snub nose BIG bore?

[Steve C]

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.

And not much of anything for a couple days after except than incessant ringing sound.

I can't figure out why anyone in the lower 48 even wants one of those .500 S&W's, especially after I had the "opportunity" to shoot one. 5 rounds satisfied my lifetime desire to ever shoot one again.

 

[ArmedBear]

maniac -- You do understand that in a large case like that, if you have a barrel that's barely longer than the bullet, you lose a lot of velocity, right?

The point is not that you get heavy recoil, it's that you don't get the requisite performance in return.

That's why a big-bore snubbie is seen as a novelty by many here, not just because the bore is big.

 

[xxxstarmaniac]

Armed Bear,
Didn't I reply to you on another bear post about the Mediocre Hornady 300gr doing 1300fps out of the SRH Alaskan? Your commentary always seems to support your firearms; if its a jframe snubbie its OK to lose the performance, but if it's bigger than your 44 mag, it's not ok.
ALL SNUBBIES LOSE VELOCITY AND HAVE REDUCED PERFORMANCE VS. THEIR LONGER BARREL BRETHREN.
Should we be talking about rifles instead?
All current rounds were "intended" for use in a longer barrel than a snubbie.
Show me the 4" DA/SA 454 that is available for purchase by s&w or ruger.
And before you reply with the "reduced" recoil 357mag loads for a j frame, realize they made the gun FIRST, not the ammo. OTOH, the 327 mag was made for the ammo, and a 3" barrel is what they used to develop an optimum load.

And please, tell me you are not trying to compare a 50bmg cartridge to a 454 BULLET that is no where near 2.5" in length.

 

[xxxstarmaniac]

And the reason many see even the 44 mag as a novelty is they are not able to handle the weapon; it is too powerful, either through recoil or now hearing sensitivity or any other limp wristed reason.
People have to accept that they may not be man enough to HANDLE the best. Just don't tell me MY OTHER 44 mags are better somehow than a revolver with a barrel 1.5" shorter that STILL MANAGES TO PRODUCE MORE ENERGY.

 

[ArmedBear]

Whatever, dude.

Re-read your post and ask yourself: "How old do I sound right here?"

See, I thought you were joking around, earlier in the thread.

Now I'm slightly shocked and a good bit amused to see that you apparently were taking yourself seriously.

 

[twoclones]

Finally got to me...

This whole thread just got to be too much for me. Had to go shoot something... Since my last post, I have fired 50 rounds of 440 grain 500 S&W Forty of that through my 4" revolver and 10 through my T/C Pro Hunter rifle. Guys were bringing me apples and cans of soda to shoot just so they could see them explode!

Believe me, even with rapid double action shooting, these short barrel .50 caliber revolvers are just as accurate as the same length 44 mag.

 

[xxxstarmaniac]

Look kid, what I'm saying is I have ALL of these firearms we are discussing. It doesn't make me better, but I did research both BEFORE I made the purchase and AFTER I fired the handguns to test REAL WORLD velocity. I am not doing what seems to be common place on the internet which is playing quarterback from a freaking sofa. Do yourself a favor. Don't assume, we know what that does. Instead take the time to actually research, handle and FIRE the gun you are attacking before you voice your "wisdom". Break it down to physics, which unfortunately for some here is NOT simple math.
I have repeatedly advised you to enjoy what you have and be glad you have a choice, but the comments have become too socialist for me to comprehend.
Take your own advice kid and ask yourself that ?

 

[xxxstarmaniac]

+1 twoclones
An ACTUAL owner of a BEAR GUN.

 

[Malodorousroadkill]

Well, this thread isn't that well named. There's plenty of reason for big BORE snubs. Big bore MAGNUM snubs don't make so much sense. .44 special, .45 colt, and .45 ACP are big heavy rounds, and even when slow, they hit pretty damn hard and make a big bloody hole. Also in a reasonably weighted snub, they're not terrible on recoil. Unlike the .44mag, and the 454 460 etc.
Actually, most of those monster snubs can use lower powered rounds and shoot them well too! Your average blackhawk is 42oz. The Alaskan is only 2oz more with double action. And the Redhawk 4inchers are 46 and 47 oz! If anything I think they should have made a 5shooter for woods defense with a 2.5 or 3inch barrel. Something like an SP on steroids.

 

[Rexster]

Well, why do people buy Shelby Cobras, when the speed limit most places tops out at 65 to 70 MPH?

Frankly, the author of the original post lost me at this: "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."

First of all, remember The High Road way is not about killing, and talking of killing will indeed stoke the fires of a prosecution or plaintiff's case. Second, people are NOT so easy to kill.

Moreover, a friend who works for an FFL told me that over 90% of the firearms he is offered in trade appear unfired, or fired just a few times. Firearms makers are in business to make money, and if there is a market for weapons that will be fired very little, they will respond to it.

This does not mean I think that short-barreled big bore revolving pistols are the best CCW pieces for most folks. Personally, though, I have a fondness for the .45 Colt, and an N-frame is just a bit too big for my hands and fingers to control well in DA fire. An SRH Alaskan in .454/.45, with a smaller factory GP100 grip, would be a dandy way for me to have a .45 Colt snubby, as the distance from backstrap to trigger face is the same as a GP100, a weapon I can shoot quite well enough.

 

[Mainsail]

And the reason many see even the 44 mag as a novelty is they are not able to handle the weapon; it is too powerful, either through recoil or now hearing sensitivity or any other limp wristed reason.

Here’s the kid shooting the Alaskan, he weighed about 100# that summer. Too powerful? Sheesh.

 

[moooose102]

just my opinion, but if you are hiking in bear territory, and your "pistol" is in your backpack, you are going to be ship out of luck when a bear encounters you. also, i can see where a snubbie would be usefull on a bear, right after he has climbed on top of you and he is chewing on your flesh. but other than that, even if there is enough power, that short sight radius is not going to give you much of a chance of hitting it at any other distance. just seems like a waste to me.

 

[twoclones]

if you are hiking in bear territory, and your "pistol" is in your backpack

It never dawned on me that one could carry a gun inside of a backpack... I even keep the spare ammo on my belt.

 

[Mainsail]

just my opinion, but if you are hiking in bear territory, and your "pistol" is in your backpack...

I don't carry concealed in downtown Seattle, I certainly don't when I'm in the woods.

 

[markallen]

I own and CCW an Alaskan. Why?
1) Because I want too.
2) Because I can.
3) Because although I do have, and sometimes need to carry a .357 Magnum I'm not fond of the round.
4) Because I can carry with .44 Special / low magnum velocities.
5) Because when I go hiking, I can load with .44 Magnum.
6) Because I handload, and can make the ammo for my needs.
7) Because I like the looks, and the way it feels in my and, and most important, I can hit what I aim at.
8) Because I'm different............

 

[jad0110]

I'm not interested in them personally, but what ever floats your boat, ya know?

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.

also, i can see where a snubbie would be usefull on a bear, right after he has climbed on top of you and he is chewing on your flesh. but other than that, even if there is enough power, that short sight radius is not going to give you much of a chance of hitting it at any other distance. just seems like a waste to me.

My thoughts as well. Though I acknowledge that some people may be quite skilled in their use (more power to 'em), for me a snub 500 Mag would only be useful once the bear has chomped down on my hand ... pull the trigger and blow his teeth out of his butt .

If I were hiking in bear and/or moose country, I'd rather tote along a lever gun in 30-30, or even an AR in .308 winchester. Basically, something that is not too heavy while offering decent power and quick, easy follow-up shots. But that's just me.

 

[fourdollarbill]

May I interject and advise all of you exactly why "they" design a snub nose big bore gun for bear attacks?

When you shoot all five or six rounds into the bullet proof leather chest he is wearing the big bear will grab you and shoves the gun up your bum and the snubbies don't hurt as bad.

Okay, sorry for the bad joke but this thread needed some cold water.

 

[Monster Zero]

How about a handy lever gun?

Something much more useful to me would be a 5-shot lightweight revolver with about a 2 1/2 inch barrel. Make it in .44 special or maybe .45 acp / .45 auto rim and we've got something useful. Something like a better Charter Arms or a cheaper S&W "Nightguard".

Magnum blasto cartridges? I suppose I could find a place in the safe for a 5 1/2 inch Redhawk in .45 colt.

If I want to shoot something that's really powerful, or has more range, I own a rifle, and for "bear defense"... if that Redhawk in .45 colt won't do it I'd want a lever gun in .45-70 nearby. Ewscray the handguns.

 

[ironvic]

The real market IMO is the collector market for these guns. I would imagine a S&W bear prescription in a nice orange case with original manuals will be worth some serious money when your grandkids cash 'er in.

 

[ironvic]

I figure that, when the bear is giving you a big ol' hug and hanging on to your tasty flesh with his sharp claws, indulging in hiker lunch, that big compact revolver is easier to squeeze between his body and yours, working it agonizingly closer, tighter, to make contact with the point of impact and pull the trigger. After the bullet does its job and you are dead from a big hole in the head, the bear can finish lunch and be on his way.

 

[22-rimfire]

Anytime you choose a handgun over a long gun, it is a compromise over killing power versus utility and convenience.

I am a fan of the 480 Ruger cartridge. I didn't buy an Alaskan in 480 when I had the chance and I regret it. From my perspective, it is just about the largest caliber a normal person who does not shoot the big bores all the time can handle. It is debatable whether or not I can handle the 480 now. But it is a very logical step up in power from the 44 magnum without going to the 500.

Folks choose the short barreled big bore handguns cause they think they might be fun (or at least interesting) to shoot and they offer a great deal of power in a smallish package that approach rifle power. Rifles and handguns are different beasties however in larger calibers. You get into a discussion about tissue damage due to high velocity versus penetration.

My "snubbie" is a 4" Model 57 Mountain Gun (41 mag). It is plenty for anything I would normally encounter in the woods and a warning shot is often all that is necessary for bears unless they are just dang hungry and hell bent on killing you.

The intended use for the large bore snubbies is for hikers, fisherman, or as a backup while hunting in areas where you might encounter something a bit larger than a black bear. It is about 4-legged protection, not 2-legged protection. They are for close range shooting as a last resort. Most would not take a snubbie hunting as their primary gun, but they might have one as a backup deer hunting even though no backup is often necessary and a 22LR would probably do as well. Hunting in grizzly country is another matter and they can be attracted to the kill of a deer, elk or whatever. The snubbie gives you a a feeling of insurance and a lot of us are really hung up on insurance in general.

 

[Mainsail]

Anytime you choose a handgun over a long gun, it is a compromise over killing power versus utility and convenience.

Yes, you have to weigh things like necessity and the practicality. Now, some people consider a ‘hike’ to be the 50 yards of walking that occurs between their truck and the fishing hole. I hike off-trail for many miles, sometimes climbing up steep ridges for eight hours or more just to get to a remote lake (we are blessed with many “secret” alpine lakes here). I wouldn’t carry a lever gun on a hike like that; it’s just too heavy and clumsy. The last remote lake I visited for an overnighter had me leaving my tent at home to save weight. Oh, and yes, the fishing was worth it!

 

[BhmBill]

All guns got their place. Just because the people who buy a particular model of gun don't use it the way it was marketed doesn't mean people are wrong for buying it.

The .50 BMG was a machine gun round designed for anti-air use. I took almost 40 or 50 years before rifles started popping up chambered in it.

Who knows what the .500 S&W holds in its future? its only a few years old. Wait and see how it develops.

I agree with what most of you are saying about big bore snubbies, but remember, more guns made in more calibers means more R&D and possibly more calibers and gun models produced.

And if a law abiding citizen wants something, give it to them, whether it's practical or not.

 

[gazpacho]

Actually, my 454 Alaskan has proven to be surprisingly accurate. Slow fire at an 8" plate, hitting it at 50 yards is doable with some skill.

I believe the primary concept for the Alaskan was as a back-up weapon to a longarm. Stuff happens. Should your longarm fail, or perhaps be leaning against a tree stump 20 feet away, the Alaskan would offer a realistic minimal chance of fending off a bear or other dangerous critter.

I love my Alaskan. 75% of the lead that flies out of it is 45 Colt. Even a steady diet of the most obnoxious "Ruger Only" 45 colt loads won't wear this snubbie out.

Why an Alaskan?
- Because it puts a smile on my face that no 38, 357 or 44 can.
- Because for some reason, it pisses people off.
- Because my other car isn't a Porsche.
- Because I got a stupid "stimulus" check in the mail, instead of my government doing something sensible with my tax money, or simply not taking my money in the first place.

Why? Why not?!

 

[flat top]

I use/carry a S&W 629, 2 1/2", 44 Mag, fixed sights, all steel. I have never liked "light" or "small" revolvers...just personal preference. The Smith weighs 32 oz's, and is bearable even with top end 44 mag loads. I load "down" (250 grain Keith @ 700 or so) for use in the home, and up a bit (250 grain Keith at around 950) for CCW, outside of the home. For a "last ditch", close up, dangerous game load, I could employ full house loads, and have shot them in this gun just to see how it felt and handled. I can stay "on target" in double action mode, and yes it is abusive, but most top end loads in big bore's are to some degree. In that situation, who cares! What I really like about the gun is, that it is easy to handle in close quarters, around the house...in the car.... is reasonably unobtrusive, and light enough to carry, but, is heavy enough to satisfy my need for control and some semblance of recoil absorbtion with the heavier loads. This gun with top end loads is "as much" recoil as I can handle well, (or would care to handle) in a gun that I consider to be small and light enough to carry comfortably....so, I guess that my thinking is in line with markallens. This type of gun is not for everyone, and granted it is a "compromise" to the extreme, but, most large bore snubbies are.