Author Topic: .454 - 475 (Read 2567 times)

Sverre A. · « **on:** September 14, 2005, 08:48:21 AM »

I`m trying to justify a reason for going up to .475 Linebaugh.
I have a .454.

(at the moment I have no plans/money to shoot something bigger than animals like a moose)

What`s your opinion?
Maybe some of you have both calibers?

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #1 on:** September 14, 2005, 11:05:51 AM »

Sverre A., I have a FA in 454 Casull but I stepped up to the S&W460. I still have my FA but the 460 will do most of the work the 454 was going to do. But when I really want to go out of the box, I will pick up one of my 500 Mag's.

Dusty Miller · « **Reply #2 on:** September 14, 2005, 08:59:59 PM »

The BEST reason to "justify" buying a new gun is, "I want it"!!

Old Griz · « **Reply #3 on:** September 15, 2005, 05:49:00 PM »

:cb2: I don't know what a .475 would do that a .454 would not. (I'd love to have either!) However, could anyone have too many FA83s?

EdK · « **Reply #4 on:** September 19, 2005, 02:18:26 PM »

Last I remember you were struggling with heavy bullets in your 454. Have you either proved they will not work to your satisfaction or given up on trying?

I was interested in doing the same thing but frankly do not have the time to pursue it exhaustively right now. What I can say that after conversing with folks at FA and Cast Performance I was assured that it is done all of the time with good performance right up to 350gr. Above that it became more of a lack of data/feedback than anyone being able to confirm it would not work.

I too do not plan on anything larger than moose. I have to ask myself what I will really gain with the 475? Sure it is bigger and more powerful but how much really? For grizzly it could never be powerful enough but for moose where do you stop? If you're shooting a magnum rifle and place a decent hit into the boiler room there are still occasional reports of them stumbling off 50 yards or so before dropping...

I suppose I must have a bit of 475 envy as well. If you just want one then go get it. I can't see that it could be anything but a marginal improvement at best over a well-placed 454 bullet. :-)

Sverre A. · « **Reply #5 on:** September 19, 2005, 05:21:06 PM »

"Last I remember you were struggling with heavy bullets in your 454. Have you either proved they will not work to your satisfaction or given up on trying?"

With FA`s factoryammunition 260 gr./my own loads with the similar bullet - the accuracy is very good.
I have not given up (but very close to) - so I have ordered a lot of Frontier CS Game 390 gr. from South Africa (will be in the same container as my trophies).
I should wish I could live with groups around 3" at 60 yds (with a Ruger - yes - but not FA).

palgeno · « **Reply #6 on:** September 21, 2005, 01:45:51 AM »

3 inches at 60 yds would not be that bad from any hunting revolver if you are shooting off hand under field conditions. Using the Corbon 320 gr Penetrator this is entirely possible in a mod. 83. The construction of the bullet in that ammo was designed to plow through dense animals like Cape Bufffalo, etc. I have not tried this ammo on such animals, so maybe I am foolish to believe Corbon's claims, but I do know they will pass through the plate and shoulders of aBIG wild hog and keep going through a 16 inch diameter South Carolina pine tree. :shock: :grin: pg

TScottO · « **Reply #7 on:** September 21, 2005, 04:48:28 PM »

Bigger bullets at lower pressures. Less sharp recoil and a bigger hole. Brass life is longer.

On the terminal end of things I dont think youll ever see a difference. The way I look at it if you want to shoot heavy bullets go to a larger caliber. I like shooting my guns for the bullet weights they were designed for. Shoot 260-320 out of the 454 and 380-425s out of the 475. I know a lot of folks really like to push there guns to the limits where performance begins to drop but thats not for me. I guess my life is pretty dull when it comes to experimenting.

I like being able to shoot 850fps up to 1400 fps with the same gun and still retain excellent accuracy. The 475 provides that and my 454 doesnt.

Take Care,
Scott

Sverre A. · « **Reply #8 on:** September 21, 2005, 06:53:16 PM »

"3 inches at 60 yds would not be that bad from any hunting revolver if you are shooting off hand under field conditions"

Agree!

But my 3" is over sandbags.

palgeno · « **Reply #9 on:** September 22, 2005, 03:24:30 AM »

If you are using open sights over sandbags, 3" at 60 yds is still fairly good. You are an experienced handgunner so you must have learned to controll the "flinch problem".If using a scope, and you get good accuracy with your 260 gr load, but not with heavier loads, the bullet or the velocity must be the answer. I find that near maximum loads shoot the best from my gun---not max and not reduced loads. But some bullets just do not do well and the worst are cast lead without a gas check.

p

g

Sverre A. · « **Reply #10 on:** September 22, 2005, 12:47:53 PM »

"If you are using open sights over sandbags, 3" at 60 yds is still fairly good"
No - scope!

"have learned to controll the "flinch problem"."

No problem (and the weight of pull is only 1 lb)!

"the bullet or the velocity must be the answer. I find that near maximum loads shoot the best from my gun"

I`ve tried a lot of bullets (different weightS and types), but I have not tried all the bullets upon max. loads. Maybe you can be right!

Dusty Miller · « **Reply #11 on:** September 22, 2005, 09:14:01 PM »

That's been my experience too. Loads that are about 1 gr. below book max seem to be just the ticket.

Sverre A. · « **Reply #12 on:** October 04, 2005, 08:40:57 AM »

I have decided to buy a 475. But I have some doubt about the barrellength. What`s your point of view?

Old Griz · « **Reply #13 on:** October 04, 2005, 01:39:43 PM »

:cb2: No data, facts, or figures--just personal preference, 7.5" to 6". At the very least 5.5". Nothing shorter for a huntin' shootin' iron.

TScottO · « **Reply #14 on:** October 08, 2005, 06:25:09 PM »

Mines a 6 incher and if I were to purchase this gun again I'd still go with six. There is no scientific reason for this other than I'm partial to six inch barrels on FA 83's. They pack well and are not front heavy and have a long enough sight radius for good iron sight shooting. The velocity difference between the shorter and longer barrels doesn't amount to much in a gun that gains its horse power from bullet weight instead of speed.

Take Care,
Scott

corbanzo · « **Reply #15 on:** October 14, 2005, 09:10:08 AM »

What the hell are you guys talking about stepping up to the 475??? the casull goes faster, and carries more energy the the linebaugh. A lot more. You can load the .475 to make it get about 1500 ft/lbs. You can load the .454 up to 2000 ft/lbs. And its going to be going 200-300 fps faster than the .475. Now the linebaugh is usually going to be pushing more lead, but that makes it have worse trajectory, and even worse for hunting. Just because 475 is a bigger number that 454 don't mean sh**.

myronman3 · « **Reply #16 on:** October 21, 2005, 01:49:30 AM »

o.k., i will play along.

given your above info, why do you think a guy like linebaugh would dink arounddevolping the 475? surely a guy with his background knows a little something aobut pistols and how they kill? and why is the linebaugh considered some of the best medicine for dangerous game from a handgun?

you tell me.

Sverre A. · « **Reply #17 on:** November 06, 2005, 08:41:28 AM »

"Just because 475 is a bigger number that 454 don't mean sh**."

But still - I ordered a 6" with express-sights.

My 454 - don`t accept heavy bullets - but is fine with FA`s 260 gr. (factory and selfloaded).

The 454 can be "the flatshooter" for deer/antilopes - and the 475 will be the gun I bring with me for the Cape buffalo.

palgeno · « **Reply #18 on:** November 07, 2005, 03:55:15 AM »

I think you will really like using those express sights ---FA has the best set I've seen. The 4x scope on my 10" .454 allowed me to get great groups at 100 yds and over, but the big JDJ caliber barrels on TC's are really more suited to such usage in my hands. I went to a 7 1/2 inch FA .454 with the express set up and do not regret it for a moment. Although I don't shoot open sights well because neither front nor rear sight is in focus for my vision-- even with glasses,-- the express sights allow me to hit well enough out to 75 yards. I realize that this does not use the accuracy potential of this fine handgun, but there is something about "close in" hunting with an iron sighted revolver that makes it seem exciting. More challenging than with scoped guns? Certainly different. I would not give up my scoped TC's for "long range" hunting. But for fast acquisition of the target at close ranges, those express sights on the FA work better for me than anything else---and you can carry it in your belt holster just like a cowboy! :grin: pg

corbanzo · « **Reply #19 on:** December 05, 2005, 08:29:33 AM »

When that .475 doesnt penetrate, but leaves a big bruise on your buff, I guess you'll be glad it's heavy enough to throw at him!! :-D

Jeremiah Johnson · « **Reply #20 on:** December 05, 2005, 08:48:34 AM »

This is for you Corbanzo.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_158_26/ai_86704793

EdK · « **Reply #21 on:** December 06, 2005, 02:05:58 AM »

Even though the article was intended for Corbanzo I got something useful out of it: A big bore seminar conducted by Linebaugh and reported on by Taffin involved penetration testing where one of the combinations involved a FA83 in 454 firing Cor-Bon's 360 gr. bonded core bullet.

I wonder if anyone ever noticed the combination wouldn't shoot worth a darn.

palgeno · « **Reply #22 on:** December 08, 2005, 01:09:14 PM »

Anyone here ever use the Corbon 360's in your .454? Any accuracy comparisons? That article indicates penetration is excellent. pg

corbanzo · « **Reply #23 on:** January 08, 2006, 04:13:33 PM »

And did anyone notice that the .500 line with a different loading is at the very bottom of the list? You need 60 grains more lead to get two inches... hmmm.. And I don't know if you noticed, but the .45 colt is right below that, what does that show? My .454 will shoot a .45 colt, and I've shot them one after the other. You can see the recoil, destruction, everything so much higher. You little penetration test put the .45 colt (500 ft/lbs energy) two inches away from the .454 casull (1800 ft/lbs energy). Does that make any sense, not to me. Wet newspaper isn't an animal. I still think its pretty funny how the lowest .45 colt is higher than the lowest .500 linebaugh..... What they need to do is load these guns with the same type of lead, powder, etc.

Onty · « **Reply #24 on:** January 21, 2006, 02:50:00 PM »

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_158_26/ai_86704793[/quote]

My 2 cents; in that respect, 480 Ruger should be enough. It could certainly push 420 gr. bullet 1,050 fps and beyond as .475 Linebaugh listed in this article. If you are thinking about longer ranges 100 yds and more, 454 could be better choice, but the price will be much greater muzzle blast that goes with it. Otherwise, I would go with 475 cal., Linebaugh or Ruger. Brass and loaded ammo would be easier to find for later one.