Big-Bore Wheel Gun

[Charley C]

I don't know if this is "news" or not, as I don't pay a lot of attention to revolvers.

I was in Terre Haute one day last week and had several hours to kill, so I decided to stop by the LGS to check to see if any of the new MOS Glocks had arrived yet.

While I was standing at the counter chit-chatting with one of the counter guys I know, this other guy was just opening up a package that had just been delivered; when he got it opened, he pulled out this HUGE stainless steel revolver. I'm thinking, "boy, that thing is really BIG"! When I asked him what caliber it was, he tells me, " .45/70"; about that time he hands it to me, now I'm thinking, "this thing would take a real man to shoot it"; (I think he said the thing weighed something like 8 lbs.) While I'm handling it, I'm looking around trying to see a name on it, and the guy says it's built by Magnum Research.

When I asked the guy what ammo for something that big cost, compared to the .50 caliber ammo for the S&W 500, he gets down a box of each, opens both boxes, and pulls out a round from each; the real surprise? He said a box of 20 for the .45/70 is like $35, while a box of 20 for the S&W 500 is like $75.

Now what I'm wondering is, why would .50 caliber ammo cost more than double what .45/70 does?

 

[Storm_Shadow]

If I had to put a guess I'd say the S&W 500 ammo is more of a "specialty" round. When you reload the price becomes much closer in costs to one another.

 

[mnrivrat]

Once again it is a matter of demand creating a larger volume use for the 45-70. Mostly of course in rifles.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

I don't know where he got that price but I'd be willing to bet it was for some fancy shmancy 500 hunting load from Federal or Winchester.

I see 500 ammo in my neck from Hornady that is priced at $40-$45 for 20 rounds. I shoot a 460 magnum, and usually pay $35 for a box of 20.

The Magnum Research BFR has been chambered for 45-70 for quite a few years now, but they are impressive guns none the less.

 

[CraigC]

One must compare loads that are actually comparable. Low pressure .45-70 loads that have been around for 100yrs are going to be cheaper. All .500S&W are going to be premium quality, high pressure loads. Compare heavy duty hunting loads in the .45-70 to the .500S&W, Buffalo Bore for example, and you'll see them within a dollar of each other.

 

[velojym]

Yep, they've been making .45-70 since long before any of us was born. While it still ain't a *cheap* round, it's still pretty well represented.

 

[MagnumDweeb]

On a side note, I do wonder at times if the .500 S&W magnum would be more powerful in a rifle than a .45-70. As I understand it the .500 magnum outperforms the .45-70 in a pistol, so why shouldn't it do it in a rifle.

 

[CraigC]

The .45/70 is a rifle cartridge and is going to suffer in pistol length barrels. The .460S&W can run at its full pressure in the BFR and will probably beat the pants off it. The .500S&W is a pistol cartridge and all available data is going to utilize pistol powders, notably H110/296. It will see significant gains in rifle length barrels so weight/velocity are comparable but it needs another 20,000psi to do it. IMHO, each is best in its designed platform but the .500S&W is a far better rifle cartridge than the .45-70 is a pistol cartridge. Still, a true .50cal rifle cartridge like the .50AK beats them both at far less pressure than the .500S&W.

 

[rswartsell]

I respect that others may feel differently, bit I have always felt these things to be oddities rather than useful tools made because someone figured out he could, not he should. Hey if you like them knock yourself out but to me out on the ragged edge somewhere.

With the advent of stuff like the Smith .500 Magnum, are my viewpoints becoming dated? Are outrageous hand cannons like a BFR .45/.70 really useful?

What do YOU think?

 

[joem1945]

I like to shoot the big bores (.460 mag.). As I reload the cost is a bit lower than LGS prices. A pound of powder doesn't go very far and good bullets aren't cheap. It's nice to see close groups at 25 yds.

 

[Panzerschwein]

Not really.

A good .454 Casull can get the same performance as a .45-70 revolver, with much less bulk and weight.

 

[Rodentman]

I have a couple 500's and 460's, including the 3" 460 PC. I never would have bought them if I didn't reload. A buddy gave me a box of Buffalo Bore 440gr for the 500. I have fired one. It's pretty outrageous. Loading "reduced recoil" or even Trail Boss loads is fun. Granted you may say why have such a big bore if I'm gonna download, but it's all good and all fun!

 

[Charley C]

.45-70 round compared to a .50 S&W round

MagnumDweeb, Quote;
"On a side note, I do wonder at times if the .500 S&W magnum would be more powerful in a rifle than a .45-70. As I understand it the .500 magnum outperforms the .45-70 in a pistol, so why shouldn't it do it in a rifle"


After looking looking at both rounds side by side, I'm guessing that the S&W .50 would "outperform" the 45-70 in anything......in addition to being a bigger caliber, it's also considerably longer, so there's obviously a quite a bit bigger charge.

 

[Charley C]

rswartsell, quote;

I respect that others may feel differently, bit I have always felt these things to be oddities rather than useful tools made because someone figured out he could, not he should. Hey if you like them knock yourself out but to me out on the ragged edge somewhere.

With the advent of stuff like the Smith .500 Magnum, are my viewpoints becoming dated? Are outrageous hand cannons like a BFR .45/.70 really useful?

What do YOU think?



Here's what I "think"; different people enjoy doing different things; I'm sure everyone on this whole forum has noticed that; something else that I've noticed throughout my rather lengthy lifetime......an awful lot of people "measure" other people while using themselves as their yardstick. Your question, Quote; "Are outrageous hand cannons like a BFR .45/.70 really useful?

Even though I'm probably the least knowledgeable person on THR when it comes to "big bore handguns", I think I can answer your question;

I happened to pick up an outdoor magazine in the waiting room of a hospital several weeks ago; leafing through it, I noticed a story written by a fellow who had recently gone on his 4th or 5th hunting trip to Africa; on all of his previous trips, he had hunted with big-bore rifles, and carrying a hand gun as a back-up; on the trip being written about, he and the fellow who went on the trip with him had elected to "leave their rifles at home", and the author had taken a S&W 500, equipped with a reflex sight; the other fellow took the other S&W revolver that is one step down from the 500, (the caliber of which eludes me at the moment.)

It was a very interesting article, (at least to me. ) Both men killed a particular type of antelope (that I don't recall the name of), but they both killed large animals at 200 yards, using these two big revolvers; (both of which are considerably more powerful than the HUGE .45-70 that I was looking at in my LGS last week.) I'm fairly certain that Smith & Wesson had a pretty good idea that there was a sufficient "market" for both of these big guns, long before they decided to invest the considerable sums of money that I'm sure it took to develop, build, and market them; to be perfectly honest, I'm somewhat less certain about Magnum Research building the gun I just saw, but I'm told that it's "been around" for quite some time now, so that right there indicates that there must be a sufficient market for it also.

Things that seem to be "outrageous" to some people are perfectly normal to other people. I've done a lot of things along the way that a lot of people I'm sure would consider to be "outrageous";

My son and I were taking pictures in Sequoia National Forest once, back in the late 90's; It's very challenging to take picture of sequoia trees, and getting pictures that are "different" are even more challenging; finally, my son decided that we HAD to get way up near the top of a 275 ft sequoia tree to get the shots we wanted; because my son was already an experienced rock climber, he had all of the equipment we needed except for one thing; we had to go on eBay to buy a crossbow to get a "throw-line" over an upper limb, in order to haul our climbing ropes up and over a high limb; I'm sure a lot of people would consider climbing 275 ft in a sequoia tree to be outrageous; It's really not, and it's not all that hard to do IF you have the proper equipment. We spent 3 whole days in the forest, (app, 20 miles south of Sequoia National Park ), climbed several trees, and never saw a single soul while we were in the forest. (If you tried that in the National Park you'd end up in jail! )

My idea of "outrageous"? Surfing! Especially on the Pacific Coast of California; there are great white sharks that are 20 ft long! That's not only "outrageous", that's down right "foolhardy", IMO! Like I said to start, different strokes for different folks!

 

[captain awesome]

I read that article, it came out 2-3 years ago. Very fascinating. the other cartridge the gentle man used was the 460 S&W

 

[rswartsell]

Ummm..,

OK, but how many of us will handgun hunt Africa (or Alaska for that matter)? My best regards to those who do.

 

[joem1945]

I like the challenge of trying to get close groups with the .460. I do on occasion hit a gong at 150 yards. Steel poppers just fall over when hit with a 250 grain JHP.

 

[TimSr]

Not really.

A good .454 Casull can get the same performance as a .45-70 revolver, with much less bulk and weight.

Agreed 100%. The 45-70 LOOKS more impressive because it has a huge brass case that was made to hold 70gr of black powder, but today its mostly useless space for which you have to design huge cylinders to hold them.

 

[buck460XVR]

The .45/70 is a rifle cartridge and is going to suffer in pistol length barrels. The .460S&W can run at its full pressure in the BFR and will probably beat the pants off it. The .500S&W is a pistol cartridge and all available data is going to utilize pistol powders, notably H110/296. It will see significant gains in rifle length barrels so weight/velocity are comparable but it needs another 20,000psi to do it. IMHO, each is best in its designed platform but the .500S&W is a far better rifle cartridge than the .45-70 is a pistol cartridge. Still, a true .50cal rifle cartridge like the .50AK beats them both at far less pressure than the .500S&W.

^^^This.

 

[CraigC]

OK, but how many of us will handgun hunt Africa (or Alaska for that matter)? My best regards to those who do.

For deer, hogs, even elk, moose and brown bear, the .44Mag and .45Colt are plenty. Even the African Big 6 have been taken with the .44Mag back in the 1980's when folks like Larry Kelly and JD Jones realized they could do a lot better than 240gr jacketed bullets. Ross Seyfried took several head of dangerous game with a heavy duty six-shot Seville .45Colt (350's at 1500fps) and concluded that it gave up very little to the heavy rifles. That said, when game gets bigger and meaner than moose, I'd rather have a bigger hammer. Seyfried went to the .475 because with 430's at 1350fps, there is nothing it can't do better. It's just a matter of whether or not you 'need' (or just want) more and are willing to deal with the recoil to get it.

Personally, I think revolvers chambered in rifle cartridges are silly. They're too big & bulky and don't have the performance increases to make it worth it. Not when you have the .460 and .500S&W cartridges that are designed and loaded for handguns. Although the only thing they offer over standard length cartridges is range. A 440gr .501" LBT at 1600fps is not going to kill anything any deader at 125yds or less than the same bullet at 1350fps. Just as a 525gr at 1400fps out of the .500Linebaugh Long won't kill anything any deader than the same bullet at 1100fps out of its shorter papa. Any of them will take any game that walks planet Earth.

 

[DeepSouth]

On a side note, I do wonder at times if the .500 S&W magnum would be more powerful in a rifle than a .45-70.
As I understand it the .500 magnum outperforms the .45-70 in a pistol, so why shouldn't it do it in a rifle

I wouldn't be surprised, a few years ago I bought a 50-90 Sharps and when looking at ballistic info it's very, very close to a .500 S&W with a pistol length barrel. Some of them are almost identical, depending on the load and bullet gr of the 50-90, they vary a LOT.

 

[rswartsell]

+1 CraigC,

You said it better than I could. I know my .45 convertible Blackhawk is all I will need or want, and there are good alternatives above that to rifle cartridge revolvers.

But again, each to their own.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Personally, I think revolvers chambered in rifle cartridges are silly. They're too big & bulky and don't have the performance increases to make it worth it. Not when you have the .460 and .500S&W cartridges that are designed and loaded for handguns.

Yep

 

[swopjan]

I saw an article about a 'model 1889' (1886/1892 levergun hybrid) a few years back that was going to be chambered in .500 s&w, I don't know what ever became of it.

Magnum Research has been making the BFR in... 'inspired' calibers for a while now. Freedom Arms might have made a few .45-70's also but I doubt it. I think the X-frame s&w's are well-proportioned but the .45-70 and .500 s&w single actions remind me of a Taurus Judge and not in a good way. Still, I wouldn't mind one in something like .475 Linebaugh.

 

[buck460XVR]

Ummm..,

OK, but how many of us will handgun hunt Africa (or Alaska for that matter)? My best regards to those who do.

Funny....when I tell folks I hunt deer with a .357. I get told it's "marginal" and I really should use a .44 or a .45. Then, when I tell them I use a .460 for deer they say deer aren't armor plated or Tyrannosaurus Rex and I should just use a .44 or .45. Apparently the only appropriate handguns for deer are .44 or .45. Still these same folks think they need a 30-06 or 7mm mag for deer, much more gun than a .460 revolver. I just don't get it.

Most folks I see dissing the really big bores have never shot a good one. But they have an opinion on them. For most of us that use the really big-bores for deer, what we are looking for over a standard .44 or .45 is range, not killing or knock-down power. I hunt areas where there are good odds of a 160-170 class, 250# buck giving me a standing shot @ 125 yards or so. I generally hunt deer with a revolver being my primary weapon. I doubt if there is anyone here that would rather take that shot with a .44 or .45 than a .460.