after the 2nd cylinder full of hot hunting rounds. Took me a couple of tries before I found a set of grips that worked for me.

That being said, you can't decide on what grips are best for you until you actually buy a gun........hint...hint...hint.

 

[Huntolive]

Fair enough on getting off the pot and picking!

The main thing that keeps holding me up from pulling the trigger (pun intended) on the 44mag, is the idea of the massive amount of extra foot pounds of energy delivered by the 454. This seems like a clear advantage in knock down power.
Is it really more bang for the buck, or just alot more BANG in recoil, and alot more BUCKS spent on ammo?

Some have said, how much deader than dead does dead need to be, and that the 44 mag offers plenty even for medium bear and moose w/ the right ammo. But the case made for the 454 is "it does everything the 44Mag can (with the 454, plus the 45lc) plus more, but the 44Mag can't do evrything the 454 can"

Final thoughts? Is it too redundant to get both?
Looking at it now, if I do get the 44mag, and also got the 454, I would only shoot 454 out of it.

 

[98Redline]

<sarcasm>Given that logic, I would say that you really need to step up to the 50 Alaskan to get "enough" energy for what you are looking to hunt.</scarcasm>

You shouldn't feel under gunned with a .44mag. Selection of the correct loads is paramount to every hunting situation. While many deer hunters sort of have the "any bullet will work" mentality when it comes to deer hunting, that is mostly because deer are not that tough and most deer hunting guns have more than enough energy to cleanly dispatch deer sized game.

When you start moving up in game size, a hunter needs to be more selective regarding their ammunition to ensure that they have selected the correct bullet for the job. If you are looking at moose or large bears, regardless of whether you are shooting a 454 or a 44, you will still need to be selective about your bullet choice. Both are lethal when the bullet is placed in the correct spot.

Personally, if looking at a 2 gun handgun hunting battery the 454 would not be on my list, I would put a 44 mag as nearly a necessity and would be the #1 caliber on my list (which is why I currently own 5 of them). It is immensely versatile and has more than enough energy for anything you are likely to hunt.
For the second gun, I would be looking for something in the truly "big bore" category (.475 or larger). Something like a .480 Ruger, .475L, etc.... These are truly the big boomers and WILL cleanly take anything on the planet, including cape buffalo.

If you were to look at my reloading journal you will find that I reload about 10x more 44 mag than my nearest other caliber (.357 mag). I use a 44 for nearly all of my handgun hunting and have never felt like I didn't have enough gun. I also couldn't tell the difference in how deer die between being shot with a .44 and a 480 Ruger. Some drop and are DRT, other take off for a bit.

But this is just one man's opinion. I am sure that there are other proponents of the 454 that will chime in a well.

In the end, you are the only one who can make the choice.

 

[Huntolive]

Ok, thanks for great info!
I will probably get 44Mag SRHH.
But if I want something bigger, wouldn't the 454 fill that role fine?
98Redline, please school me on 480, 475, etc. I thought the 454 was just as powerful as the 480.

 

[98Redline]

If you want/need something bigger than a 44mag, then I would be looking toward some of the calibers I mentioned above. I think that the .454 has too much overlap with the 44mag to be of much value to me. I suppose if you had an encore or contender pistol in 454 the extra velocity would start to work to your advantage when you start getting out to 200+ yards but if I were going in that direction I would be looking at some of the rifle calibers.

While there is certainly some overlap between the 454 and the 480, the top end heavy loads in the 454 are around 400gr. This is really just the mid point of the 480's bullet weight range. There are bullets up to 440gr.

I admit, I prefer a heavy slower bullet to a light fast one. I will take penetration over expansion every day. To that end, the 480 works for quelling my big bore needs....for now.

I haven't really compared energy between the 454 and the 480 however I suspect that they are around the same. However the 480 does not have the recoil and muzzle blast of the 454 that I find objectionable.
Another data point is something that came out of one of the seminars that John Linebaugh puts on. In the penetration tests the 480 Ruger (essentially a 475L special) provided bullet penetration that was within something like 3" of a full bore 475L.

All of that being said, you are just stepping up into the big bore handguns. I would suggest that right now you concentrate on the 44/45 caliber flavor and determine if those give you everything you want. Honestly in North America I really can't think of any game animal that would require the use of anything more than a 44mag.

 

[22-rimfire]

I too favor slow and heavy rather than fast and light for handgun hunting. As mentioned earlier, I chose the 9.5" SRH in 480 Ruger. I didn't like the muzzle blast and recoil of the 454 and experience has demonstrated that I tend not to shoot low powered rounds (specials) in a magnum handgun. If I purchased 480 SRH today, I'd choose the 7.5".

The 460 and 500 S&W were not available when I first purchased the 480 Ruger. Today, since I have a slow and heavy preference, I would lean toward the 500 S&W if I couldn't find a 480. I have not regretted my choice of the 480. The 475 Linebaugh appeals to me as well and would most likely be my next step up in power versus the 500 S&W. Honestly, the 480 Ruger is plenty big enough for me. Anything else would be a pure novelty.

I think you need to work up in power and experience gradually or you end up with a handgun you don't want to shoot. That is not uncommon with the big bore handguns including 44 magnum. I would get a 44 mag first (or in my case, 41 mag) and move up after getting comfortable with that caliber if you still want more power in a handgun.

 

[Huntolive]

Thanks,

Yes, I definitely will NOT start any bigger than the 454/45lc.
And I have seen that off the shelf 45lc of any power is PRICEY!

That makes 44Mag all the more a better place to start.

But if I committ to re-loading (my good friend/neighbor has all the equ. for 44 and 45) is the 45lc a better place to start than 44Mag, based on the larger bullet?
I agree what I want is penetration and energy on the animal/knockdown power, not tons of velocity and nasty recoil. So, since the 45lc is pretty much same size as 454, but slower, a good hot 45 could be perfect?
So why is 44Mag better?

 

[98Redline]

A hot loaded 45 and 44 mag are so close together ballisticly that you could flip a coin and come up with a winner heads or tails.

Regarding which is "better"....hell, do you want to start another 6+ page thread debating the nuances between the two? This is one of those hotly debated topics that I will just steer clear of.

Pick the one that YOU like.

I would be happy with either.

 

[Huntolive]

The 44mag seems like a smarter gun to start with, but the 454/45lc seems to give me both the "starter gun" and the "next step gun" all in one, and at under $600, that is what is so hard to pass on.

Ammo prices/availability also steer me home to 44mag. But I do plan to learn reloading, and have access to equp.

Do the high end 44mags (think Double Tap 325grn at 1300 sps)
recoil as much as the equivalent 454? or less?

I have this idea, that high end 44mag will be worse in recoil than mid range 454, since you are maxing out the guns/rounds potential. Is this wrong?