Thoughts on 454 Casull for elk hunting?

[gloriavoxdei]

I'm thinking about ditching the rifle and taking up handgun hunting. I'm a Deputy Sheriff so most of my range time is spent with handguns so I'm very comfortable with them and their handling. I think I've decided on the Ruger Super Redhawk in .454 Casull with a 8.5" barrel and 4x scope but want to see what you all have to say about the choice. I'll be using it for Deer and Elk mostly and occationaly Antelope. Let the openions fly!!!

 

[Weedy]

Load her up with hard cast bullets and rock 'n' roll!

 

[Enachos]

If you get that I'll be really jealous haha

 

[MMCSRET]

No reason it won't work, my RSBH in 44 Magnum has taken several since I sold it to a proficient hunter. I wasn't good enough to make it work on elk. Worked on Mule deer for me.

 

[gbran]

Do yourself a favor and get a 2x scope. You won't need 4x. I'm using a Burris. I've taken, deer, hog and bear. I've only taken one elk at about 80 yds. As stated elsewhere, use hard cast bullets. I don't use large heavy bullets, but I drive them fast.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

If a .454 Casull won't kill it, I wouldn't hunt it. Like Enachos, I'll be terribly jealous. I've been wanting to hunt with a handgun for some time now. I'd be proud to own that setup. As mentioned above, don't go power happy with your scope. Handgun ranges won't require you to have that much magnification. Most handgun hunters want something similar to bow range. Your experience with handguns may extend your range a little beyond what the average shooter should attempt, but you still won't need a huge scope. If you get a T/C pistol chambered for a rifle cartridge then I could see it.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Do yourself a favor and get a 2x scope. You won't need 4x

Variables work fine on pistols. Though I can't find a photo at present, I had a Burris 1.5-4x on my Desert Eagle .50. I've taken it hunting, though I didn't so much as see a Decent buck or elk either time. I figured with my accuracy (about 2.5 MOA rested) and the ballistics of my 325 gr. handloads, I was good to a max of 200 yards on deer, and figured on keeping it to < 150 for elk.

Wish I'd had an opportunity. Only bull elk we saw that year knew exactly where to be, on that 30,000 acre private ranch covered in "no hunting" signs. All we could do was glass them from across the canyon, where we hunted the BLM land.

 

[22-rimfire]

I believe the SRH comes with either a 9.5 or 7.5" barrel. I have a 2x Leupold scoped 9.5" barreled one in 480 Ruger. It is too big to carry with a rifle comfortably unless you have the rifle in a scabbord on a horse or ATV (or vice versa). I tried carrying mine along with my Remington 700 in 270 and it was just not very comfortable. Either the handgun or the rifle is simply not close to being ready if a quick opportunity develops.

Hence I made the decision that if I wanted to hunt deer with the revolver as my primary weapon; I started leaving the rifle at home. That was hard to do for me. I kept the rifle in my truck burried behind the seat a couple of outings as I just wasn't sure I would go through with the handgun only approach. Like it now, but I don't hunt fields much; mostly woods.

I use a monopod. I depend on it as other than a quick shot, I NEED a good rest with the SRH.

I would not get a fixed 4x scope on it. I might get a short variable however. I like my 2x Leupold. A scoped handgun takes some getting used to.

Use loctite on the mounts and save yourself a lot of aggrevation. Mine shot loose tightend as firmly as I could make the screws by hand after only a few rounds fired with the 480 Ruger. For a while, I couldn't figure out what was happening. It shot good and all of a sudden I was shooting all over the place on the targets... kind of funny in hindsight.

I'm not a big fan of the 454 Casull, but more power to ya if you can handle it.

 

[farscott]

I hunt deer and boar with a Freedom Arms 83 in .454 Casull. My current model is iron-sighted and has a 7.5-inch barrel. I agree with those who suggest a 4X scope is too much magnification. I once used the same basic model with a 2X Leupold scope mounted, and it provided sufficient magnification.

One suggestion: do not skimp on the scope and mounts. The .454 can be a hard-kicking round, especially with the lighter weight factory loads. The scope and rings have to handle that recoil and torque, and the scope and rings on a handgun are a much higher percentage of the total weight of the firearm system than a scope and rings on a rifle. Just like bullet pull is an issue with really light revolvers, scope damage and mount battering can be an issue on the .454. So when you choose a scope, look at warranty and customer service.

You might also consider loading down or running hot .45 Colt loads as you may not need full-throttle .454 loads all of the time. I like to load my .454 with 300-grain bullets at 1200 fps for deer and boar but I used different bullets for the different animals.

Another suggestion: If you like single-action revolvers, look for a used FA 83. There are great deals available, and the FA 83 was designed around the .454. It is possibly the finest revolver ever made, and they can be found very lightly used for not much more than a new Ruger.

 

[hillbillydelux]

I have been using a leupold 4x scope on my SRH 454 and actually like it. BTW I think ruger stopped making longer than 7.5 inch barrel in SRH. I agree with farscott in that sometimes full .454 loads are overkill. My first load's I was pushing speer 300 grain uni-core to around 1500 FPS. It would probably be a dandy load on ELK, however it would destroy deer and hogs. I switched to 260 grain partitions around 1300 FPS for deer.

 

[umc180gr]

7.5" barrel is alive and well

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/products/superRedhawkStandard/models.html

 

[sw282]

Pass on the scope. I hunted w/open sites for years on my SBH44. Decided to mount a 2x Leupold on it. bad idea. Made the gun unweildy and awkward to handle. I took the it off and went back to open sites. Glad I did

 

[dairycreek]

I am now 73 years old and have hunted with handguns for over 40 years and have had my share of sucess in taking both deer and elk here in Oregon. I have used a variety of 7.5" barrel Rugers with hard cast bullets all in 44 magnum. Lately I have used Garrett ammo and can attest that it does the job admirably. That is, when I do my job.

I have tried a variety of scope magnifications and agree that 4X is way too much for a handgun - 2X is more like it and I have abandoned scopes altogether. Just too much trouble in the field.

I limit my effective shooting range to 100 yards or less and concentrate on shot placement. Most of my sucessful kills have been at 75 yards or less.

As far as the 454 is concerned, given its ballistics, it should do just fine as long as the shooter can do the job with it. Shot placement is still the main issue and if that is done correctly the elk/deer will go down.

 

[gloriavoxdei]

What about the Taurus Raging Bull, I've been looking around and they seem to be a little less and I like the looks of the gun better. I'm also thinking open sights now since I can make shots at 100 yards with them at the range so I think 50-75 in the field should be realistic for my skills.