It's a bit funny how that after we get through explaining our differences in opinions and what we look for, it tends to funnel back into the final end product: putting the bullet on target. I guess as long as that happens and regardless of HOW it happened, as Whitworth is saying, that's what really matters in the end.

It's a shame to let such a good debate end like that.

George, it is strange how you go from muzzle energy to energy dump to agreeing with us that actually kill animals!
Then you go right back to the energy stuff. Put the book away and go hunting!
Gee whiz, you sound like you are running for office!

BFR, your problem is myopia. You tend to insist that "boolets" (sic) perform without physics. I never will. What I WILL agree on is, that as has been stated by the combining of opinions, is that (1) a bullet that passes THROUGH and animal, obviously has energy left in it that wasn't spent on whacking the animal, and (2) when, within reasonable limits, with a modicum of energy, a bullet strikes a vital organic part of an animal, it's going to expire. In the Army, they call it "putting boots on the ground". In hunting, we call it "putting lead in the boiler room". You can have the optimum round, fired at the optimum velocity with the optimum energy while maintaining the optimum trajectory, but if you hit a bull in the ass with it, it still ain't gonna die quickly. With all the other factors perfect, it still remains the hunters job to put the bullet on target.

I know bfrshooter well, and myopia is not something he suffers.

George, if I hit a bull in the ass with one of my 420 grain WFNs, at a moderate 1,350 fps (that's what they chrono, I'm not making this up ), I am confident that despite the unimpressive muzzle energy, it will traverse the entire length of said bull's body, striking and destroying the unfortunate bovine's heart, thereby releasing its soul, and exiting the front end of the bull. Penetration at its finest!

you know, i've heard less stories of erratic bullet performance out of big bore handguns than of some of the large african calibers. seems odd that all that time in the 60's and 70's they thought the 458 was inadequate, seemed they just needed to ditch the round nose solids and shoot flat pointed bullets, who knew?

Yup, slow 'em down a they behave better.......

George -- "boolit" is the term used by handloaders for hardcast bullets, and not the mark of illiteracy.

quote:

Originally posted by george roof:
BFR, your problem is myopia. You tend to insist that "boolets" (sic) perform without physics. I never will. What I WILL agree on is, that as has been stated by the combining of opinions, is that (1) a bullet that passes THROUGH and animal, obviously has energy left in it that wasn't spent on whacking the animal, and (2) when, within reasonable limits, with a modicum of energy, a bullet strikes a vital organic part of an animal, it's going to expire. In the Army, they call it "putting boots on the ground". In hunting, we call it "putting lead in the boiler room". You can have the optimum round, fired at the optimum velocity with the optimum energy while maintaining the optimum trajectory, but if you hit a bull in the ass with it, it still ain't gonna die quickly. With all the other factors perfect, it still remains the hunters job to put the bullet on target.

Physic clearly states that in a ollison that momentum is transfered and KE is transformed into other forms of energy mostly thermal. It appearsw that Elmer Kieth clearly understood this..

well, i'm not so sure physics says that so clearly. momentum and kinetic energy are just different ways of describing relationships of mass and velocity. one does not impart it's energy differently i.e. one as heat and the other in some other way. momentum describes the relationship in a vector quantity and kinetic energy is a description so to speak as a scalar quantity. you can take either of these examples however you want them to whatever extreme you would like to. well, for example take the example of a 458 going fast and not penetrating as well as a slower 45/70 round. this however, doesn't prove a whole lot. it's one example. you can take a look at another example and that is that of a 1kg ball at 1000m/s and a 1000kg truck at 1m/s. sparing you the math, you get the same momentum but drastically different KE. the ball has 500000 joules of KE and the truck has 500 joules. if hit by a small ball weighing 2.2 pounds at over 3000 fps you be blown to freaking bits, if hit by the truck you'd be lightly nudged out of the way. extremes are never helpful.

i think the 454 vs. 475 illustrations are a good example of where the line in favor one way or the other are blurred. depends on the load and bullet type used as to which is better and either will do the job to about the same effect. that said what's a more effective way to kill a deer, a large 45/70 or a 257 weatherby? the answer is both. this is what no one seems to get. everyone picks a side and then holds to it when the other actually makes some sense. they both work, all of these guns from big bore pistols to large african rifles and 300 weatherby's if the right bullets are used. if you use KE as a minumum you exclude many worthy calibers like 45/70's and all the big bore pistol rounds. if you use caliber restriction like the .375 or .40 restriction you exclude many other more than worthy rounds like the 338s and the "super" 338's and some actually worthy 30's. (as long as appropriate bullets are used)

Well I just got back from WV today, it was nice and hot there. I took my new little toy with me to shoot, it is a Kal tec 380. I need a gun for Maine.
When George and I go black bear hunting next month, after my recent knee surgury, I will not be able to out run the old guy, so I figured if we get chased in the woods by a big black bear, I will just shoot him and make my get away....LOL

Now I see you all had a lot to talk about while I was gone. But have you guys went to Ruger's site ? They are no longer making the 480 Ruger in the Super Redhawk. Also I just got an e-mail from Ruger telling me the same thing. I think you all might want to call Ruger and find out the reason for there discontinuing of the 480 Ruger all together, I got a hint it was from people destroying there guns, when they were having them re-chambered to 475 Linebaugh.

So I will keep my T/C Encore that I had sent off as my 475 Linebaugh gun and leave my Ruger Super Redhawk 480 as a 480. If I decide to get a revolver in 475 Linebaugh, I will just order a BFR in it.

Here is a copy of the E-mail I received from Ruger.
________________________________________________________________________________________
Dear Alex Garcia ,


Thank you for using the Ruger On-Line Customer Support Request Form.

This e-mail is in response to your question or comment of 07/24/2008
Request No: 6979

Comment / question:

I have a Super Redhawk 6 shot 480 Ruger, what is the cost to have it refitted with a 5 shot cylinder? Do you even do this?

Thank you

Alex

Response:
Unfortunately, that is not a service that we offer. We are no longer producing the .480 Super Redhawk.

If you need further information, please visit our web site at www.ruger.com or contact us at:

Revolvers, shotguns, rifles, 10/22 Charger Pistol: (603) 865-2442
Pistols: (928) 778-6555
Serial Number History Information: (603) 865-2424

Please note: This e-mail is sent from a notification-only address that cannot accept incoming e-mail. Please do not reply to this message.

Sincerely,
Ruger Firearms

I'll say it again. There is no strength issue here at all. The Linebaugh doesn't come anywhere near the Casull in the pressure department. I don't think there are many people out there who have converted their SRHs to .475 anyhow. The only reason the 6-shot was discontinued was because extraction issues which were a result of a machining problem they had.

Is your knee getting better?

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
I'll say it again. There is no strength issue here at all. The Linebaugh doesn't come anywhere near the Casull in the pressure department. I don't think there are many people out there who have converted their SRHs to .475 anyhow. The only reason the 6-shot was discontinued was because extraction issues which were a result of a machining problem they had.

Is your knee getting better?

Yea it's getting better..

Whitworth, I am going to call Ruger Monday and get the skinny on the whole reason for discontinuing the 480 all together, no 6 shot or 5 shots being made.

Myself, I am not going to say there is or is not an issue with the guns, but there has to be a reason why they just quit making the 480 Ruger.

The biggest reason for discontinuing a product is poor sales, so I suspect that this is the issue and not a warranty issue. Besides, if you damage a gun that you modify, it's not Ruger's doing. They are still offering the .454 version and I would bet it is because they sell a lot more of them. The .454 Casull is a much more established cartridge.

Also, there is only a 2,000 psi SAAMI spec difference between the two cartridges. I believe the .475 spec is 48,500 psi (not sure exactly) and the .454 62,000 psi if I can recall correctly.

LOL Whitworth, (sic) behind "boolit" hardly means "illiteracy". It means that the word is a paradoxical usage that is not a mistake and should be read as printed.

Trademark, I got a bigger chuckle out of your reply. I'm quite familiar with the old rejoinder:"When you can't dazzle them with brilliance, you can always resort to baffling them with bullshit." LOL Nice one.

Wait wait wait...

They discontinued the .480 SRH again?

Yup. I called them yesterday and they stated that it was a marketing decision. I think the sales were poor enough to yank it out of production.........

george, i got a chuckle out of your reply. even though i realized i used quite a few "big" words you may have had trouble with, you'd be hard pressed to prove anything i said to be "dazzling bullshit".

LOL Trademark, you're correct. I actually understood what you said, but no matter how you dress a dog to fool others, another dog can smell him out and know he's a dog. Woof! Woof! LMAO

witty anachronisms and clever sayings don't win an argument or discussion, in fact they really don't contribute either.

Well that sucks. The 5-shot .480 Redhawk is (was) the most interesting big-bore production revolver to come out since the .454 Redhawk

quote:

Originally posted by Sergeant_Sabre:
Well that sucks. The 5-shot .480 Redhawk is (was) the most interesting big-bore production revolver to come out since the .454 Redhawk

I agree! It's a really good and balanced package. Very unfortunate.......

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:

quote:

Originally posted by Sergeant_Sabre:
Well that sucks. The 5-shot .480 Redhawk is (was) the most interesting big-bore production revolver to come out since the .454 Redhawk

I agree! It's a really good and balanced package. Very unfortunate.......

I agree also, I was thinking of adding one to my collection, but I guess I will jest have to get another custom.