Best platform for the 454 casull

Best platform for 454 casull


  • Total voters
    68
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why is being built like a bank vault a virtue?
I would like to add that weight is a little of a thought here too. I don't mind some heft to a handgun, but the 454 I get will probably end up with a scope on it, and I don't want it weighing more than my rifles. For me half of the fun in handgun hunting is the "handi-ness" of a smaller, lighter gun than the rifle. That is the main reason I don't want an x-frame.
 
The FA would be great but with the 83 you don't get the transfer bar safety...
I’ve read this comment a couple of times. I have not ever handled a FA revolver, but I was under the impression they had a Ruger-style transfer bar.

The FA website states “All Model 83’s have a manual sliding bar safety.” So it it’s not a transfer bar, what exactly is it? Does the FA have a manual safety, like on a rifle or a semi-auto pistol?
 
This is all pretty interesting. I have been kicking around the idea of a .454 recently, so the timing is really good. I was originally leaning toward the SBH, but some of the comments here have me reconsidering. I’ve always liked the idea of a FA revolver, and I think the single action just looks right, compared to a DA. The BFR might be worth considering.

The local Cabelas has a SRH on the shelf, and I’ve got a bunch of club points, which would bring my out of pocket cost down to around $450, which is getting tough to pass up. I just have a hard time getting excited about Ruger’s huge chunk of double-action steel.

So from a shooter's perspective, how is the SRH vs the Ruger Bisley with heavy recoiling cartridges? I can shoot my .45 Colt Blackhawk with top-end “Ruger Only” loads with bullets up through 250 grains. The 300s become pretty uncomfortable though, due to how the gun rotates hard and the frame bites my hand. I’m thinking something besides the plow handle grip should help with this.

Decisions...
 
This is all pretty interesting. I have been kicking around the idea of a .454 recently, so the timing is really good. I was originally leaning toward the SBH, but some of the comments here have me reconsidering. I’ve always liked the idea of a FA revolver, and I think the single action just looks right, compared to a DA. The BFR might be worth considering.

The local Cabelas has a SRH on the shelf, and I’ve got a bunch of club points, which would bring my out of pocket cost down to around $450, which is getting tough to pass up. I just have a hard time getting excited about Ruger’s huge chunk of double-action steel.

So from a shooter's perspective, how is the SRH vs the Ruger Bisley with heavy recoiling cartridges? I can shoot my .45 Colt Blackhawk with top-end “Ruger Only” loads with bullets up through 250 grains. The 300s become pretty uncomfortable though, due to how the gun rotates hard and the frame bites my hand. I’m thinking something besides the plow handle grip should help with this.

Decisions...
Well the SRH you get 6 shots with 454, the SA wheelguns like the FA M83 and the SBH are 5 shots(IIRC about the SBH) and my 480 SRH isn't unpleasant to shoot, not sure about a 454 model but it can't be all that different recoil wise there GarrettJ.;)
 
This is all pretty interesting. I have been kicking around the idea of a .454 recently, so the timing is really good. I was originally leaning toward the SBH, but some of the comments here have me reconsidering. I’ve always liked the idea of a FA revolver, and I think the single action just looks right, compared to a DA. The BFR might be worth considering.

The local Cabelas has a SRH on the shelf, and I’ve got a bunch of club points, which would bring my out of pocket cost down to around $450, which is getting tough to pass up. I just have a hard time getting excited about Ruger’s huge chunk of double-action steel.

So from a shooter's perspective, how is the SRH vs the Ruger Bisley with heavy recoiling cartridges? I can shoot my .45 Colt Blackhawk with top-end “Ruger Only” loads with bullets up through 250 grains. The 300s become pretty uncomfortable though, due to how the gun rotates hard and the frame bites my hand. I’m thinking something besides the plow handle grip should help with this.

Decisions...

The SRH is definitely gentler than the SBH from a recoil standpoint. If you can get a new one for $450 with points you’ve earned, it’s a no-brainer as far as I’m concerned. I would jump.
 
Why is being built like a bank vault a virtue?
The fit and finish on the FA casull guns is hard to beat. Thats why to comparison to a bank vault. The lock up on the cylinder is super tight, and the barrel cylinder gap is usually less than .003. (mine measures .0015) Also i think the line boring of the cylinder makes these guns more accurate. With a 3X scope on mine from the bench I can shoot 1.5" groups at 75 yards.
 
As usual, "it depends". If you want to explore everything that 65,000psi has to offer, the FA is the only way to go. The reason it is made so precise and from such strong alloys is so that it will survive the battering it receives from the cartridge. Most, if not all factory loads are in the 50,000psi range and at that level, most of them will do fine. My pick is the Super Redhawk. It is a strong sixgun and robust enough to handle the cartridge at that level without self destructing. The Bisley version shows us the limitations of a factory built single action and illustrates why it's important to completely rebuild the lockwork on the custom five-shot guns. I would just treat them as a slightly stronger .45Colt. The BFR gives you 90% of what you get from the FA or a custom at a fraction of the price.

Here's a shot of my FA Field Grade, stocked by Rowen in bighorn sheep. It also came with a .45Colt cylinder. You can get some real deals on these guns on the used market. This whole rig with scope, mount and $1000 in grips cost less than what a new Premier Grade would have.

IMG_9538b.jpg

I'm also obviously a fan of the Super Redhawk.

IMG_0071b.jpg
 
The fit and finish on the FA casull guns is hard to beat. Thats why to comparison to a bank vault. The lock up on the cylinder is super tight, and the barrel cylinder gap is usually less than .003. (mine measures .0015) Also i think the line boring of the cylinder makes these guns more accurate. With a 3X scope on mine from the bench I can shoot 1.5" groups at 75 yards.

My .454 Bisley rattles if you shake it, there’s so much end shake. It will easily outshoot my much tighter FA 83.

This is a 50 yard group with "Lucy" (Loose as a Goose) shooting Double Tap 360 grain .45 Colt +P loads. This was shot with a red dot. If my FA locks up as tight as a bank vault, Lucy locks up about as tight as a busted screen door in a hurricane.

SG-NewSBH-8.jpg
 
Last edited:
Other: I like the Smith & Wesson 460xvr

I agree.

Unless you are just wanting a single action I'd get the 460. I deer hunted with one for a long time before I went back to a 10mm then a 4 inch 44. It shoots rifle sized groups at 150 yards and has a slightly better trajectory than 454 and no more cost. This year it's been a 10mm one day and a 44 the other (yes only 2 hunts.... darn rain) Ammo is as cheap or sometimes cheaper in 460 for whatever reason if you want factory ammo and that's how I got a lot of my brass to reload. My 8 inch 460 is no heavier than my FA either. It's only slightly heavier than my 44 redhawk with a 7 inch barrel. It is physically much bigger and its unbelievably loud with the brake. But other than those two I see no reason to go 454. I havent fired a 454 round in 15 years. Now if you want a single action that's a different story. I take spells using one or the other.
 
I think your scale is broken.

I never weighed them so it could be. Lol. Just seat of the pants/feel kind of thing. They may be much lighter. Maybe a balance thing. I have a 10 inch 44 blackhawk that feels much heavier. But I've shot many hundreds of rounds through that 460 and my 7 inch redhawk. I dont notice much weight difference. Both are heavy enough to suck after a few miles of walking compared to my 4 inch Smith's.

I actually have them all at my house because I cleaned them up for deer season. so if I think of it I'll use my food scale and find out after work.
 
I think your scale is broken.


Exactly! Last I weighed the .460 XVR I tested years ago, it came in at a portly 5-lbs loaded. That is one chunky monkey!

Here it is next to my old 6 1/2-inch Model 29.

0801-460SW-02.jpg

Side note. I tested an SRH in .454 a few years back and shot this group at 100 yards with Federal 300 Swift A-frame factory fodder and topped with a red dot. These guns shoot and they aren't "bank vault" tight.

Picture006-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
And one more thing. BFR next to an FA83. Yes, the BFR is bigger, just not that much -- the scope mount also makes it look much larger.

FA%20and%20BFR.jpg
 
Why would the BFR be wasted on .454? It’s a great platform for .454. Why do folks think they are so big? I will post a photo of my FA and a BFR together and they are very close as far as size is concerned.

Because of the long-cylinder versions. They are big.

But why would the short-cylinder BFR be "wasted" on 454? Because you can have a .500 JRH or .500 Linebaugh (custom order but production option). I believe the FA is limited to the rimless, belted 500 WE, and production Rugers top out at 480 Ruger. Personally, I don't think that simply "more of everything is better" but that all these guns are about a big bore and bigger is better. Higher pressure and higher velocity, not so much.
 
Because of the long-cylinder versions. They are big.

But why would the short-cylinder BFR be "wasted" on 454? Because you can have a .500 JRH or .500 Linebaugh (custom order but production option). I believe the FA is limited to the rimless, belted 500 WE, and Rugers top out at 480 Ruger. Personally, I don't think that simply "more of everything is better" but that all these guns are about a big bore and bigger is better. Higher pressure and higher velocity, not so much.

But the .454 isn’t a long-framed revolver, so I’m still not grasping the logic in your statement. I have a BFR in .44 Mag as well and it’s not oversized in any sense of the word.

Here's the .44 Mag BFR:

DSC_0776.jpg
 
Last edited:
As usual, "it depends". If you want to explore everything that 65,000psi has to offer, the FA is the only way to go. The reason it is made so precise and from such strong alloys is so that it will survive the battering it receives from the cartridge. Most, if not all factory loads are in the 50,000psi range and at that level, most of them will do fine. My pick is the Super Redhawk. It is a strong sixgun and robust enough to handle the cartridge at that level without self destructing. The Bisley version shows us the limitations of a factory built single action and illustrates why it's important to completely rebuild the lockwork on the custom five-shot guns. I would just treat them as a slightly stronger .45Colt. The BFR gives you 90% of what you get from the FA or a custom at a fraction of the price.

Here's a shot of my FA Field Grade, stocked by Rowen in bighorn sheep. It also came with a .45Colt cylinder. You can get some real deals on these guns on the used market. This whole rig with scope, mount and $1000 in grips cost less than what a new Premier Grade would have.

View attachment 876943

I'm also obviously a fan of the Super Redhawk.

View attachment 876944

Very nice group. How are the wood grips with respect to full recoil loads?
 
I think your scale is broken.

Exactly! Last I weighed the .460 XVR I tested years ago,

Ok so I weighed them and there is a bit of difference. But not double or anything either.

7 inch redhawk 44 was 3.37 lb
460 xvr was 4.500 lb
And super blackhawk 44 is 4.021 lb

All unloaded and the blackhawk has an aluminum scope mount. And that's a large frame vs two 44s. The only N-frame I have here is a 329pd so that wouldn't be much of a comparison.

But as far as shooting them and just by feel, all the weight of the 460 is in the cylinder and grip while the other two seem muzzle heavy
 
Very nice group. How are the wood grips with respect to full recoil loads?
I had those same wood grips as Craig (altamont sells them) on my gp100 and agree with Craig, they are narrow at the top. I found my they scoot down in my hand under recoil and I would have to regrip between shots unless I had a very firm grip. Not a fan. Look nice though.
 
Ok so I weighed them and there is a bit of difference. But not double or anything either.

7 inch redhawk 44 was 3.37 lb
460 xvr was 4.500 lb
And super blackhawk 44 is 4.021 lb

All unloaded and the blackhawk has an aluminum scope mount. And that's a large frame vs two 44s. The only N-frame I have here is a 329pd so that wouldn't be much of a comparison.

But as far as shooting them and just by feel, all the weight of the 460 is in the cylinder and grip while the other two seem muzzle heavy
Most people consider the ~20oz difference between a 7.5" Redhawk and an 8 3/8" X-frame to be quite significant. :confused:


CraigC you sure have some nice revolvers.
Thanks!
 
Most people consider the ~20oz difference between a 7.5" Redhawk and an 8 3/8" X-frame to be quite significant. :confused:
Ah yep. I'm a fairly strong dude, but that weight difference would be pretty noticeable on the hip, and in the hand.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top