First NEW Handi

[cab32]

Have been looking for a 500 S&W. Found one today.  It is new with a standard wood stock, iron (plastic) sights made in Ilion.  This is the first handi I have purchased new.  I own 4 and a topper in 22 hornet so the sticker price seemed high but I have seen no used 500 S&Ws except  one with a $500 price tag on it, and  want to try this  round.
 I want to scope it as the plastic glowing red and green sights don't do much for me. I understand that the recoil is destructive to scopes and mounts.  Anyone have experience with this cartridge and want to recommend optics and mounts that will do well with its recoil?
CAB

[revbc]

Don't have any experience with the 500; however, I like the ironsighter base.  It's cheap and has metal all the way across the mount to support the ring cross screws.  H&R bases only have metal on the edges.  The Warne base is steel and a good one, but a little pricey.

It was my understanding that the 500's were breaking the ring cross bolts/screws.

I think all this is covered in the FAQ's.  Take a look there.

[MNSHOOTER]

I am not sure I understand...! I have two 45-70 scoped handis and have shot them many times with full house loads and have never broke a mount or ring. I have a couple of .500 revolvers and find the recoil mild compaired to the .460 full house loads in my smith. Although a handi could be different I just dont now how.

[cwlongshot]

 I had a 500 and shot it quite a bit with 500 and up bullets at top velocities. (Chronographed 1800 fps 500g bullets) Now I did not find the recoil debilitating, but it was stout. I would say quite similar to the heavy 2000 fps 400g 45-70 loads.
 
I mounted a Leupold VXII 2x7 scope in Leupold PRW rings on a H&R base. I was having some troubles with occasional flyer's. I did once remove the base, clean the screws and holes. Then reinstall the base and screws with red lock tite and proper torque. Then reinstalled the rings and scope. NO lock tite there. But the problems where still there. In hind site, I assume the cross pin, IE recoil shoulder for the ring was cracked and I did not see it. The design of this ring has that cross pin only supported on a single side. To exacerbate this shortcoming, the factory bases slots are very small and located on the very edges. 
 
Here is some pics of what I mean.

You can see the cuts in the base for the cross pin I just mentioned.
 
Here is the offending ring. I feel it failed because of its design. It holds up to most calibers, but not the 500 heavy loads.



 
I still use these rings and I do like the looks and heft. I do NOT use them on anything with substantial recoil.
 
Burris ZEE rings are steel and have a full width cross pin. Same for the Warne rings. BOTH are my top pic for a good stout ring.
 
For the base, I do use the factory still, but only because I haven't swapped them out yet. IMHO they are insufficient for all but the lightest recoiling calibers. Warne bases get the nod for heavy kickers or extra duty type use.
 
CW

[jeneks84k10]

This is good info. I would have never thought about the design of h&r bases and "cheap" rings being a problem area but Ive always used lighter recoil guns so this is all new to me.
 
On a side note, the only other person I have ever seen/heard use the word exacerbate was my biology professor in college
Ive always thought it was a cool word.

[cab32]

Shot the 500 today with my son.  Great fun but the stock sights have to go.  Took a look at the iron sighter base as recommended  since it has the ring grooves the full width of the base.  This feature may  help support the rings better than the standard H&R base or the leopold rifleman bases I have been using on my other handi.  Although it is aluminum, it is one third the price of the Warne steel bases.   I will take a look at the Zee and warne rings.  Thanks for the help.
CAB