Well I was about to buy a 460 bfr, and just for fun I called

Dustin Linebaugh to see about his gun. Maybe I should have left

well enough alone. After talking to him about differant cals . Of

course the 475 came up. So here I go again back to the net checking

out anything I can find on the 475 , as well as talking to the few friends I have that hand gun hunt.

So here is the same old question what do all of you think.

Thanks

Hell yes, get it. Its a great do it all cartridge and will put a hurting on anything that walks. While I have a 500L there are times when I wish I would have gotten the 475L instead, due mostly to the fact that the 475L can do anything the 500L will without the recoil issues when shooting full house loads. You can also shoot 480 Ruger shells too, which is important if you either don't reload or don't shoot it enough to make the reloading investment worthwhile. Its nice to shoot reduced power loads once in awhile as it saves on the hands/wrists and allows the gun to live longer too.

Woody

quote:

Originally posted by Woodrow S:
Hell yes, get it. Its a great do it all cartridge and will put a hurting on anything that walks. While I have a 500L there are times when I wish I would have gotten the 475L instead, due mostly to the fact that the 475L can do anything the 500L will without the recoil issues when shooting full house loads. You can also shoot 480 Ruger shells too, which is important if you either don't reload or don't shoot it enough to make the reloading investment worthwhile. Its nice to shoot reduced power loads once in awhile as it saves on the hands/wrists and allows the gun to live longer too.

Woody

The only part of your assesment that I disagree with is the part that you stated that the recoil of the 500 Linebaugh is worse than the 475 Linebaugh. I have owned both for many years and do not find the recoil of the 500 to be any more objectionable than the 475 if anything I would say it to be the other way around.........

I have a BFR in 475 Linebaugh and got it used on Gunbroker for around $650ish. It is a great gun and I would wager that it is stronger than the Freedom Arms revolvers.
You don't always have to shoot max loads. A 400gn hard cast at 1250 isn't anything to sneeze at.
My only real compalaint with the BFR is I wish I could get a Houge Mono-grip for it.
I have 2 BFRs (45-70 also) and would buy another.
The custom Ruger Bisleys are very nice, but much more $$ than my plain jane BFR.

It's hard to comment. I have a lot of revolvers but most sit in the safe because the one I like to shoot the most and to start each hunting season with is my BFR .475. WOW, what a deer thumper!

JWP,

I guess it all depends on what you are shooting them out of. My 500L is a 5" /5 shot Reeder and its very light with micarta grips, shooting full house 435 hard cast. The 475L was the BFR with a longer bbl, I think a 6.5 and rubber grips and I believe the loads were factory (yes, I know some factory loads are hot) but I am not certain. Mine definately had more sting to the hand and it was not just my opinion but a few other guys as well. Perhaps it was not a fair "straight up" comparison but thats all I had to go on.

Woody

The BFR rises high in recoil but it is not painful. I can see deer fall under the gun, between my arms, after I shoot.
You have to remember each second when shooting at deer to not relax. The gun has to be held firm or you will only take a pile of hair off the top of the deer's back. I made the mistake and found I relax too much. I now have to talk to myself while aiming, saying "Hold tight."

7 Mag,
To answer your question, I believe that the .475L is THE superior hunting revolver for the person who is willing to truly master its use. I own 3 of them and have used them on multiple bears, bison, buffalo, bull elk and large hogs, to my complete satisfation. Mine are all FA's.

Kenoneill, you are missing out on a more versatile gun. The freedom has a 1 in 18 twist and a short cylinder. The BFR has a 1 in 15 twist and a longer cylinder. The BFR shoots heavier boolits more accurately. The Freedom is a glorified .480 with heavy bullets seated so deep. The Freedom shoots best at 350 gr's and the BFR loves 400 gr's and up.

Not to say the .480 isn't a good caliber and won't do the job you have done but I like the full power the .475 was designed for.
My BFR has shot many groups of 5/8" at 50 yd's with heavier boolits then you can fit in yours.

bfr,

How much more power than 425 grain bullets at 1275-1300 fps are you looking for? I'm running about 100 fps behind what John claims and my velocities mirror what Taffin was getting from testing a Linebaugh conversion. Glorified 480? I think not my friend.

Hello,
I have a Freedom arms and a John Linebaugh Bisley. The bisley fits me better. I think that is more important than what gun it is.
John

quote:

Originally posted by MS Hitman:
bfr,

How much more power than 425 grain bullets at 1275-1300 fps are you looking for? I'm running about 100 fps behind what John claims and my velocities mirror what Taffin was getting from testing a Linebaugh conversion. Glorified 480? I think not my friend.

I have both freedom Arms and Ruger Bisley conversions and I puurchased the first 475 Linebaugh that Hamiltom Bowen built back around 1986or7 I personaly don't see the problem with the Freedom Revolver that bfrshooter does. I have shot 425 grain LFN Hard Cast out of both the Freedom Revolvers and the Ruger and the BFR revolvers at 1400+ FPS they all shot accurately and how one would need more power escapes me (maybe want more,but not need). I am quite sure that not many people have owned a 475 Linebaugh as long as I have. I took 2 50+ inch bull Moose and shot an Artic Grizzely that came in on me cleaning a Moose all 3 three were taken with NO PROBLEM useing a 390 grain LFN at 1350 fps NOT MUCH NEED FOR MORE POWER........

Not saying the Freedom isn't good for hunting but I like better accuracy then the Freedom can give with heavy boolits. The Freedom starts to lose it after 400 gr's. I do a lot of shooting out to 500 meters with my handguns. I can seat my larger boolits out farther and get more power with less pressure. I make my own molds and make the crimp groove lower.
The very max overall length in the Freedom is 1.795", I have many heavy boolits that will not chamber in the Freedom unless .480 brass is used or .475 cases are cut down.
After shooting thousands of rounds and working loads for a Freedom, we found it loves a 350 gr boolit best.
It all depends on what one considers accuracy with the very heavy boolits and for that, I take the BFR any day. For hunting and carry, the Freedom is great. No beef with it for it's purpose but my shooting is different then yours. I don't like to worry if a round will fit the gun.
Bullet makers have put the cannelures too high on the jacketed bullets just to fit the Freedom and should put another groove down lower. There is a LOT of bullet down in the case.

bfr,

Each firearm is a law unto itself and seating a bullet further out of the case does not necessarily increase its accuracy. I agree that increasing the case capacity does lower operating pressures, this is the reason for developing the express calibers used in the tropics. I have a Ballisticast mould which throws 350 and 400 grain LFN style bullets. I have no problems loading these bullets with standard length cases. Same goes for the 425 grain bullets I purchase from Cast Performance. I check my ammo as I load it, therefore I have no worrys that a round will fit the gun. If you don't like the location of a cannelure on a particular jacketed bullet, Corbin and C-H Tool each have a tool to create your own cannelures. Purchase one and use it; I do.

You are not the only one on this forum who has shot handgun silhouette, taken game with a revolver, or loaded a round of ammunition for a revolver. I also consider the ability to hit a 20 oz. pop bottle or clay pidgeons at 100 yards plenty accurate for an open sighted revolver for my intended use. I have shot 500 meter rams with my FA; so you ain't the only one who's done that either hoss.

So, having said all this; take your "left-handed" compliments of the FAs and put them in your back pocket. As I've said before, I do not shoot BFRs, but neither do I run them down.

bfrshooter,
I guess I have to say that I guess I'm tired of hearing from someone who shoots a BFR criticize and condemn a FA with every post. Thanks for your concern, but I haven't "missed out" on much in my shooting and hunting background. My FA's have always shot only 400 and 420 gr. bullets since I've owned them. We never knew they were running out of steam ! You've got me really concerned now- I wonder what it was that made that game fall over dead ? I've never used a 350 gr. bullet in a .475...and never will, since I'm fortunate enough to have other handguns to handle weights that light, but I defer to your much greater experience in such matters.
Shoot what you want. If you're happy, I'm happy. A good product will stand on its own merits without a need to denigrate another product. The groundless criticizers have been watching too many Cable News talking heads, and learning the wrong lessons.

You see how fast I get jumped on? I never criticized the freedom, I only sort each gun for a certain use. It is the same as a guy that has a .45 colt and wants to shoot hot loads, I would direct him to a Ruger instead of the Colt. I would never say the Colt is a bad gun and I have never said the Freedom is a bad gun, only different for what I do.
I want a bunch of Freedoms for hunting and fun but don't have the money yet.
I will never understand why Freedom owners get so upset! I don't get upset if some of you say something about the guns I shoot or point out one is too heavy or hard to pack.

DE-Nile is a river in Egypt

How fast? I've been reading your put downs of the FA for about as long as you have been on this board. Almost four years is a while to put up with this. Like I said, I don't run your choice of revolver down. As to whether or not you say the FA is a "bad" gun; comments such as the ones in this thread are bad mouthing it enough. I have yet to find a FA shooter who has backed up your assessment of the revolver's capabilities. Nor have I found anyone around here that will back up your espoused opinion of the firearms.

Like I said earlier, you aren't the only one around here who shoots, reloads, hunts with a handgun, shoots silhouette or casts bullets. Quit running down every other make of revolver other than BFR.

You appear to have a good bit of knowledge and experience that would be an asset to the board and its members, but quite frankly I have tired of your tirade against FAs and passing them off as some sort of "spoiled" kid's toy.

I am sorry if I open pandoras box it was not my intent. As for myself I asked

about information on the 475 ,not really on any one gun . I was leaning towards

the bfr because it was what I could afford right now. I think what will work

for me is to make up my mind on what cal. I want then a gun. So knowing that I am

very new to handgun hunting and that most of you if not all have all knowledge

about this that anyone could want is why I asked about the 475. Things like recoil, distance to make clean kills ( depends on shooter this one I know )but

how far is to far, can it be controlled in a shooting house . Mybe if all I am

going to hunt is deer & elk do I need such a cal. Things like these can only

come from the men that have taken this walk before and care to past it on.

Thank each and everyone you for your help.

OK, here's my take. If you really desire a 475 Linebaugh, then do so. The next thing you do is get enough ammo and go out shooting. It takes quite a bit of shooting to acclimate yourself to the recoil force as far as your nerves in the hands and arms is concerned. The only prerequisite is to have shot heavy 44's and 45's for a few years before the leap. Even then, the recoil will surprise if you don't have a very firm hold from the moment you light if off to the moment the recoil stops. This is not a cartridge for the light-hearted nor the light "target shooters" as they will hurt themselvs if they're not concentrating 110% from the word go. I'd say limit yourself to 20-30 rnds max for your first couple of outings. That's the road I took when I first got my FA 83 quite a few years ago when they were well under $2K. It takes a few months and a bit of ammo to get used to it and to shoot accurately. One thing, though, once your hand and arm starts to shaking uncontrollably, stop there and call it a day. Your body has to build up a resistance to the shock of the recoil. Good shooting.

quote:

Originally posted by 475Guy:
One thing, though, once your hand and arm starts to shaking uncontrollably, stop there and call it a day. Your body has to build up a resistance to the shock of the recoil. Good shooting.

It's good to know I'm not the only one.

7mag,

The .475 is a very accurate round and capable of taking game from elephants on down. There are now several options available in both production and custom made revolvers.

This is a caliber in which reloading is a big plus; providing you the ability to start at the lower power levels and move up the power scale to the point you want/need to be at. The bulk of my shooting is not at max. power. I simply do not need to run the firearm that hard nor do I need to utilize the power it is capable of everytime I pull the trigger. Other serious shooters of this round will tell you the same thing. I have the advantage of bullet weight and diameter. The same holds true for my .500 Linebaugh.

I have no problem making a shot out to and slightly past 100 yards on a game animal when the opportunity presents itself. My level of confidence in the round and the accuracy of my revovler is that high. I have also made offhand headshots on WV groundhogs at a measured 50 yards. This is a target about the size of a small child's fist. Again, the loads I make are that accurate in my revolver. I have taken around a half dozen whitetail with my FA, several coyotes, and a cow elk I shot at 70 yards. The 400 grain Speer bullet broke the left femur and penetrated cross-ways on the body, stopping under the hide of the right shoulder.

So, if you want a .475; I wholeheartedly recommend you acquire one. I do not believe you will be dissappointed in the caliber, regardless of the platform from which you shoot.

7 Mag.,
Your original quest was a .460 BFR, and you've taken this detour to ask about the .475 L.
Regardless of the platform you choose, I believe you would find the .475 L to be far more versatile. As I said above, I highly recommend it to you.

Or you can go the route I am going. I have a Ruger Super Redhawk in .480 Ruger, and I've sent it to Jack Huntington for a 5-shot cylinder in .475 Linebaugh...... Even with 410 grain boolits at 1200 fps (.480 Ruger), I've found my SRH in .454 Casull to be a lot less pleasant to shoot -- although the .475 might just unseat the Casull as the recoil king. We'll see!

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
Or you can go the route I am going. I have a Ruger Super Redhawk in .480 Ruger, and I've sent it to Jack Huntington for a 5-shot cylinder in .475 Linebaugh......

Sounds like an excellent idea. I'd love to see the pics when you get it done. What barrel length are you going with on it?
I think that I'd like to get a 480 Alaskan sometime. I've only seen one, but it wasn't for sale at the time.

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
Or you can go the route I am going. I have a Ruger Super Redhawk in .480 Ruger, and I've sent it to Jack Huntington for a 5-shot cylinder in .475 Linebaugh...... Even with 410 grain boolits at 1200 fps (.480 Ruger), I've found my SRH in .454 Casull to be a lot less pleasant to shoot -- although the .475 might just unseat the Casull as the recoil king. We'll see!

how much does that cost and what is the max oal??? thanks!

LAR, I'm keeping it at 7.5 inches. It's a bit hefty, but it's mainly used as a primary hunting weapon, so I don't worry about packing it. I've also grown accustomed to carrying it in a shoulder holster when I'm rifle hunting.

Boomy, it'll cost right around 1K and right now the wait is about 8 months, so you never really feel the cost if you don't want to pay the whole mess up front! Offhand I don't know what the max OAL is, but the Rugers don't suffer from too short cylinders (I shoot 400 grain boolits in my SRH in Casull), but I don't see the need to load 'em long. From everything I have seen and read, the sweet spot for the .475 Linebaugh seems to be in the 420 grain range from 1000 - 1400 fps, which it will easily do without seating the bullet long. I'll check on the OAL and get back to you.

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
I have seen and read, the sweet spot for the .475 Linebaugh seems to be in the 420 grain range from 1000 - 1400 fps, which it will easily do without seating the bullet long. I'll check on the OAL and get back to you.

+1..... The More that I shoot these revolvers and the more game that I take the more that I am convinced that 1200 fps is all that is needed for top on game performance and for anything in the lower 48 1000 fps will be more than adequate and the slower speeds make them much easier to shoot............

a super redhawk 470 linebaugh is a great idea but wouldnt it be more cost effective to go with a freedom arms? the scoped 470 linebaugh redhawk is cooooooooooool.

http://hunting.about.com/od/guns/l/aast480rugerb.htm

this is interesting...any remarks? i guess it will be fine as long as you dont load hot

.480 Ruger & Ruger's Super Redhawk

By Dick Metcalf, Technical Editor, Shooting Times.
When Steve Hornady called Bill Ruger with the idea for a new big-bore handgun cartridge, the first chambering to carry the Ruger name was born.

Hornady’s just-introduced .480 Ruger cartridge powers a new-design 325-grain .475-caliber XTP-MAG bullet at 1350 fps velocity from a 71/2-inch revolver barrel to deliver 1315 foot-pounds (ft-lbs) of energy. At 50 yards it’s carrying approximately 1100 fps velocity and 1025 ft-lbs energy, and at 100 yards it still retains more than 1075 fps velocity and 835 ft-lbs of energy. Those are impressive figures!

By comparison, this performance represents 82 percent of the rated muzzle velocity and 73 percent of the muzzle energy of a 300-grain .454 Casull load. At 100 yards the comparison is still 81 percent of the .454’s retained velocity and 71 percent of its energy. When compared to a 300-grain .44 Magnum, the .480 Ruger has 17 percent greater muzzle velocity with nearly 50 percent more muzzle energy, and at 100 yards it still has a four-percent velocity advantage, with 18 percent more energy. Put even more directly, the .480 Ruger delivers nearly 150 ft-lbs more energy at 50 yards than the 881 ft-lbs the .44 Magnum has at the muzzle, and it doesn't drop below the energy of the .44's muzzle until about 85 yards. That's power.

At the same time, due to the larger caliber diameter of the .480 Ruger in comparison to the .454 Casull, Hornady claims the felt recoil of its initial .480 Ruger load is approximately 50 percent less than the .454 when shooting it in a conventional revolver—due to the flatter, less spiked, pressure curve of the bigger-bore cartridge (which translates into more of a perceived “heavy push†instead of a sharp “wrenching blowâ€).

Subjectively, I agree. After firing a trio of identical-length Super Redhawks with Hornady’s own 300-grain .44 Magnum, 325-grain .480 Ruger, and 300-grain .454 Casull loads, I’ll testify that the .480 feels much more like the .44 than the .454, and I can shoot the .480 for as long as I want without undue stress. Eighty percent of the .454 Casull’s power with half the recoil—no wonder Hornady believes the new .480 Ruger “takes handgun performance to an entirely new level.â€

Dimensionally, the .480 has a nominal 1.285-inch case length and a maximum overall loaded length of 1.650 inches. Its case diameter, rim size, and other specifications are the same as the longer (1.5-inch case) and much more powerful 475 Linebaugh cartridge, which was developed from a cut-down .45-70 case with a reduced-diameter rim.

Hornady takes particular note of the fact that .480 Ruger performance comes at essentially “normal handgun operating pressures,†so its brass isn't subjected to unusual stress and can be reloaded at about the same rate as .44 Magnum brass. Unfired .480 Ruger brass is available from Hornady for handloaders, and existing .475 Linebaugh dies (available from RCBS, Dillion, Redding, and Hornady) are used to load the .480 Ruger the same way .44 Magnum dies are used to load .44 Special loads.

All of this helps to understand how the .480 Ruger came into being. Steve Hornady has always loved heavy, big-bore cartridges, but he doesn't love heavy, big-bore recoil—especially in handguns. So after introducing his .475 Linebaugh load to the market in early 2000, he perceived an opportunity. He wasn't going to sell a lot of full-power Linebaugh ammunition unless people were buying Linebaugh-chambered guns, but there weren't going to be a lot of people buying Linebaugh-chambered guns if the only thing to shoot in them was full-power .475 Linebaugh ammunition.

What was needed was a .475 cartridge that could stand in the same position relative to the Linebaugh as the .44 Special and .45 Colt stand in relation to the .44 Magnum and .454 Casull. He figured that a shorter case .475 load splitting the power difference between a heavy-load .44 Magnum and the .454 Casull would be about right and could offer handgun hunters a previously untapped combination of serious performance with acceptable recoil. Hornady’s technical branch had already done virtually all the groundwork necessary in the process of developing the full-power Linebaugh loads, so the only real task was to cut back the case to a length that could fit revolvers already in the marketplace, pick an appropriate .475 bullet weight for the targeted performance level, and select a powder for optimum load density and efficient burn in the new-length case.

.480 Ruger Ballistic Comparison
Chambering Bullet Velocity
(fps) Energy
(ft-lbs

.480 Ruger Hornady 325-gr. XTP-MAG 1350 1313
.44 Magnum Hornady 300-gr. HP/XTP 1150 881
.45 Colt “Magnum +P†Hornady 300-gr. JSP 1300 1126
.454 Casull Hornady 300-gr. XTP-MAG 1650 1813
.475 Linebaugh Hornady 400-gr. XTP-MAG 1300 1501
NOTES: All figures are for 71/2-inch test barrels

The result was the new load before us, which fits exactly into the slot Steve Hornady envisioned for it and, I might add, is the cleanest burning big-bore handgun cartridge I've ever fired. I don’t know what powder Hornady is using, but the inside of a once-fired factory case is absolutely free of residue and nearly as bright as fresh, unfired brass.

With his new “.475 Short†cartridge basically in hand, Steve also recognized a need to have guns that were chambered for it in its own right, instead of just being hooked to the .475 Linebaugh. The technical data readings showed that the new load was coming in with a SAAMI-standard maximum average pressure (MAP) of 48,000 psi, which is less than the 50,000 psi that is standard for the .454 Casull. That meant any revolver designed for the .454 was already specced to handle this new cartridge, provided the cylinder geometry would accommodate the 0.023 larger caliber. Keenly aware that the most recent .454 Casull revolver introduction was Ruger’s Super Redhawk in 1999, and equally aware that Ruger was actively urging the use of .45 Colt loads and “medium†Casull loadings in that same revolver to promote its popularity and increased general use, Hornady made the approach.

Hornady: “I've got this new revolver cartridge with more power than a .44 Magnum and less recoil than a .454 Casull. I think it will work in your gun. Want to do a joint development?

Ruger: “Possibly. What's it called?â€

Hornady: “What do you WANT to call it?â€

It was about that simple. The first prototype revolvers Ruger sent to Hornady were in fact marked “.475 Ruger,†but after rethinking, Ruger decided to change the name of the cartridge to “.480†to give it a stand-alone identity.


Hornady is very high on its new product and regards it as far more than just another routine loading variation. And with the Ruger name now officially attached to the cartridge, it certainly won’t be long before we see many other loading variations in different bullet designs and weights from many other ammunition manufacturers—not to mention additional makes and models of guns.


Page Two - The .480 Super Redhawk

When Sturm, Ruger & Co. accepted Steve Hornady’s offer to cooperatively develop a new heavy-power big-bore cartridge/ revolver combination, it decided not to use one of its large-frame single-action revolvers as the platform—in spite of the fact that SA revolvers are typically the guns of choice for such high-end loads. Instead, it chose the double-action Super Redhawk (SRH), which is now being chambered for the very first cartridge ever to bear the Ruger name.

SPECS
Ruger Super Redhawk .480
Ruger DA Revolver
Manufacturer....................... Sturm,
Ruger & Co. Inc.
200 Ruger Rd.
Prescott, AZ 86301
Model ..................Super Redhawk
Operation ..............Double-action
revolver
Caliber ..........................480 Ruger
Barrel length ................9.5 inches
Overall length ...............15 inches
Weight, empty .............58 ounces
Safety........................ Transfer-bar
ignition;swing-out
cylinder interlock
Sights ...........Ruger white-outline
adjustable rear;
elevation-interchangeable
red insert ramp front
Sight radius .............11.25 inches
Rifling ............................6 grooves,
1:18 RH twist
Stocks........................ Rubber with
black laminated panels
Cylinder capacity ..........6 rounds
Finish ...............Ruger Target gray
Price .......................................$745
It was actually the natural choice. Just the year before last, Ruger introduced a .454 Casull version of the Super Redhawk and in the process had already engineered the original SRH design to accommodate the 50,000+ average psi pressures generated by that powerful load. The new .475-caliber .480 Ruger operates at a SAAMI-spec maximum average pressure of 48,000 psi, so the basic structural job was already done. And for the many of you who are wondering, Ruger spokesmen say that they do not consider the existing single-action Super Blackhawk/Bisley configuration to have a sufficient design margin for these and other (.475 Linebaugh) more powerful high-end cartridges. Should Ruger decide to offer single-action chamberings for such loads, it will be in a thoroughly redeveloped platform.


The new stainless-steel Super Redhawk in .480 Ruger is available in either 7 1/2- or 9 1/2-inch barrel lengths, with unfluted cylinder, and is finished with the same hard, slick Ruger “Target-gray†surface treatment as is applied to the company’s varmint version Model 77 bolt-action rifles. It comes with Ruger’s frame-integral scope-mount dovetails and patented one-inch stainless-steel scope rings in the same finish. Suggested retail price is $745. Like all Ruger firearms products, the new Super Redhawk .480 Ruger is a rugged, durable tool, certain to appeal to those who appreciate big-bore, heavy-impact handguns and was specifically designed with the big-game sportsman in mind.


The Super Redhawk was originally designed and introduced in 1986 as a .44 Magnum and is still available in its original 7 1/2- and 9 1/2-inch .44-caliber iterations with a natural brushed-satin stainless-steel finish and fluted cylinders. The .454 Casull and .480 Ruger models come with the Target-gray finish and unfluted cylinders. The Ruger catalog lists the same weight for the 7 1/2-inch-barrelled versions of the .44 Magnum, .454 Casull, and .480 Ruger, at 53 ounces, but due to the bigger diameter chambers and bore, the actual measured weight of a .454 Super Redhawk is about an ounce less than the .44 and the .480 is about an ounce less than that.


Other than these differences, and the fact that the .454 Casull and .480 Ruger versions wear black laminated grip panels instead of the brown-colored Goncalo Alves wood panels used on the patented cushioned grips on the .44s, there are no other significant dimensional or configuration differences between the previous versions and the .480 Ruger Super Redhawk edition. The upper front of the cylinder window in the .480’s frame has been opened very slightly to allow for the slightly larger diameter of the threaded portion of the .475-caliber barrel. The 400-series stainless-steel material used in the barrel and frame of the .480 Ruger model is subjected to different hardening and heat-treat processes for additional strength, as is done with the .454 Casull versions as well.

The Super Redhawk looks intimidating. The frame topstrap has more metal than any revolver made, with a massive forward frame extension that completely encloses the rear three inches of the heavy, nearly one-inch-diameter round bull barrel. According to Ruger, the heavy extended frame “provides lengthened bearing surfaces and relocated barrel threads for greater strength and rigidity in barrel mounting.†The topstrap and frame extension also provide the mount locations for attaching the scope rings. Even the front sight has an extra heavy-duty look; an interchangeable black steel, red-insert blade sits in a stainless-steel ramp twice the size of any other revolver’s front sight base.

One thing sure to cause continuing comment about the .480 Ruger version of the SRH is the six-shot cylinder. And let me tell you, with a .475-caliber cartridge that is a full cylinder; so full, in fact, that the case head rims of the cartridges actually touch. In fact, small normal manufacturing variations in rim-head diameter, or any tiny ding or burr, can cause interference between cartridges and can perhaps require a switch or rotation of rounds (this condition arose several times among some of the hunters on the Hornady field-test hunt recounted herein). The chamber walls might give pause to some because they appear unusually “thin†considering the inherent power of the load, but Ruger avers unequivocally that its thoroughly tested structural steel and special heat-treat provides a massive safety margin. I believe it. Ruger never errs except on the side of caution.

Beyond this, the rest of the Super Redhawk revolver design is already familiar to Shooting Times readers and requires no further detailed description here. What everyone really wants to know about the new .480 Ruger-chambered Super Redhawk is how well does it perform and what does it feel like to shoot?

Boomy, why the Ruger? It's simple, I like DA revolvers better than SAs -- just a personal preference. Plus, the .480 needs only a cylinder change as the barrel is compatible. Plus, I really like the pistol and it's very accurate. SRHs while not the prettiest revolvers are very strong and very rugged.

The .480 doesn't need to be loaded hot. Don't look at muzzle energy as any good way of determining how it kills game -- it's a poor measurement.

I'll post some pics as soon as it comes back.

Im with woody on this. I hear all the time that the .475 recoils more then the .500. I have both and its pure hogwash. If you load to the pressures published for both maybe but the .500 is capable of alot more performance then the low pressure loads published. A typical 475 load with push a 400 to about 1350fps. A 500 will easily do the same with a 450 and just plain common sense physics will tell you which will recoil more. put 27 grains of 110 and a 400 in a 475 and then put 32 grains of 110 in a 50 with a 450 take them both out and shoot them and then tell me which recoils more.

quote:

Originally posted by Woodrow S:
JWP,

I guess it all depends on what you are shooting them out of. My 500L is a 5" /5 shot Reeder and its very light with micarta grips, shooting full house 435 hard cast. The 475L was the BFR with a longer bbl, I think a 6.5 and rubber grips and I believe the loads were factory (yes, I know some factory loads are hot) but I am not certain. Mine definately had more sting to the hand and it was not just my opinion but a few other guys as well. Perhaps it was not a fair "straight up" comparison but thats all I had to go on.

Woody

The recoil all depends on the guns weight and whether or not it is ported. Some 500's have far less recoil then the .475. You have to use each caliber on the same platform before saying which kicks more. A few inches difference in barrel length alone makes a huge difference.

quote:

Originally posted by Lloyd Smale:
Im with woody on this. I hear all the time that the .475 recoils more then the .500. I have both and its pure hogwash. If you load to the pressures published for both maybe but the .500 is capable of alot more performance then the low pressure loads published. A typical 475 load with push a 400 to about 1350fps. A 500 will easily do the same with a 450 and just plain common sense physics will tell you which will recoil more. put 27 grains of 110 and a 400 in a 475 and then put 32 grains of 110 in a 50 with a 450 take them both out and shoot them and then tell me which recoils more.

quote:

Originally posted by Woodrow S:
JWP,

I guess it all depends on what you are shooting them out of. My 500L is a 5" /5 shot Reeder and its very light with micarta grips, shooting full house 435 hard cast. The 475L was the BFR with a longer bbl, I think a 6.5 and rubber grips and I believe the loads were factory (yes, I know some factory loads are hot) but I am not certain. Mine definately had more sting to the hand and it was not just my opinion but a few other guys as well. Perhaps it was not a fair "straight up" comparison but thats all I had to go on.

Woody

Ever shoot two 12 gauge shotguns with the same barrel length,same wieght, the same load and the only difference in the 2 is they are different brands and one kicks you noticable harder than the other,yet the Physics (as you say )does not show this to be possiable.

If you've never shot a serious power sixgun in a DA frame, you might want to reconsider a 475 on the Ruger SRH, though you really don't need to rechamber as long loaded bullets provide the same case capacity.

I've fired enough 454's, 475's and 500's in mdl 83 FA's, custom ruger bisleys and blackhawks and super redhawks to realize that the 480 at ordingal load levels is a practical recoil limit in a DA frame. When you push it to linebaugh levels, you're taking a serious hit to the web of your hand.

With the SA frames, the gun will roll on recoil, and you can handle more of because of how it is transferred to your body.

I know folks who have converted srh 480's to 475, as well as those that have loaded their 480's up, and they attest to the brutal recoil.

Paul, I've gotten used to my SRH in .454 Casull shooting 400 grain bullets at 1400 fps......how much worse could it be?!?

i based my statement on shooting my first two linebaughs both about identical guns. 5.5 inch non barrel banded bisleys.

quote:

Originally posted by bfrshooter:
The recoil all depends on the guns weight and whether or not it is ported. Some 500's have far less recoil then the .475. You have to use each caliber on the same platform before saying which kicks more. A few inches difference in barrel length alone makes a huge difference.

That will sure tell you which has the most recoil!
I shoot the BFR .475 and my .45 Vaquero with heavy boolts and there is little difference in recoil between them.
Some say the .500 is mild but they are using the big, heavy, ported S&W. If you had the S&W in a .475 too, then the comparison would be valid. I have shot small, light .357's that stung pretty bad but in an 8-3/8" S&W, it is nothing. The gun I really hate with powerful cartridges is the TC contender, worst design for heavy recoil ever made. I shoot my .475 and 45-70 with one hand often with no pain but the Contender, even in 30-30 mangles my knuckle and stings my hand. It is fine from Creedmore or with two hands but just holding it out in one hand hurts. The MOA pistol can get nasty too.