The .500 mag is no more

[jeager106]

effective than the .44 magnum!

Well that orta get some shorts twisted!

Now relax and let me explain that.
I'm speaking of powerful, practical, revolver cartridges at senesible handgun hunting ranges.
Personally I consider the .357 magnum to be a marginally acceptable round for deer sized game at close range, under 40 yards.
That said let's address the handgun calibers suitable for hunting big game.
Could we agree that the .41 mag is about as light a caliber as one would want for game the size of deer and black bear?
Can we agree that reasonable handgun hunting ranges for a proper revolver with open sights to be 100 yards MAX?
I would suggest 50 yards maximum for us mere mortals but you experts know you can shoot 4" groups offand at 100 yards all day long.
My hats off to you guys.
 
That being the case; that 50 to 100 yards is a practical maximum range for us to be slinging lead at deer and black bear can anyone explain to me why the .460, the .454, the .500 are more effective than your everyday common run of the mill .44 mag, the .45 Colt loaded to potential, and the .41 magnum?
I'm not addressing you guys that are lucky enough to draw a permit to hunt the endangered T Rex, but the popular, and more common, whitetail and black bear.
Disclaimer.
If you want a .500 magnum or other hand cannons of that genre then that's reason enough to own one.
I just want to know if anyone believes the huge boomers are really any more effective on the deer and black bear that most of us hunt?
Controversy is a good thing.

[Lloyd Smale]

for deer and black bear at those ranges its not. Dead is dead.

[Redhawk1]

Is it needed "No". Neither is a 7MM Mag or 300 Win Mag but people use them.

The 41 Mag, 45 L/C and 44Mag have worked for years at, as you put it  "practical maximum range 50 to 100 yards"

[myronman3]

that is it!  i am going out and buying a lottery ticket!   i never thought i would live to see the day!!!!

[Questor]

I really like posts like this. It's stimulating and we get to see each others' opinions on things. For my own hunting I've desperately tried to come up with an excuse for buying a 45LC, 454, 460, 475, 480, or 500, but just haven't been able to work up enough interest in one of these cartridges to do it because I like my 44s so much. They just do what I want them to do. Even at that, my 44s are one revolver and a single shot Contender barrel. They're so good that I'm satisfied that their niche is adequately filled, and to a satisfying degree.

I know that utter satisfaction with a gun and cartridge is a pretty lame excuse for not going out and buying another gun just because I want it, but the truth is such as it is and I make no further apologies for it.

[Redhawk1]

I really like posts like this. It's stimulating and we get to see each others' opinions on things. For my own hunting I've desperately tried to come up with an excuse for buying a 45LC, 454, 460, 475, 480, or 500, but just haven't been able to work up enough interest in one of these cartridges to do it because I like my 44s so much. They just do what I want them to do. Even at that, my 44s are one revolver and a single shot Contender barrel. They're so good that I'm satisfied that their niche is adequately filled, and to a satisfying degree.

I know that utter satisfaction with a gun and cartridge is a pretty lame excuse for not going out and buying another gun just because I want it, but the truth is such as it is and I make no further apologies for it.

That is what is nice about the whole think, what works for you and makes you happy is all that counts. Some of us just look for something different. Could you image all the post here if we all did it the same way.  :eek:

[Questor]

I keep waffling around about what I would get if I did take the plunge and get another one, and after thinking about it I lean toward greater velocity in a relatively small projectile. The 454 Casull and 460 S&W do that. But then, my biggest animals with such a gun would be hogs.  An extra few hundred feet per second really do seem to make a difference in TOE (time to expire).

[Bullseye]

They are needed because that is the American Way.  "Bigger is Better"!

By the way, I do not own one, the more older calibers do what I need in a much smaller package.

[Turk]

This debate will never end.  It's like what combat round is better a 5.56 or a 7.62  The fact is the any thing over a 44 Mag. is over kill on  whitetail.  But as Bullseye said the American way is bigger is better.   Maybe that's why I have big bore handguns and barrels?  This year for whitetail I plan to use a 357 max. for gun season and a Jeager for muzzleloading  :lol:

Turk

Remember to pray for our troops.

[simplicity]

First off good post. I'm a big 500 fan and I am one of those guys who shoots the 3-4 inch groups off hand with open sights at 100. An you are right except in one case. In the case of a moose I would prefer more then a 44 just because I've seen some moose absorb alot of lead and they were put in the right spot as well, but odd cases do happen. Right now I'm, playing with the 200 yard line with open sights now. I will aggree with the rest as far as black bear and whitetail are concerned  you don't need anything more then a 44-45 colt for under a hundred yards. I do beleive in the old school theory of the big slow bullets, once you get a freight train going it's hard to stop. All the 500 is is just a really big freight train. I shoot it because I've always had a knack for shooting big revolvers and I shoot it well. If I ever come accrossed something in the woods that I can't handle with it you can bet I've already paid someoen to be behind me with a double 416 rigby or better.

[jeager106]

Is it needed "No". Neither is a 7MM Mag or 300 Win Mag but people use them.

The 41 Mag, 45 L/C and 44Mag have worked for years at, as you put it  "practical maximum range 50 to 100 yards"

Redhawk: I think you missed part of my point in my post.
I said that the factory wheel gun with open sites had a maximum practical range of 50 to 100 yards.
The .460, nor the .500 change the maximum range one iota.
Those calibers are still chambered in revolvers with open sights but are not magic and power alone cannot extend the practical limits of the sights and shooter.
If a shooter can hold 4" offhand 50 yards groups with a .454 what in gawds name makes the .500 a 200 yard weapon in the same shooters hands??
All that power is simply for not.
And yes I read your rifle remarks that were out of place on a handgun forum and out of the context of the discussion. Stick to the subject being discussed please, else this will turn all sorts of directions at once and we might need to solicite the aid of a moderator to get back on track.
If the .44 mag and others of that ilk are deadly good 'nuff at the mentioned ranges why is the .500 'better'?
How dead is dead?
Is it not true that many people cannot accurately handle the recoil of the .500 mag and make 4" offhand groups at 100 yards?
I know that an expert big boar shooter such as yourself can shoot acorns out of the tallest oak with your .500 but what about us average mortal NRA rated Master Marksmen?
The .500 simply is not even close to necessary for 50 yard whitetail sniping and way too much gun for most hunters.
I'd LOVE to have one, but I guess I'll make do in deer country with my lowlife, insignificant .44's, .45 Colts, and 41 mag. (sniff)
Maybe I orta get a 'mans concealed carry NAA mini gun to defend my bacon huh?

[Redhawk1]

jeager106, I really did not know why I even got into a discussion with you, I should of learned the first time. I am through totally with even trying to have an intelligent conversation with you. You constant reference to Moderators is a joke.  I am officially ignoring your posts, they are just for a soul purpose of argument. If anyone differs with your opinions you don't like it. As far as my reference being off topic, what about our last thread, it was a handgun thread as well when you referenced using a rifle.  :roll:  I forgot I was dealing with an arm chair expert.  :roll: Do me a favor ignore my post as I will yours. You talk about sticking with the topic, you throw in you NAA 22 mag jab.

[doncisler]

depends as much on how you are hunting as what you are hunting.
black bear, hogs, and walking for deer i use a 10" bfr, iron sighted, in 45-70.  i can keep 'em all in a foot off hand at 75 yards and with any sort of rest to 100 yards.
if i am going to be in my deer blind or tree stand where i always have a good ledge to rest on i take my 460 s&w.  with the better rest i can keep them in a foot at 200 yards and there is plenty of retained energy.
i cannot do that with any of my 44's.

[ratgunner]

jeager106, are you on medication? :-D  :-D  :-D

[shermbob]

They are needed because that is the American Way.  "Bigger is Better"!

By the way, I do not own one, the more older calibers do what I need in a much smaller package.

While bigger can be better sometimes More is better. 357, 44mag , 454, 45/70 and stiil looling for a 500  at the right price.
shermbob

[all4abuck]

Jeager,
You can kill a deer with a knife, if you get REALLY close.
Forget about 357 and 41, try a swiss army knife... :twisted:

[jeager106]

Jeager,
You can kill a deer with a knife, if you get REALLY close.
Forget about 357 and 41, try a swiss army knife... :twisted:

I'm not real sure but I think there might be a little difference between the effectivness of a magnum handgun and a Swiss army knife.
The point I was making that most people understood was that there is no effective difference between a .500 magnum and the like and a .44 magnum class handgun.
All things being equal, i.e. it's a given that with factory sights the maximum effective range for a good marksman is about 100 yards.
For the average shooter I'd say 50 to 60 yards is about maximum.
The super gee whiz modern generation magnum handguns are no more effective at taking a whitetail or black bear than the .44 mag class weapons.
The .500 magnum types still do not increase effective range.
The big magnums are certainly more powerful but after 100 yards power is not the factor.
Being able to deliver the bullet is the most important element.
Just shooting a .500 magnum does not make the hunter any more able to increase the effective range which is limited by the nature of the weapon itself.

[Redhawk1]

Believe it or not but jeager106 is correct. "There is no effective difference between a .500 magnum and the like and a .44 magnum class handgun for deer and bear hunting"  Contrary to belief I understand fully.
But what I like is, the distance beyond the effective range which makes me choose the 460 Mag or 500 Mag.

[corbanzo]

Heck, I hear you can kill stuff with this thing with a piece off wood and string and long skinny piece of wood with a sharp point... there's not even an explosion, lest a huge one!!!  Whoodathunkit.....  whoodathunkit...  they call it like a bough, or sumthin??  Can you kill without lots and lots of gunpowder??? :-D  :-D  :-D  :-D  :-D  :-D  :-D

[jeager106]

Redhawk has got the point spot on!
Say, Red....THANKS!
Everyone bear in mind I'm not knocking the ultral big handcannons at all.
Merely pointing out that they are no more effective on most game at handgun hunting ranges.
All that extra power and recoil is completely unneccessary for game the size of black bear and deer.
No one can realize the potential of the really big boomers with open sights at ranges of 100 yards and less.
Once again there is nothing wrong with the hand cannons and if you want one get one, 'er two 'er three.
Frankly if one comes my way at a price I can handle I will get one just to have one.
I hunt deer. Ranges are relatively short, under 60 yards or so.
My .45 Colts, .44 mags, the .41 mag are all plenty enough gun for that task.
The 500 mag can cleanly harvest game to 200 yards or more, I have no doubt.
It's the hunter that can't control a 200 yard shot with an open sight revolver and no responsible hunter would ever try that stunt.

[Scott T]

I respectfully disagree.

I think there is a bit of advantage to shooting a larger diameter bullet even at close ranges.  A handgun is not a terribly powerful tool to begin with, but a .500 Linebaugh  does open a pretty big hole.  

The problem is that your premise is flawed.  Increasing range is not really practical because of the physical limitations of the shooter as well as the instrument.  

Extended range is not the reason some of us use .500 Linebaugh handguns.  Some of us believe that the bigger hole lets in lots of cold air and lets out plenty of blood.  You see, all things are not equal, that .429 bullet has to expand quite a bit to match the .512 I am shooting.

[Lone Star]

I'll support Scott T as well.  For the classic broadshide lung shot at a standing deer at 50 yards there is little difference between the rounds mentioned.....but how many hunters ever get the chance to take a shot like that?  Not many, and most will be forced to take a shot that may be angling, may be at a moving deer, there may be light brush in the way - you get the picture.  The heavier bullet, larger hole and deeper penetration of the .475s and .500s may mean the difference between harvesting the deer and losing it, or not finding it until it is fly-blown and bloated.   Amateurs think in terms of the perfect shot, experienced hunters know that these occur infrequently in most woods.

If the .30-30 really was as effective at woods ranges as a .30-06, then the latter would not be so popular with experienced hunters.  The fact is that the extra power of the old .30-06 kills better - not deader.  Dead is dead - responsible hunters want game to die sooner.  Sheesh.

[Redhawk1]

I'll support Scott T as well.  For the classic broadshide lung shot at a standing deer at 50 yards there is little difference between the rounds mentioned.....but how many hunters ever get the chance to take a shot like that?  Not many, and most will be forced to take a shot that may be angling, may be at a moving deer, there may be light brush in the way - you get the picture.  The heavier bullet, larger hole and deeper penetration of the .475s and .500s may mean the difference between harvesting the deer and losing it, or not finding it until it is fly-blown and bloated.   Amateurs think in terms of the perfect shot, experienced hunters know that these occur infrequently in most woods.

If the .30-30 really was as effective at woods ranges as a .30-06, then the latter would not be so popular with experienced hunters.  The fact is that the extra power of the old .30-06 kills better - not deader.  Dead is dead - responsible hunters want game to die sooner.  Sheesh.

Lone Star, The 30-06 shines as a longer range cartridge. Within 150 yards both will kill a deer with no problem. The 30-06 kills no better than a 30-30 within that 150 yards.  Also the 30-06 shines when you have the ability to load heavier bullets.  

[Dino Darnell]

Evidently you have never shot a deer with a .30-30, bullet design on those 2 cartridges come into play. I would rather have a good wrist rocket than a .30-30 for deer.

[Redhawk1]

Evidently you have never shot a deer with a .30-30, bullet design on those 2 cartridges come into play. I would rather have a good wrist rocket than a .30-30 for deer.

What???  :?

[Pinkerton]

Dino

Please expand on your experience and theory on the limited effectiveness of the 30-30 on the average deer at under 150yrds. Do they grow the size of bison in Tenn?

[Lloyd Smale]

well pal ive lost count of the deer and bear ive killed and have seen killed by family members with that underpowered 3030. Never lost a one. Most died quicker then if they would have shot with an 06. Id surely line up against you with one of my 3030s against your wrist rocket!!!!!!!!! Placement not displacement kills for the most part.

Evidently you have never shot a deer with a .30-30, bullet design on those 2 cartridges come into play. I would rather have a good wrist rocket than a .30-30 for deer.

[Scott T]

Where are these armor plated deer that cannot be killed with a .30-30?  I sure have not seen them.

[Dino Darnell]

Ok I will agree that a .30-30 win. chambered in a contender or encore loaded with a good bullet ie(ballistic tip or other pointed bullet) will do a fine job on deer sized game out to 200 yds,but that flat point bullet you are restricted to just don't cut it. I wasn't trying to cause an uproar (pal) only posting my opinion.

[Redhawk1]

Ok I will agree that a .30-30 win. chambered in a contender or encore loaded with a good bullet ie(ballistic tip or other pointed bullet) will do a fine job on deer sized game out to 200 yds,but that flat point bullet you are restricted to just don't cut it. I wasn't trying to cause an uproar (pal) only posting my opinion.

Even a flat nose bullet in a contender or encore is a great bullet. Your opinion is welcome, but if it does not contain fact, expect to be challenged on that. Remember the 30-30 round has counted for more bear and deer killed than I think any other single cartridge.