Ruger Bisley SBH 6.5" .454 vs 5.5" .45 Colt ?

09 October 2015, 03:34

Rick R

I've been lusting after the 5.5" Bisley in .45 Colt and was ready to get my LGS to order one then Ruger released the 6.5" .454...

For you gents who've shot each or either which makes the most sense for sticking in a hip or chest holster and taking off for a day afield hunting nothing bigger than Eastern deer or black bear? Or for just shooting at the range for a day of fun.

FWIW I already load .45 Colt for another revolver and it's a great cartridge.

09 October 2015, 05:26

jk16

Had a custom John Linebaugh rebored .45Colt Bisley in blue for many.years.I have also taken game with many 6.5" and 7.5" Blackhawks over the years.
My choice for shot placement and killing is a 7.5" gun.

Having said that, for eaiser carry a 5.5" nice and the traditional Colt SAA mid lenght (for good reason)

IMHO a 6.5" is just a poor compromise. Never liked them .

If to you want compact and can shoot well,the 5.5" is a nice little gun.

09 October 2015, 20:52

Whitworth

Yes, but the 6 1/2-inch configuration (with the long ejector rod housing) is the only way you can get the new SBH in .454 and .480. I now shoot almost nothing but .45 Colt +P loads through mine and am very happy with it. Extremely accurate. I shot this five-shot group at 50 yards with mine stoked with Double Tap's 360 grain .45 Colt + P load. Great accuracy in my book. That said, I love my 5 1/2-inch .45 Colt Bisley, but it never shot this well out of the box. I prefer a 5 1/2-inch barrel personally, but the new SBH is pretty good.

10 October 2015, 02:08

Rick R

Wow! Nice group!

I'd wondered if gearing up to make the .454 and .480 cylinders had given Ruger a reason to use a bit more TLC on those pistols. From the looks of that group they sure didn't skimp.

I really only intend on shooting cowboy to heavy +p .45 Colt loads and don't see a need for .454 level in my neck of the woods so I was thinking the 5.5" would be enough but that group does make one sit up and take notice. How "bad" does your 5.5" shoot with those or similar loads?

10 October 2015, 15:18

9.3 X 75R

As you're asking for thoughts I'll offer mine. I'm a 5 1/2 in. fan. I'm not very tall, a whopping 5'9", I prefer a hip holster to an across the chest and for me the 5 1/2 always seemed the best of both worlds. Longer than the 4 3/4 for a slightly longer sight radius but still enough shorter than the 7 1/2 or 6 /12 to be handy....for me. All but one of my SA revolvers is 5 1/2.

10 October 2015, 18:15

LovesLevers

If you want to carry it a lot and have no plans of needing 454 power the 5.5 in 45 Colt is the clear choice.

10 October 2015, 22:48

Rick R

I mainly own 4"ish barrel revolvers. I'm 5'9" too so I'm leaning toward the 5.5" for holster carry while hunting. But with the iffy performance I've read about with the .45 Ruger revolvers it's interesting to see the group that Whitworth posted.
Wonder how hard it would be to get a 6.5" cut down to a 5.5"?

11 October 2015, 04:52

LovesLevers

Any good smith can cut down the barrel and remount the sight. Just make sure the ejector rod works as planned.
I doubt any hunter shooting under field
conditions with iron sights could
tell any differences in accuracy between the two models

11 October 2015, 12:22

srshooter

quote:
Originally posted by Whitworth:
Yes, but the 6 1/2-inch configuration (with the long ejector rod housing) is the only way you can get the new SBH in .454 and .480. I now shoot almost nothing but .45 Colt +P loads through mine and am very happy with it. Extremely accurate. I shot this five-shot group at 50 yards with mine stoked with Double Tap's 360 grain .45 Colt + P load. Great accuracy in my book. That said, I love my 5 1/2-inch .45 Colt Bisley, but it never shot this well out of the box. I prefer a 5 1/2-inch barrel personally, but the new SBH is pretty good.

Nice shooting! I I'm gonna have to try that Double Tap 360 gr load in my 4 5/8 Blackhawk. I may also have to break down and buy a SBH Bisley .454 too!

You seem to be pretty high on these new Rugers. Do you think they are comparable to a BFR in accuracy and quality?

As far as the topic at hand.....unless the handgun is going to be used strictly as a hunting tool, I'd probably prefer the 5 1/2" Bisley .45 over a 6 1/2" .454. However, it's tough to make that call because I've not been fortunate enough to handle the new Ruger SBH Bisley. I just know it's longer and heavier.

Actually my preference for all around outdoors carry is the 4 5/8 BH as long as +P .45 Colts are the max cal/loads. Anything bigger and I'd prefer the Bisley grip. It smarts when that BH hammer digs into your hand!!!

12 October 2015, 17:39

Whitworth

quote:
Originally posted by Rick R:
How "bad" does your 5.5" shoot with those or similar loads?

It shot well (it has since turned into a full custom -- see photo below), but not as well as this .454. I had no real complaints it's just that this SBH stands out. I also find it comforting that you can load the .454 any which way you want and there is still a large margin of safety.

I too would prefer a 5 1/2-inch barrel, and the barrel can be shortened easily enough but keep in mind that they used the long ejector rod housing on these new revolvers.

My .480 version is equally impressive from an accuracy standpoint. I shot this five-shot group at 50 yards with Buffalo Bore's new 370 grain low-recoil load. I haven't even had the time to do any load development.

13 October 2015, 23:57

Paul H

I haven't handled the new 6 1/2" 454 but have shot bisleys in a variety of configurations and barrel lengths and IMHO the 5 1/2" is just perfect in terms of balance and packability. And a six shot 45 colt Ruger will do anything I'll want done in 45 caliber.

I do have a hankering for an SA 480 as a companion to my 480 SRH, but that's a different story

16 October 2015, 16:25

Ken ONeill

Make mine the new 6.5" Bisley .454.

29 October 2015, 17:16

Whitworth

Shot this water buffalo two weeks ago in Texas with my .454 SBH.....loaded with Garrett 405 grain .45 Colt +P loads. I'm really happy with the accuracy.

29 October 2015, 18:15

Carolina Man

With 45 Colt loads ĺike this why even bother with the 454 loads. Wonder how it would do in a 5.5 gun?

George

12 November 2015, 16:36

jwp475

quote:
Originally posted by Carolina Man:
With 45 Colt loads ĺike this why even bother with the 454 loads. Wonder how it would do in a 5.5 gun?

George

My conclusion as well. Heavy loads 45 Colts are perfect.

A 5 1/2" barrel is perfection in Bisley IMHO.

18 December 2015, 20:26

ss30378

quote:
Originally posted by Whitworth:
Shot this water buffalo two weeks ago in Texas with my .454 SBH.....loaded with Garrett 405 grain .45 Colt +P loads. I'm really happy with the accuracy.

Max, garrett shows these are loaded to 1.785 COL. How much room is left in the SBH cylinder???

19 December 2015, 16:50

p dog shooter

Not single actions but the my 5.5 inch Redhawk seems to be better then my 4 or 7.5.

It also gives the best velocity of the 5 44s I had the it ran faster then my 3 7.5s one red hawk and two black hawks

Carry better than the 7.5s and just as nice as the 4 inch

If I only could have one it would be the 5.5

23 December 2015, 09:46

Boxhead

quote:
Originally posted by Whitworth:
Shot this water buffalo two weeks ago in Texas with my .454 SBH.....loaded with Garrett 405 grain .45 Colt +P loads. I'm really happy with the accuracy.

One shot? Bullet recovered or still sailing?

24 December 2015, 01:33

Whitworth

I shot him three times, Ed. Found two bullets actually poking through the skin of the offside shoulder. I will posted a picture later. The third shot exited. The first shot was fatal but I am of the school of hunting that keeps shooting until the animal is permanently anchored to terra firma.

24 December 2015, 05:51

Whitworth

Here you go:

26 December 2015, 22:37

bobmn

Whit: I am surprised you did not get full penetration. Do you know what bullet Garret uses? Do you think penetration was decreased due to bullet expansion or slower velocity? I would think a punch bullet at 454 Casull or 475 linebaugh velocities would exit. Did bone or shot placement have an influence?
The reason I ask is I do not track like an African so I like holes on both sides..

29 December 2015, 19:15

Whitworth

quote:
Originally posted by bobmn:
Whit: I am surprised you did not get full penetration. Do you know what bullet Garret uses? Do you think penetration was decreased due to bullet expansion or slower velocity? I would think a punch bullet at 454 Casull or 475 linebaugh velocities would exit. Did bone or shot placement have an influence?
The reason I ask is I do not track like an African so I like holes on both sides..

Hi Bob,

I'm pretty pleased with the way they performed and frankly even a bit surprised they did as well as they did. These bullets are scaled up (albeit a little longer for added weight) versions of the Garrett 330s (in .429 Magnum), so I think they are of Randy Garrett's design. One of the bullets had an intact nose, the other was wiped off a bit (probably from more bone contact). Personally, if really big animals like this are what you will regularly shoot, I would step up to the .475s or one of the .50 cals. They are simply better for the job at hand IMHO. Don't get me wrong, they are up to the task, I just like the way my .50s hit comparatively speaking.

29 December 2015, 19:59

Whitworth

quote:
Originally posted by ss30378:

Max, garrett shows these are loaded to 1.785 COL. How much room is left in the SBH cylinder???

It's really close (see photos). I will measure it. Fortunately I have never experienced even the slightest crimp pull with these.

08 January 2016, 10:21

tradmark

Not getting full penetration is not surprising. After shooting my cape buff me and a friend did some penetration testing thru the shoulder. Neither barnes buster in 454 or his 475 got full penetration. My initial shot with a 325 gr a frame got full penetration thru the same shoulder. Just means they hit different structures. Granted the buff was over 2000lbs but if ya hit certain connective tissue ya wont get an exit. Its like kevlar. Funny thing is he had 2 full penetration shots on his buff with the busters from his 454 but they were just behind the shoulder and whistled on thru. Go figure. Buff was just about as big body size and horns.

Whit, i would be interested to see if the 360's penetrate better. I personally have seen that in my own shooting but ive only had limited use with the 400's in 45 caliber. Those waterbuff have really nasty hide and connective tissue

08 January 2016, 21:13

jwp475

quote:
Originally posted by tradmark:
Not getting full penetration is not surprising. After shooting my cape buff me and a friend did some penetration testing thru the shoulder. Neither barnes buster in 454 or his 475 got full penetration. My initial shot with a 325 gr a frame got full penetration thru the same shoulder. Just means they hit different structures. Granted the buff was over 2000lbs but if ya hit certain connective tissue ya wont get an exit. Its like kevlar. Funny thing is he had 2 full penetration shots on his buff with the busters from his 454 but they were just behind the shoulder and whistled on thru. Go figure. Buff was just about as big body size and horns.

Whit, i would be interested to see if the 360's penetrate better. I personally have seen that in my own shooting but ive only had limited use with the 400's in 45 caliber. Those waterbuff have really nasty hide and connective tissue

The Garret 365 grain did exit.