Author Topic: 500 S&W vs. 454 Casull (Read 6157 times)

AK737FO · « **on:** April 01, 2005, 07:58:23 AM »

Hello all,
I just found this board and need some opinions. I live in the Great State of Alaska where I enjoy a lot of time in the outdoors. I have hunted (deer) and carried my Super Blackhawk for years for bear protection when fly fishing or archery hunting. My Ruger is a 10.5 barrel and I find it to be cumbersom. With all the new compact revolvers coming to market, I am interested in a new sidearm.

I have looked at the 500 S&W in 4 inch. It seems like a great gun with a massive amount of power. One of the local shops told me that they have had three customers come back with reports of hearing damage, one of these men fired it at a bear in self defense and ruptured his ear drum! This is a big deal to me as I do not want to permanently damage my ears if I need to fire the gun at a brown fuzzy - its not like a guy will have time to put in ear plugs if faced with a brown bear attack.

Next up is the new Ruger Alaskan in 454. I realized it has not hit the market yet, so any input will be just best guess at this point.

So to sum up. I am very concerned about ear damage from the 500 Smith - any opions are welcome. I have no experience with the 500 smith or the 454 caliber and would like everyone's opinion on their abilities for bear protection.
Thanks to all.
AK737FO

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #1 on:** April 01, 2005, 08:55:09 AM »

Either the Ruger Alaskan 454 Casull or the 500 MAG S&W 4 inch would be great for bear defence.

I just sold my Ruger Super Redhawk in 454 Casull with a 2 1/2 inch barrel, that I took to Alaska for bear defence. I use to shoot it once in a while just to see how the sound was without ear plugs, it was loud but not ear drum busting loud. I have a 4 inch 500MAG and it is a lot louder than my 2 1/2 in 454 Casull.

I would not shot it with out hearing protection in an indoor range, but I have shot it a couple of times outside without ear plugs just to see how loud it was, and it did not bust my ear drums. But if it came down to my hearing or my life, I would pick my life.

I do not recommend shooting any ported gun without ear protection, I just did it to see how bad it was. :eek:

Yukon Gold · « **Reply #2 on:** April 01, 2005, 08:59:38 AM »

Both calibers will make quite the "blast".

However, the 4" S&W 500's all come ported, which usually results in more noise - as far as the shooter is concerned (and those standing by them).

It would appear the Ruger .454 Alaskan does not come ported - all things considered - I would think the Alaskan would be "quieter" to the shooter.

oso45-70 · « **Reply #3 on:** April 01, 2005, 09:25:09 AM »

AK737FO

Welcome to GBO, I see you are new here, I think you will get some good advise here. As far as shooting either the 500mag or the 454 i wouldnt do either one without muffs or plugs. There are muffs that let you here
every thing and still block out the big bang.......Joe.............

unspellable · « **Reply #4 on:** April 01, 2005, 11:44:44 AM »

Considring the size they grow those brown fuzzies up there in Alaska I would think ear damage would be a low priority item in a self defense fuzzy shooting. Besides, if you stay away from 'em they won't shoot at you.

poncaguy · « **Reply #5 on:** April 01, 2005, 01:53:31 PM »

Might think about the new S&W .460, you can shoot 454 Casulls and 45 Long Colts in it too. Get a longer barrel to cut down on the blast....... :-)

jk3006 · « **Reply #6 on:** April 01, 2005, 03:29:32 PM »

AK737FO,

I would like to add that maybe the Alaskan in a .480 might be just the ticket. I'm not sure, but perhaps the .454 in a 2.5 inch barrel would be more handcuffed (as far as velecity is concerned) than the .480 would be in that barrel length. I have a .480 (7.5 inch barrel), and I shoot 400 grainers at 1200 f/s. I love the caliber and gun, Ruger SRH.

To answer your question, I would never shoot a ported handgun without plugs. That's just me.

Good luck with your choice,

Jon

redawg · « **Reply #7 on:** April 02, 2005, 08:23:05 AM »

First off, I live in Nebraska. I've never been faced with shooting a bear in self-defense and probably never will. With that, I think the SRH Alaskan in .480 Ruger would be a good choice. Bigger bullet than the .454, with less muzzle blast. If you wanted to go the route of the 4" .500, you could see if someone could make a non-compensated compensator for it. Does that make sense? I believe I've read that the compensator can be removed, so why couldn't someone make one w/out the holes? I know it's not a compensator then, but it might be an option. Just my :money: !

Catfish · « **Reply #8 on:** April 02, 2005, 09:08:55 AM »

You should wear ear portection with any lagre bore handgun. EAR inc. makes some hearing aids that shut off when you fire a gun and are well worht the money if you want to save your hearing, and you can turn the volume up and down to help you hear when hunting ect.
The .500 S&W is the only way to go for protection when talking about brown bears. Sighting In just did a show on hunting handguns last nite and the power factor of the .500 is so much more than any other handgun on the market none of the others are close, and with brown bear you want all you can get. I have a .500 S&W and the recoil is not bad at all. It did get to me when testing groups, but I fired 45 rounds over sand bags befor it really got to me, off hand you can shoot it all day. The 4 in. barrel would have more recoil, but still should be manageable.

Hcliff · « **Reply #9 on:** April 08, 2005, 01:01:31 PM »

Never shoot a handgun without protection. When a big Brownie comes a calling I think that rule can be broken. That would be the least of my concerns. Also must people in the Great state of Alaska or anywhere else don't ever have to fire the gun in self defense very often if ever. It is just a great insurance policy. All the calibers you have been told about are all good ones. It depends on what you want the handgun to do. I like to shoot my guns all the time so that is a concern of what do you like. I can feel the weight of some of the bigger handguns on my waist. A 454 or 480 in a short barrel might be less weight than a 500 (Not sure would have to check specs). That has been my concern.

Good Luck

Hcliff

6Shooter · « **Reply #10 on:** April 09, 2005, 06:01:37 PM »

I'm wondering....would a .44 mag not kill a bear? If I knew a big monster of a animal was coming down on me in the woods I would want a cannon, but it seems these big handguns are a bit too much to handle.
If I was in bear country I think I would carry a rifle instead of a handgun.

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #11 on:** April 10, 2005, 02:02:46 AM »

6Shooter, a lot of use agree that a rifle is better, but there are sometimes a pistol fits the bill better.

Have you ever tried fly fishing with a rifle on your back?
If you sleep in a tent in bear country a rifle is useless in a tent.

6Shooter · « **Reply #12 on:** April 10, 2005, 06:01:56 AM »

Yea, I know a rifle is not as handi, but if there are dangerous critters around better safe than sorry. There are some very nice carbines out there that would do. Ya couldn't hang them on your belt but more handy than a big rifle.

simplicity · « **Reply #13 on:** April 17, 2005, 05:00:05 AM »

There are alot of storys (note the word storys was said) of people killing big bruin easily with hot 300 grain loads in a 44. I live in maine so big bruins I have no exsperience with big bruins just relative that have a few esxperiences with black bears and heard storys of 300lbs black bears taking a whole cylinder of 240gr. 44s. Whether they were all placed right I couldn't tell you but when it comes to big animals I kinda look at older cartridges they didn't have the speed of todays rifles but they shot a big bullet and a big bullet not moving very fast still makes a good hole and penetrates deep. So when it comes to big bears the bigger the bullet the better is what I feel. Heck I love my 500 and I've owned 44's and a 454 as well, But if I was to go into some major bear country and and i wanted something semi compact but more then a handgun (granted alot of yousportsman might look down on me for saying this but think about it honestly before you judge) is get a riot shotgun with a pistol grip on the back and load it with 1 3/8 oz. 3 inch brenneke's if the sole purpose of the gun was close range bear defense and you can pick up one of these guns for little to nothing and yuh don't have to worry about keeping it pretty either.

jro45 · « **Reply #14 on:** May 25, 2005, 10:50:58 AM »

If I were going into big bear country I would have a 500 with me and nothing less for self protection.

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #15 on:** May 25, 2005, 12:55:42 PM »

Quote from: jro45

If I were going into big bear country I would have a 500 with me and nothing less for self protection.

Another 500 user

Dusty Miller · « **Reply #16 on:** May 25, 2005, 09:48:03 PM »

Ah, bear defense. If you want to get a bunch of guys pontificating, just bring up bear defense! However, it sure fun!!

Catfish · « **Reply #17 on:** May 27, 2005, 01:52:01 PM »

I love big bore handgun and have been shooting them since the 1960`s. I have 3 - .44 mags, 2 - .454`s and a 500 S&W. I will not fire any of them without ear protection, even when hunting.
As far as Brown bear protection I would use the biggest I got, the .500.

RANGER RICK · « **Reply #18 on:** June 30, 2005, 05:44:01 AM »

Guess I will throw my nickel's worth in . I have seen the 4" versions with the non ported sleeve . They look very nice and I am sure it did cut down the noise level a bit . I do not have the 4" bit I do have the 10.5 PC Hunter and I have no problem at all carring it as a side arm while I am hunting and carring my rifle and I even carry it whlie bow hunting . It is very loud to shoot so I never shoot it without ear protection. I hunt with a set of electronic ear muffs on . They enhance softer noises and cut out the very loud noises . One thing is that my ears get very sweaty while walking around in the woods . Try it and you will like it .

RR

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #19 on:** June 30, 2005, 06:30:11 AM »

I use a set of electronic ear muffs also. Sure does help. :eek:

ShootnStr8 · « **Reply #20 on:** June 30, 2005, 07:30:28 AM »

6Shooter is making a good point about using a rifle.

JJHack, who moderates the Africa Hunting forum, has forgotten more than most of us will ever know about bears. I remember him posting a while back that handguns can give a person a false sense of security and keep a person from taking the proper precautions to avoid a conflict with a bear. At the time, he suggested that a rifle in an appropriate chambering was the way to go.

One, of course, could argue that a pistol is better than nothing. It would be worth a note to JJ to find out just how much better than nothing and to get his advice. I fear that most of us would be guessing while he has the extensive field experience.

One additional thing I might suggest is that if you are going to carry a handgun for protection against bears use a lanyard of a proper length to tie the handgun to yourself.

Be safe!

ShootnStr8

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #21 on:** June 30, 2005, 10:13:54 AM »

Quote from: ShootnStr8

6Shooter is making a good point about using a rifle.

JJHack, who moderates the Africa Hunting forum, has forgotten more than most of us will ever know about bears. I remember him posting a while back that handguns can give a person a false sense of security and keep a person from taking the proper precautions to avoid a conflict with a bear. At the time, he suggested that a rifle in an appropriate chambering was the way to go.

One, of course, could argue that a pistol is better than nothing. It would be worth a note to JJ to find out just how much better than nothing and to get his advice. I fear that most of us would be guessing while he has the extensive field experience.

One additional thing I might suggest is that if you are going to carry a handgun for protection against bears use a lanyard of a proper length to tie the handgun to yourself.

Be safe!

ShootnStr8

You may be correct that JJHack is very knowledgeable, but there are a lot of us that are able to make an informed decision on our own. Everyone can have there opinion that what they think is best. It is totally your our decision. Yes common since is first and far more the best thing going. I am sure we also know a rifle is always first choice in a bear defence situation, but if a handgun makes us feel better, who has the right to impose there way, as the way it should be done.

There are so many opinions out there on what to have as protection it is not even funny. Me, I do what I think will suites my needs. I carry a rifle and have a back up pistol, that is just the way I do it. If you don't like what I do then that is fine, but I may think your way is not what I feel is best for me. So to me there is not right or wrong way to do it. Good common since is the real issue.

AK|Bandit · « **Reply #22 on:** June 30, 2005, 11:18:57 AM »

Quote from: Redhawk1

You may be correct that JJHack is very knowledgeable, but there are a lot of use that are able to make an informed decision on our own. Everyone can have there opinion that what they think is best. It is totally your our decision. Yes common since is first and far more the best thing going. I am sure we also know a rifle is always first choice in a bear defence situation, but if a handgun makes us feel better, who has the right to impose there way, as the way it should be done.

There are so many opinions out there on what to have as protection it is not even funny. Me, I do what I think will suites my needs. I carry a rifle and have a back up pistol, that is just the way I do it. If you don't like what I do then that is fine, but I may think your way is not what I feel is best for me. So to me there is not right or wrong way to do it. Good common since is the real issue.

:yeah: that :wink:
The odds are against you that you will ever have to use a gun against a bear in self defense. That fact alone is enough for me to not carry a rifle. I do alot of hiking, fishing, and camping, so if it doesnt fit in a holster, I dont want to carry it. A carbine, no matter how short, is still too cumbersome. I've tried lugging a pistol gripped 12ga with an 18" barrel on my back while hiking and fishing, and it just takes the fun out of it. Besides, I can unholster my revolver twice as fast as I can unsling my rifle or shotgun. I am very confident that my 454 casull will do the job in the unlikely event of having to defending myself. Sorry, didnt mean to ramble

RANGER RICK · « **Reply #23 on:** June 30, 2005, 12:41:44 PM »

Not sure what type of shotgun you use with those slugs and how far you are shooting but I have never had a deer run any distance with a hit to the chest with a slug !!! I have watched them do a back flip after being hit and even seen them get lifted off the ground but not run . You might want to close in a couple hundred yards with that shotgun :eek:
Do yourself a favor and do a little research on those MONSTER REVOLVERS you will be suprised .

RR

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #24 on:** June 30, 2005, 05:19:35 PM »

Quote from: RANGER RICK

Not sure what type of shotgun you use with those slugs and how far you are shooting but I have never had a deer run any distance with a hit to the chest with a slug !!! I have watched them do a back flip after being hit and even seen them get lifted off the ground but not run . You might want to close in a couple hundred yards with that shotgun :eek:
Do yourself a favor and do a little research on those MONSTER REVOLVERS you will be suprised .

RR

You tell him Ranger Rick.

Knowledge of those MONSTER REVOLVERS will change his mind. I am sure these Alaskan boy's know well what a good handgun is capable of.

ShootnStr8 · « **Reply #25 on:** July 01, 2005, 04:19:54 AM »

I was poking around the net and ran across a story that appeared in the Anchorage Daily News entitled "Pistol-packing hiker kills brown bear in sudden Chugach foothills attack." The pistol was a .44 mag. The bear was 750 pounds and the hiker emptied all but one round. So it appears that you MONSTER PISTOL packing folks have a point

Here is the link: http://www.adn.com/front/story/5591480p-5522882c.html Another interesting bear story can be found at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/997103/posts

Have a great 4th!

ShootnStr8

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #26 on:** July 01, 2005, 05:00:49 AM »

Quote from: ShootnStr8

I was poking around the net and ran across a story that appeared in the Anchorage Daily News entitled "Pistol-packing hiker kills brown bear in sudden Chugach foothills attack." The pistol was a .44 mag. The bear was 750 pounds and the hiker emptied all but one round. So it appears that you MONSTER PISTOL packing folks have a point Here is the link: http://www.adn.com/front/story/5591480p-5522882c.html Another interesting bear story can be found at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/997103/posts

Have a great 4th!

ShootnStr8

Good report. It may not happen often, but the best thing is to always be prepared for the worst. You also have a great 4th.

AK737FO · « **Reply #27 on:** September 04, 2006, 09:05:13 PM »

Hello Gents,
Well it has been over a year since I posted this question. I thought I would drag it out for a new round of input. Since I posed the first question I endured a 30% pay cut at work. That changed my priorities a bit - my morgage became much more important than a new pistol!

Dreaming of better (financial) days to come, I have started looking into big hog pistols again. I have changed my idea of the perfect pistol and thought I would get your opinions.

I will relaod my own ammo. I've looked at the .500 and the .460 reloading data and it would seem that they are darn close to the same (in ft/lbs on target). I want a pistol that is fairly short, that will easily mount a scope, that I can kill dear with in Alaska (75 yard or less) and has the power to provide bear protection.

The leading contender seems to be the S&W 500 performance center in 6 1/2. I can put a scope on it for deer season and wear it across my chest, then take the scope off for fishing and hiking and put it on my belt.

So the 500 or the 460? Another contender that can't be ingnored is the BFR in 500 Smith or 45/70. I have seen a few for sale with 7 1/2 barrels. As the ladies say - size does matter, and in this case I am interested in being reasonably "short stacked".

I appriciate your comments and I wish a safe hunting season for all.
AK737FO

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #28 on:** September 05, 2006, 01:57:10 AM »

The 460 Mag with a 5 inch barrel is a great choice, I have one and when I mount a red-dot on it, I get great 100 yards groups. Now as far as 500 or 460 Mag, I have 2 of each now. I have a 7.5 inch PC model and a 5 inch model in 460 Mag and a BFR and 4 inch S&W in 500 Mag. I used my BFR last year on my black bear hunt. I had my BFR shortened to 6 inches and had it Mag-na-ported, I can't tell the difference in how loud it is to how loud it was before being Mag-na-ported.
I love both the 460 and 500 Mag, but if I had to choose one it would be the 460 Mag. But I am glad I don't have to make that decision.

STJ · « **Reply #29 on:** September 05, 2006, 03:04:48 PM »

IMHO the 460 or 500 is overkill on hogs. The 480 Ruger loaded with a 420gr LBT bullet flying at 1200fps, will kill a hog and defiantly a deer with no problems. Plus the recoil and muzzle blast is a lot less than either S&Ws. Also the 480 will fit the bill for an easy packing bear gun. FYI that load has killed bison with no issues also...complete pass through.