Got 1711 fps/2860 lbs.ft. energy, .900" @ 25 yds. with a 440 grain bullet and Lilgun.

So far, I've only been able to shoot at 25 yards, but results have been positive. My best groups have been with WW296--one is .300, the other is .550, but power is a bit less than with Lilgun (max with 296 is 1643 fps/2637 lbs.ft.).

Starline brass appears to be better made than Jamison. I had to debur the flash holes in the Jamison brass, and the mouths were not cut as cleanly as those from Starline. About 50% of the Jamison brass had heavy dings in the case heads--it looks like machine strikes during manufacture. Perhaps it was caused by the ejection system of one of the case making/head stamping machines?

Starline brass is also cheaper at .50/case, delivered (compared to .57/case + delivery for Jamison). I do not know which will last longer; I'm on my third reloading of the Jamison stuff now.

It looks like there's plenty of room for bigger bullets; perhaps a 600 grain, or even 700???

Hmmm...

Yes,it looks like the .500 will be accurate,I have shot some 495-540gr cast bullets at 1450-1585 fps using LIL GUN powder ,at those levels the recoil can be hard . Have Fun

I was just over at www.mountainmolds.com and he was showing me a 700gn+ bullet from a mold he has made for a customer. It looks very intimidateing! I've gotten 405's to 1750 from my 45-70 BFR, it's not fun to shoot anymore at that level. Does the factory port help reduce recoil much?

I forgot to mention that the 700gn + mold was for a 500 S&W

It's hard to tell if the port is beneficial because it cannot be removed. But overall, the gun handles very well; it shoots about like a scaled-up Dan Wesson .44 with an 8" barrel. The largest bullets I've fired are 440s from cast performance and I could shoot them all day.

I'm discussing a mold order with Mountain Molds right now. I'm trying to decide what to get. I'm thinking about a dual cavity with one cavity being cut for a 500-550 LBT style, the other for a 600-650 bore rider.

But I might instead go with a 450/550 dual cavity, and a 650 single. Then, I could cast the bullets with Lyman #2 and not have to heat treat them.

I want to make sure the bullets can be seated out enough so I can really take advantage of high case volume and slower powders. From what I've been able to ascertain, powders like BLC-2, H322, and H335 do a hell of a job.

Anyone have experiences they would like to share? I'd love to learn from someone else's experience before I order the mould(s). I'd hate to get them only to find out that they seat too deeply and I can't get any performance out of them.

Hi ,I also have a 500 s/w,and a couple of moulds from Dan at mountainmolds 325 wfngc-
350 keithtype -400 wfngc,what kind of velocity/performance are you wanting.there is some load data for the bigger bullets at smith-wessonforum.com

Hello from Iraq.

In some of the literature some of you have been generous enough to send me, I've been reading about the new cartridge.

As some of you may know, I have a custom-built .500 Linebaugh, out of which I shoot 425s at around 1330 FPS. I can go warmer, yes, but there's no need in Illinois... and shooting rabbits with the 425s leaves some pretty serious divots.

For those with personal experience with both cartridges... is it worth my time and money (the latter of which I'll have a lot of if I make it home from this little vacation I'm on) to purchase the new .500 S&W?

Thoughts, anyone?

Thanks.

Russ

475/480,

That site you mentioned is a great one. I'd like to get performance like John Ross. He's already blazed the trail I'd like to travel, and I'd like to find out if he's encountered any problems. What, if anything, would he change about the bullet designs he is currently using?

I'm thinking about a mould(s) that would drop bullets of 550-650 range. There is room enough in the cylinder and the case capacity is large enough to use slower powders, such as H322, H335, BLC-2, etc.

Dan from Mountain Molds said that problems may be encountered when casting bullets of this size because of moulds overheating. Because I want to use Lyman #2, it is likely a two cavity will overheat. Therefore, I'm thinking about a dual cavity that drops a 450 and 550, and a single cavity that drops a 650.

I want to maximize the case capacity, which means seating the bullets out, so I can use some of these slower powders. To do this, I'll need to move the mass of the bullet to the nose. I'm not sure of the few things:
1) how big can I make the nose before stability problems result?
2) I can also go to smaller lube grooves to shift lead forward. Anyone had experience with shallow lube grooves? I'd think they would work as well.
3) I'm thinking of a 450 LBT Ogival (because I like the design and there shouldn't be a capacity issue) the 650 would be a Bore Rider (because that's the only way with a bullet of this size) and perhaps a 550 bore rider.

I'd like to know if anyone out there has run into any problems with inadequate case capacity, accuracy, or anything else. I'd want to order molds from Mountain Molds on Monday.

Thanks for any input!

I would ask Dan about the mold John Ross got from him with Nose length .650? with small lube grooves.John Ross said it was very accurate at 200 yards.Dan will remember which one it was (small lube grooves).weight 625-650gr
NL. 625-650 with bore rider @ .488, a big bullet

LilJohn, you should be well pleased with an order from mountainmolds. His Cnc Process turns out what ever you want and provides a perfect mold. I just picked up my new 500gn mold for my 470 NE Yesterday. It's a dual cavity gascheck with 70% and 90% nose. His test bullets looked perfect.
475/480, the nose length is similar to the 500's you sent me. I didn't remember which mold they came from. I'll send some your way to try when I get my pot fired up if you want. I got the tool steel sprue plate on this one, I'll have to see how it compares with the aluminum ones on my other molds.

Thanks Glenn,not right now ,I have so many bullets in the reloading room now I dont know what to do. .The 500gr bullets are LFN-70% meplat

Wish S&W would make a 5" barrel version so I could carry it on my hip. Couldnt be much worse that my 4-3/4" .475 linebaugh.
Navigator

Russ,

It's always good to have a new toy but it would be better to stick with the 500 Linebaugh. As you already know, the 500 Linebaugh is built on a much smaller sixgun and it is handy as hell, especially to pack it in the wilderness.

The model 500 from SW does not seem to have a very good design for such a powerful cartridge. If you look carefully, those locking notches on the cylinder are too small and way back so the lockup strenght is no where near the Redhawk or Dan Wesson. Time will tell if it can hold up to the continuous pounding of the 500 S&W. There is no question about the frame strenght of the 500 as it has a lot of material on it but the action strenght is what concerns me. Anyhow, I probably don't know what I am talking but at least it is something negative about it that I can point out.

Good luck!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Russell E. Taylor:
Hello from Iraq.

In some of the literature some of you have been generous enough to send me, I've been reading about the new cartridge.

As some of you may know, I have a custom-built .500 Linebaugh, out of which I shoot 425s at around 1330 FPS. I can go warmer, yes, but there's no need in Illinois... and shooting rabbits with the 425s leaves some pretty serious divots.

For those with personal experience with both cartridges... is it worth my time and money (the latter of which I'll have a lot of if I make it home from this little vacation I'm on) to purchase the new .500 S&W?

Thoughts, anyone?

Thanks.

Russ

---

liljohn,

If your mould gets too hot while casting, you can place an electric fan on the bench so that it can blow on the open mould halves between fills. Works for me.

Paul

After having cast from a couple of split cavity molds, I can say personally I will never do it again. After the initial load work up and fiddling time, you'll prefer one cavity to the other, and then be stuck with a one cavity mold, which is a crime for a handgun. I can barely stand to time it takes to cast a pair of two cavity molds.

To Russ,

No offense to the 500 S&W fans, but I see the gun as a novelty. It is big and powerful, but anyone who actually packs a hunting sixgun for weeks and months at a time will know that the S&W is simply too big to be a practicle hunting revolver. The 500 Linebaugh on the other hand is a practicle hunting revolver, and sufficiently powerful for anything one would sensibly hunt with a handgun.

Personally, I'm quite content with the 480, anything that I wouldn't take with a 400 gr @ 1200 fps calls for a large rifle, in my book.

No offense taken, Paul. I agree, the 500 SW doesn't seem like it would be very practical. I still don't think it will be a flash in the pan, though. It will be with us for a very long time. I want one, even though I have absolutely zero use for it, apart from making really large holes in paper of course.

After having cast from a couple of split cavity molds, I can say personally I will never do it again. After the initial load work up and fiddling time, you'll prefer one cavity to the other, and then be stuck with a one cavity mold, which is a crime for a handgun. I can barely stand to time it takes to cast a pair of two cavity molds.

Paul,

Typically I would agree, but there is more to this. The chances of a two-cavity mould casting bullets over 400 grains using Lyman #2 are slim. The bullets are likely to suffer from "shrunken bullet syndrome", which means there will be portions of the bullet that are poorly filled-out or frosty and "shrunken". In order to see if it was possible with bullets of this size and caliber, I decided to go with a mould that used two different sizes. If in the unlikely event the mould produced good bullets when casting from both cavities, then I'd only suffer the inconvenience of slow productivity. However, if in the highly likely event the bullets suffer from SBS when casting from both cavities, then I can use each cavity independently, and use the single cavity 650 mould to have two moulds in use at the same time(the 650 must be a single cavity mould to get good bullets). So, I've essentially elimated the risk of having a two-cavity mould that will completely fail at improving productivity in exchange for a two-cavity mould that, if it works as a two-cavity mould, will be somewhat less efficient because of two bullet sizes. But, if it fails to work when using both cavities because of SBS, then it will still work well as a "single" cavity mould for either a 450 or 550 grain bullet.



No offense to the 500 S&W fans, but I see the gun as a novelty. It is big and powerful, but anyone who actually packs a hunting sixgun for weeks and months at a time will know that the S&W is simply too big to be a practicle hunting revolver. The 500 Linebaugh on the other hand is a practicle hunting revolver, and sufficiently powerful for anything one would sensibly hunt with a handgun.

I think the 500 is establishing a new paradigm in the world of big bore revolver cartridges. It seems to be efficient, very powerful, and versitile with a large number of powders and bullets weights. It might even be more versitile and forgiving than the 44 mag. The X frame is only the first to be chambered in the cartridge and there are many ways it could be reduced in size. There is no reason a maker couldn't produce a gun more packable and portable than the current 500.

I think it will be the new big bore standard and is destined to be one of the greatest handgun cartridges in history. I find it manageable, even with heavy loads, accurate, and fun to shoot. It can handle bullets from the 300-grain range up to 725 (I read about a guy that's gotten 1450 with a 725!) And it's much cheaper and easier to load, even now when components are at a premium, than loading and shooting custom cartridges like the Linebaugh longs. And it's not finicky and tempermental like the .454 can be when trying to use heavy bullets (serious issues with reduced powder capacity, chamber length, etc. )

Russ, I'd recommend you get one as soon as you can. It's got something for everyone that likes the big-bores. I've only had it a number of weeks and it's my favorite handgun. I'm anxious to see what other guns end up on the market in this caliber--I think someone will end up producing smaller single actions that can overcome the issues Paul raises above.

[ 08-25-2003, 04:09: Message edited by: liljohn ]

Liljohn,

While I agree that the 500 S&W will probably be around for quite a while, I also feel it is very limited in what it can do in the versitility catagory that you state it rates very high in.

I admit that I have no experience loading for the 500 but I have loaded for several other big bore, large capacity rounds including the 357 Maximum, 445 Super Mag, 454, 444 Marlin, 450 Marlin, and 45-70. All of these work great in handguns with near max or max loads.

If you get into the medium velocity loads some very strage things begin to happen and with certain powders, some very dangerous things can happen.

For what the 500 is, it is of course the biggest and baddest so far, but it is not versitile.

When I think of a do everything handgun, the 45 Colt loaded in a Ruger comes to mind. With the correct charge of Unique, it will drive a cast 255 gr SWC to 800 fps which is ideal for taking small edible game as well as very easy recoiling practice rounds.

We can also take that same bullet or a jacketed bullet of same weight and use Blue Dot and drive them to 1000-1100 fps for a bit more serious practice load and even a deer hunting load with plenty of power for whitetails for those that are a bit recoil sensitive.

You can also take H-110, W 296 or H-LilGun and load a 300 gr Speer Uni-Core SP or 300 gr LBT design to +1300 fps and have a very serious round for hunting heavy game. Out to 75 yards, a load like this will easily harvest game up to and including Elk and Moose.

Or with the same revolver, you can use those same three powders and load heavy hard cast from 335 gr to 360 gr to velocities from 1150 to 1250 fps and have a serious packing handgun for use against pissy bears.

My favorite load for my 4 5/8" Blackhawk in 45 Colt drives the 360 gr WLNGC to just shy of 1200 fps using H-110 and would allow me to bust the skull on a grizzly no matter the angle he had me pinned.

Lately I have found the 480 Ruger to be every bit as much an all around round but it suffers from a smaller selection of bullets. Also, I wish, Ruger would pull their head out of their rear and offer a 4 5/8" and 5 1/2" Bisley in a 5 shot 480 Ruger. This I feel would be nearly as perfect a packing handgun as there ever could be. My load out of my 7 1/2" SRH drives the 425 gr WFNGC out at 1220 fps, I'm sure this same load would hit 1150 to 1175 in the discribed Bisley.

Just my opinion, the 500 is an awsome round but it is limited in what it can do, not a revolver a dad could take out with his 10 year old sun and bust cans with in my view.

Good Shooting!!!

50

The versatility of this cartridge is not so much a matter of opinion. Its versatility is empirical. It will shoot loads as light as 275g @ 1250-1900 fps, 450g @ 1200-1800, 550g @ 950-1550, all the way up to bullets of 725g @ 1100! You cannot even come close to this level of versatility with any handgun cartridge that has ever existed. The range of bullet weights, attainable velocities, ballistic coefficient of bullets, and powders that can be used with great effect are unmatched. In fact, I think the numbers I provided above indicate a performance window that is actually a bit NARROW relative to velocities. There are so many powders that work in this thing I have yet to try them all, and I am sure someone interested in light loads will come up with functional data (I am not interested in reduced loads).

Are the guns heavy and bulky right now? Yes, and that may limit the gun's versatility right now (but not the cartridge). You cannot carry one with snakeshot while flyfishing, for example. However, the gun is not so big that it cannot be used for hunting (and hunting more game than just about any handgun has ever been capable of), target (to greater distances than any revolver), and silhouette shooting (to greater distances with larger rams). As the popularity of the cartridge catches on, makers of guns will come out with more compact models (Smith already plans a 5 inch, I think) and components will become more varied, plentiful, and cheaper. But none of these issues have anything to do with the performance window of the cartridge, which is ultimately what determines it's versatility.

Again, I'm not arguing the gun is the ultimate training device for elementary-age shooters, but what it lacks at the low end of the performance spectrum it makes up in the high end like no revolver before it.

I guess I tend to get a bit worked up over this issue because people that have no experience with the gun or cartridge are quick to pass judgement on it. This happened in the 1930's with the rollout of the .357 (some people said it would not be shootable) and in the 50's with the .44 (people argued there was no need for so much power). Both are now considered the best all around revolver cartridges.

The .500 overcomes what I think are serious shortcomings with the .454. Short cylinder and small case capacity (especially in the Freedom Arms model) reduce the number of bullet weight/powder types that can be used. Slower powders overflow the case or take up so much space the bullet cannot be seated. Larger bullets take up the same space, meaning slower powders that take up more space cannot be used. The result is a performance window that is narrow--best performance comes from the use of bullets in the 330 to 370 range, with only two good powder choices WW 296(h110) or Lilgun. Using bigger bullets (even if slightly bigger, like 395) results in huge drops in powder. Same with lighter bullets, because a faster powder must be used to get to max pressure.

The 500 has plenty of both--big capacity and long cylinder. So many powders/bullets/seating depths/bullet configurations can be used with surprising results. The performance curve is very broad while the efficiency is great (using less powder than a 45-70 yields greater performance, for example).

It will establish a new standard in the same way as the .357 and .44. Give it a try and I think you'll agree.

[ 09-13-2003, 17:51: Message edited by: liljohn ]

LilJohn,

You make valid points for sure, but I still have a couple points to bounce off you for your opinion.

Obviously you are a great fan of the 500, and there really isn't any real reason not to be.

Here are a couple points I still stand by. Not all hunting with a handgun is for large game, in fact most of it is for light game. This is where the 500 can not compete with the likes of the 45 Colt or 480 Ruger.

Take your 275 gr load, even in its lightest load (which I would almost bet will have huge velocity variations) and shoot a cottontail for the camp stew pot at 15 yards. Or a grouse at 10 yards for the same purpose.

Will the 500 hit and harvest these little targets, there is no doubt, will there be alot left to eat, a little.

The next point. The single cheapest bullet commercially available to the public for the 500 is the CPB 440 gr WFNGC. Which by convnetional handgun bullets is not cheap. All the others you list are much more expensive or custom made bullets.

There is no need to go custom for the likes of the 45 Colt or 480 or the 475 for that matter.

I have a 15" Encore chambered in the 50 A.E. and have been looking for a bullet for years to handle what this handgun could do with this round.

I drive the 440 gr WFNGC from CPB at 1550 fps and out to 150 yards see no reason for more.

I agree it is a very useful round, our opinions just differ on the range of usefulness.

Good Debate to have though!

Good Shooting!!!

50

My arguement did not address the specific applications of the 500, but instead the versatility of the cartridge (not the versatility of the gun, since at this moment there are only two factory versions available).

The points you make above may or may not be valid ones, but they do not negate my claim that the cartridge is versatile. I'll be specific.

Not all hunting with a handgun is for large game, in fact most of it is for light game. This is where the 500 can not compete with the likes of the 45 Colt or 480 Ruger.

It all depends on what you hunt. If you hunt small game, your statement is true. If you hunt large game, then it is not. However, I don't believe the benefits of a big bore are quantified by how little power they can be downloaded to. Does the power envelope of these two cartridges make them better suited than the 500 for some small game animals? Maybe so, but that does not mean the 500 lacks versatility, nor does it mean the 45 and 480 are the best cartridges for the job. After all, if I was to select handguns to hunt small game, especially at close range, the 45 and 480 would not be my choices. I'd be inclined to go with a 32 Mag or maybe a 22 Mag. It's like saying your dump truck is better at road racing than my articulated rig. That may be true, but neither is ideally suited for the job.

Take your 275 gr load, even in its lightest load (which I would almost bet will have huge velocity variations) and shoot a cottontail for the camp stew pot at 15 yards. Or a grouse at 10 yards for the same purpose.

I have not experimented with light loads yet, but I'm sure there will be some that work very well. I have no doubt that they will be able to deliver performance close to, or maybe even the same as, that of a 45 or 480.

As for the scenarios you mention involving a rabbit and grouse, none of the cartridges discussed would be ideal for them so I'm not sure why they are part of the arguement.

Will I stop using a fantastic hunting gun because I'd have too much gun for a surprise opportunity to take a rabbit or bird at close range? No. Does a cartridge lack versatility because it is likely to be less than ideal in a surprise close-range shot on small game? I don't think so.

The next point. The single cheapest bullet commercially available to the public for the 500 is the CPB 440 gr WFNGC. Which by convnetional handgun bullets is not cheap. All the others you list are much more expensive or custom made bullets. There is no need to go custom for the likes of the 45 Colt or 480 or the 475 for that matter.

I did not argue the economics of the cartridge, just it's versatility. Is it expensive to shoot? Right now, yes, unless you can cast your own. But that will change as people recognise it's potential and more makers produce components. These factors do not affect the cartridge's inherent versatility, although they do complicate the matter of utilizing it.

I have a 15" Encore chambered in the 50 A.E. and have been looking for a bullet for years to handle what this handgun could do with this round.

I drive the 440 gr WFNGC from CPB at 1550 fps and out to 150 yards see no reason for more.

Yes, but you cannot get this level of performance with your 45 or 480. Which is exactly my point--none of these guns, the 45, 480, or 50AE have the versatility that the 500 does. Most of what you do with 3 guns I can do as well, or better, with one. And, I have 4 loads using three bullet weights that group 1/2" or LESS at 25 yards.

If the only arguement that can be made for the 45 and 480 is they can be reduced to a lower performance level than the 500, I'll stick with the 500. For the rare instances when I want a low power handgun, I'll use my .32 mag.

One more thing, I agree with you that the debate is fun. I was talking about various firearms-related debates to my wife the other day and she asked "so what happens if you are right?" I was stunned. All I could say was "nothing, I guess". She said, "Oh....That's good, dear."

Kind of puts things into perspective.

[ 09-24-2003, 02:12: Message edited by: liljohn ]

I'd like to know how many 500 owners have carried there guns for at least a comulative of 1 month a year, and what they think about the bulk and weight. I pack my 480 on average 1 month a year, take it on all day hikes, week long hunts, fishing, and other misc use. It is the biggest heaviest gun I'd be willing to use for that, and I certainly wouldn't mind it being a tad smaller and lighter. I just don't see the 500 being able to be used the same. When you look at that bulk and weight, I'd take a rifle, and it would leave the 500 in the dust performance wise.

I do shoot a 310 gr @ 700 fps from the 480, and it makes a fine small game load. I've taken 3 spruce hens with it, all chest shots, as those loads shoot much lower then my full patch loads, so I didn't want to take a head shot. Meat loss was minimal, all birds dead when they hit the ground.

I think the 500's advantages are more on paper then in the real world. Yes, it will sling a heavier bullet faster, but how much is enough in the hunting fields? IMHO, 400 gr @ 1200 fps is plenty for 70 yds on in for any game I'd take with an iron sighted handgun, which includes the Yukon Moose. Anything that needs more killing then that, well, I've got a 500 Jeffrey in the safe, and me thinks a 570 gr X bullet @ 2400 fps will be more versitile then any 500 S&W load I can also shoot 470 gr cast @ 1100 fps for mild loads.

Paul, practicality and desire have little to do with each other...you know that! I own a bunch of revolvers I don't really have a use for, other than to satisfy my desire to own them. I own several 357 magnums, several 44 magnums, and one 454 Casull. I don't even hunt, but I sure shoot a lot. In the next couple years I plan on adding a Freedom Arms 475 Linebaugh and the S&W 500 to my arsenal, even though the 500 covers the performance envelope of all of them. Gotta spend the dough on something!

My hat is off to Russel for his service to our country. He is in reality fighting two wars: one against what remains of Saddam's loathesome regime and the other against the US news media. Saddam was easy compared to the latter buggars...

LilJohn,

I suppose that my thinking is more in line with the comments Paul made on his latest post.

I spend alot of time in the back country here in Montana, not near as much as I used to but still plenty. I spend as much time during the summer camping and doing alot of back country fishing.

The areasa I fish are very hard to get to, creeks covered with extremely thick willow thicketts for several hundred yards in all directions.

Problem is that this same area has been know to hold a good number of black bears and there is always a couple Grizzly being kept track of as well.

I have only needed a handgun once in all the years I have been hunting and fishing in the mountains, at least to save my butt.

I was fishing and was plowing through some very thick willows to get to a beaver dam to get access to the creek. As I broke clear of the willows and onto the dam, I quickly noticed the grizzly sow and two cubs on the opposite end of the dam, about 25-30 yards away.

As quickly as I could I drew the 4 5/8" Ruger 45 Colt loded with 355 gr WFNGC at right at 1200 fps and held the front sight dead on the sows head.

This was not an old sow and she seemed as scared as I was which is usually the case, but with those cubs, I was in a real sticky spot and no way to calmly back away from the situation as the willows were to thick to retreat into backwards.

It seemed like an hour that she set there burred up and huffing at me. I know you are supposed to talk calmly aloud in a situation like this but frankly I was to busy holding the sights on that sow. Sadly, if she would have taken a step toward me I know I would have shot her which would have been a sad thing.

Luckly for me she grew tired of me starring at her and once she realized I was not going to advance on her cubs, she grunted once and whirled her two cubs back into the brush and gone.

TO be honest, I set down right there and took a ten minute breather, yes, with the colt still pointed at the brush where she disappeared, hammer cocked and finger on teh trigger.

I tell this story for one reason. This fishing area is the best Brook Trout fishing area I know but it is also about as severe a fishing location as you will find as well.

If my handgun is not very light, and as small as possible, it is a real bother carrying in the brush. This is why I feel the 45 Colt is THE most versitile handgun round made today.

When I made the comment about using the 45 and 480 on rabbits and grouse, I did not mean that they were to be the primary intended game. I ment that if you were on the elk mountain heading back to camp and you came across a few fool hens on the way, even the heavy loaded colt load, intended for use against something big with teeth, will do little meat damage. Or you can do what I do, keep a cylinder full of light loads in my pack for just such occasions.

I agree that the 500 S&W is a beast of a handgun round, we have never seen anything like it out of a handgun. From what I have heard I'm not over sure the handgun is designed to handle the strain for very long, the brass has already been redesigned.

As far as other handgun makers picking up the round, I find that highly unlikely. I can not see Ruger building a stretched frame revolver again, especially for a S&W round, its hard to say what Tauras will do but it would be a major investment for them to design a revolver for this round.

The most likely handgun will be the T/C Encore which I could see happening.

Anyway, I guess if you are talking strickly a dedicated big game hunting revolver, there may be no better then the 500 S&W.

If you are talking about a revolver that could be used as a main hunting handgun as well as a back-up revolver, I feel the 500S&W make a very poor choice.

Like Paul commented on earlier, who will have the 500 on their hip when they need it?

Good Shooting!!!

50

I can see your point. It sounds like you guys depend on your guns in ways that many shooters do not. If hunting, I would only be shooting at the game I was hunting or a theat (bear)--that is all that would be permitted. On the other hand, you and Paul could end up taking game that is completely different from what you set out to get. It sounds like you and Paul are likely to carry your guns for long periods, too, which is something I never do. If I did I'd take my .44 Mountain, which I shoot often but never carry.

In my case, the gun will be used extensively for load development and performance testing. It does not require carrying any further than the car to the shooting bench. For hunting, it's not too much to carry around for a few days a year. For target shooting or silohuette, the size is an advantage and accuracy is unmatched.

Until this gun and cartridge, the only way similar performance could be achieved was with a $3000 custom single action that required custom brass, bullets, dies, and a steel wrist to shoot it. Even then, the guns would be prone to failures, if you could tolerate the abuse inflicted while shooting it. I've shot as many as 150 heavy 500 loads in a day with no failures or fatigue at all.

Now, I can get a .500 for $789, brass for .50/ea., a four die set for $35, bullets from Cast Performance or custom moulds from Mountain Molds (they are only slightly more expensive than factory molds), use any one of 6 or 8 powders, use bullet weights from 350 to 500 (for max power), and have a gun that will exceed the performance of heavily loaded .44s by more than double while shooting groups half the size. And if I want, I can go as light as 260 or heavy as 725.

This is what I like so much about it. I can play with a HUGE number of bullet weights and configuarions, powder combos, etc. The finer aspects of the gun as a survival tool are secondary to me.

FYI: The 500 brass is not problematic. It does not sustain much abuse--much less than the .454. Pressures are only about 48000 PSI; much less than a Casull. There was a problem where a run of it that was too hard and it was prone to splitting, but other than that there has been no issue. If you contact the maker, they will replace it.

[ 09-26-2003, 15:36: Message edited by: liljohn ]

liljohn,

I can see you like your 500 as much as I like my 480. I'm glad you're enjoying the gun. When you find a gun you really like, you put more effort into trying lots of different loads.

In the 480 I've tried round balls, 310, 320, 335, 350, 390, (2) 400's, 415 and 460 gr cast bullets. I'm also planning on having a 270 gr Keith style swc mold made. I like the versitility, and to me, it's all the power I need in a revolver. I've pretty much settled on the 400 gr @ 1200 fps as a std hunting load, but I'll still try other loads in the future. I've found Unique and H-110 are the only powders I really need, though I've also used Red dot, Win AA+, 2400 and Lil Gun.