There is a new Gunblast review of the 5 shot Alaskan, and Jeff Quinn seems pretty sure that Ruger is going back into production of these fine guns.

Hopefully that will lead to more gun and ammo sales, and more once fired .480 brass on GunBroker.....

GB 5 shot Alaskan review

John Davies
Spokane WA

John, from what I understand, they are not going to start producing them again. That said, I wouldn't hesitate to pick one up used as they are great revolvers and a great caliber.

Jeff Quinn: "I am glad to see that Ruger is producing the .480 revolvers again. The five-shot cylinder gives hope that maybe there will be a five-shot .480 Bisley Blackhawk in the future, but that is just speculation at this time."

"The .480 Ruger is a very efficient cartridge, and I am glad to see that Ruger is once again producing revolvers to fire that dandy round."

Jeff spoke up at RugerForum.com and apologized for implying that Ruger is going to continue to make these guns in any form. These 5 shot guns were produced in a limited production run, with no guarantee that there will be more.

I already have a six shot, and I hope that others will be able to buy new guns in the future. I think it is a great cartridge and a great handgun. Maybe if folks buy up the 5 shots, it will send the right signal to Ruger.

It looked for a while like they were going to resume production, but then they didn't. I talked to Ruger and they said that it was a marketing decision to no longer build them. Bummer.

Can someone explain to this peon what the diffference is between a 475 Linebaugh and a 480 Ruger in terms of ballistics?
Thanks, Peter.

There is about a tenth of an inch difference in case length -- 1.29 for the .480 versus 1.38-1.40 for the .475 Linebaugh. Velocity potential is obviously greater for the .475. My loads average 1,350 fps with a 420 grain bullet.

the 480 is sorta the light load for the 475 linebaugh.Like 357 and 38.Last deer season i ran out of 475 ammo and used the 480 to shoot a nice buck

I would also add to TBEAR's post that the .480 will pretty much do everything the .475 Linebaugh will do with the exception of beating the shooter up as badly.

The 475L can be loaded like a 480. The 480 cann't match the 475L on the top end loads.

You are right, but it's arguable that you need more velocity than the.480. I've used them both on game and they kill about the same IMHO. That said, I am happy with my .475 and wouldn't trade it for another .480.......

Did they just not sell that well?

Evidently not. Didn't help that the first factory loads were so lackluster and they were trying to fit the cartridge in between the .44 mag and the .454 Casull. Funny thing is that loaded with 400 + grain bullets it handily outshines the .454 and it's not as obnoxious.

the 480 still is potent on recoil but not nearly as much truth be told if i would of bought a 480 when they first came out which i tried but that gunshop said i had to wait a year to catch up to the marketing.I probally wouldn't have a 475 linebaugh but i won't give up my 475 now that i have it.I plan to take my first bear with it this sept

I'm somewhat fond of the 480 I've had one almost as long as they've been available, and worked up loads when there was almost no data available.

A bit of background, my shooting buddy is a gun project nut, and has had multiple 475 and 500 Linebaughs built by various smiths on both the bisley and super redhawk platform. I've been fortunate to shoot several of those guns, as well as other custom rugers and FA 83's. I personally cannot handle the recoil of the 475 and 500 Linebaugh. Perhaps I could put in a tremendous amount of effort to get to the point that I can shoot them w/o flinching, but as it is, my 25 yd groups are paper plate plus in size. Not good for hunting.

So, when I heard about the 480, I though ah-ha, this should offer a jump in power from the 44 mag, but not a huge jump in recoil. My buddy and I each got 7 1/2" srh's and proceded to work up loads. Our first mold was an LBT 390 gr LFN plain base. We tried 2400 and H-110. With 2400 we were getting 1100 fps, and with H-110 1200 fps. 25 yd groups were one ragged hole, so we proceded to the 50 yd line for load work. Dialed in we were printing 5 into 1". Recoil was like a heavy 44 mag, just a big push, but none of the brutality of the 475. Yes, the 475 can push those 400 gr bullets 1400 fps, and then recoil doubles.

I've worked with many bullets since that initial one, and tried different powders. My buddy had mountain molds make a custom 400 gr lfn gc mold, with an extra long nose. The bullet seats out to the end of the cylinder and powder capacity is on par with the 475 linebaugh. He was driving them 1350 fps and cases just fell out of the cylinder. Oh, you could see the difference in the recoil when he shot it, utterly changed the personality of the gun.

I had another custom mold cut, the specs were 450 gr wfn gc, it came out to 460 gr when cast from ww's. I found my best accuracy was at 1050 fps, I got them going going 1150 fps doing load work but extraction was sticky, and recoil was getting up there. I sent some of them to another member here years ago to try at the linebaugh seminar. He loaded them to 1100 fps in his 480, and in penetration tests they were within 10-15% penetration of the best 475 and 500 linebaugh loads. In wet newsprint they went 38" deep, and in the bone and newsprint test they went through 2" of bone and 10" of newsprint.

To me it is perfection in a hunting sixgun, plenty of power and penetration, reasonable recoil, and steller accuracy. In my gun the magic recipe seems to be hornady brass, cci 350, 21 gr H-110 or Lil gun, and a 390-400 gr hardcast bullet. I've tried nearly 1/2 dozen bullets in that weight range and all clock 1200 fps +/- and print 1" at 50 yds.

For target loads a 310 gr lfn over 9.7 gr unique clocks 1000 fps and shoots better than I do. It's also plenty for any deer you'll come across.

Here are some pics of various cast bullets. I had a keith style swc mold made that drops 275 gr. My goal was an accurate 700 fps load, but I've yet to find a powder accurate at that speed. With blue dot @ 1000 fps it'll stack em right in there.





The 460 gr bullets tested at the linebaugh seminar, one on the left after 38" of newsprint, one on the right after 2" of bone and 10" of newsprint. Both cast from ww's and water dropped from the mold. It's the bullet on the right on the lineup picture above.



Also check out more notes on my loads

http://forums.accuratereloadin...=330100786#330100786

Welcome back, Paul! I was hoping you would weigh in on this thread. The .480 really is a great round. I too got my first SRH when they just became available, but later converted it to .475 Linebaugh, a decision I do not regret as the revolver is SO accurate. Anyhow, a 400 + grain bullet at 1,100 to 1,200 fps will take anything and everything you can encounter, leaving two large holes. The top-end .475 Linebaugh loads recoil in a whole different category.

It is too bad about ruger dropping the 480, they had the right idea, but just not committed enough to stick through it. No I am stuck with 44's and 454's. 454's are pleasant to shoot in my S&W 460V, with the muzzle break and heft I get quick follow up shots making it a good self defense pistol. I would survive but only hear half of what people say.

But I digress, other than the carry weight of the SRH, I really couldn't fault the 480 and wish they would return to production.

John

I wish Ruger would come out with the 480 in a 5 shot single action, I think it would be a hot seller...

I know I would by one....

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:
I wish Ruger would come out with the 480 in a 5 shot single action, I think it would be a hot seller...

I know I would by one....

Absolutely! Would have been a big seller IMHO. I know I would have bought one.......

Yes, that gun in a 4 5/8 barrel would be a must have. I'll keep wishing as well.

Probably less of a handful than my 83 6.5"! I guess I could load it down a bit, but where's the fun in that!

John

Originally posted by Big Bore boar Hunter

quote:

Probably less of a handful than my 83 6.5"! I guess I could load it down a bit, but where's the fun in that!

John

I don't know maybe, but I had a 4&3/4 model 83 .454 and found that it had real bad controlability issues. I got a 6" M83 .454 and the differance was like night and day. I find that barrels under 5" in a big boar are hard to shoot accuratly with full power loads. I have to think the 3" would be real bad.

quote:

Originally posted by TBEAR99:
the 480 is sorta the light load for the 475 linebaugh.Like 357 and 38.Last deer season i ran out of 475 ammo and used the 480 to shoot a nice buck

Unh-unh, nope. More nearly accurate comparison would be 357 Magnum and +P+ 38 Special. Over the range of bullet weights generally used, the 475 retains less than 100 fps advantage for those willing to accept violent recoil.

Since John Linebaugh has demonstrated that, when using bullets near the top of usable weight range, cast bullets having wide meplats do not require anywhere close to maximum velocities/pressures from either 475 or 480 to be efficient game getters, the real differences between the two loads -- for 90+ percent of their shooters -- is marketing hyperbole and bragging rights.

I own two 480 SRHs and two Freedom Arms 475s. The difference between the cartridges is effectively moot. There is a difference between the revolvers on several levels.

I have personally found that game can't really tell the 150 fps difference between my max loads for each caliber. There is a marked difference in recoil. The 150 fps difference is pretty big. It's just like moving from .458 win mag levels to the 2,300 fps level of the .458 Lott -- you are moving into a different category of recoil.

I have shot lots of single action .475s and while not the most pleasant recoilers, I recommend trying out a DA revolver in .475 -- it'll get your attention.......

Lots of good stuff in this thread:

quote:

Whitworth
one of us
Picture of Whitworth

Posted 04 July 2009 18:17 Hide Post
I have personally found that game can't really tell the 150 fps difference between my max loads for each caliber. There is a marked difference in recoil. The 150 fps difference is pretty big. It's just like moving from .458 win mag levels to the 2,300 fps level of the .458 Lott -- you are moving into a different category of recoil.

The irony with that is John L. was the one always telling me a 452, 260 grain Kieth cast, @1200 fps would take anything in the 48. That was until he moved back to Cody, and had brown bear around. Then he was going to build a .338 OKH, rifle. Point being his cartridges were designed like the old Nitro Express rounds, big case, big bullet, low pressure. However, to market them, he had to go faster then a Casull, and, there is always the lunatic fringe that thinks more velocity means better killing power(Ross Seyfried?) To be fair, when the 45 heavy colts were being made, it was really clear the 454 was marginal for big game, and, wanting all the velocity you could get, which was 1550 with a 350 grain cast 45 bullet, was not an unreasonable wish.

quote:

Since John Linebaugh has demonstrated that, when using bullets near the top of usable weight range, cast bullets having wide meplats do not require anywhere close to maximum velocities/pressures from either 475 or 480 to be efficient game getters, the real differences between the two loads -- for 90+ percent of their shooters -- is marketing hyperbole and bragging rights.

The beauty of the .475 is it does what the .480 does, with less pressure, and, slower recoil, all things being equal. Given John's stature, and experience, creating a handgun that recoiled at 40 ft-lbs or more wasn't high on his agenda. He's always been sort of practical, trying to get it done without beating himself to death.

quote:

I personally cannot handle the recoil of the 475 and 500 Linebaugh. Perhaps I could put in a tremendous amount of effort to get to the point that I can shoot them w/o flinching, but as it is, my 25 yd groups are paper plate plus in size. Not good for hunting.

I found when moving to the .475 and .500 that this was true, until I had custom fit grips on my handguns. The grips made all the difference in the world, even with 454 level loads in my old Seville.

The only real reason to use that extra case capacity is to move hollow point, or expanding bullets, through big targets.

Safarikid for one, is an experienced hunter that likes using expanding bullets, since they do more damage, cut a bigger hole, etc.
Akshooter

quote:

I don't know maybe, but I had a 4&3/4 model 83 .454 and found that it had real bad controlability issues. I got a 6" M83 .454 and the differance was like night and day. I find that barrels under 5" in a big boar are hard to shoot accuratly with full power loads. I have to think the 3" would be real bad.

I feel your pain. The 454, without custom grips, is a handful. That said, with the bigger guns, they make pretty much the perfect belly or snubs. We found that with over 350 grain bullets the bullet provides enough resistance to get complete powder combustion. So, you can have a 4" barrel on a .475 or .500 JRH, etc. and, get the same velocity as a 7.5" barrel.

So, if you use a heavy, expanding bullet, and the right powder, you have the ultimate belly gun.
Tom's Hellboy: .500JRH

454 marginal for big game?? not sure it's ever really been that way. 6 buff in now and it's not been marginal at all yet. to be accurate, 5 buff with the 454, one with the 475 bfr, and my brother's taken two with a 44 mag. son has taken one with a 44 mag. 300+ grains in any of these guns is damn sure more than enough. i couldn't tell any of these were hitting harder than the other on any of the shots. the only difference was seen in the buff hit with the .44 mag 225 gr hornady leverevolution rounds. killed it dead but didn't pass through and definitely didn't hold together as well as the barnes and hardcasts did. the 480 ruger makes perfect sense as long as there isn't a 475 linebaugh around. ruger really should just chamber that round and be done with it. i'd buy one for sure. love a mate for my bfr.

quote:

Originally posted by Cockerman77:
Yes, that gun in a 4 5/8 barrel would be a must have. I'll keep wishing as well.

While I have 6- and 4.75-inch M83 475s, they are strictly stock configurations. And they balance better than my stock SRH 480 7.5-inch barrel. I took care of the klutz problem with the SRH. And this 480 balances beautifully. I've changed to Pachmayr's GP100 grip and with my petite hand I can control the revolver trigger cocking without a problem.

The front sight base blank had sufficient length that I could have chosen between 6- and 3.75-inch barrel length. I chose 4.75 inches to maintain consistency with the M83.

Here is the revolver with Ruger's stock grip.



Here is the template model upon which I believe I improved. While the bead blasted finish is more esthetically pleasing to me when both revolvers are unmarked, that finish is significantly more fragile than my brushed hard chrome. And my finish can be restored by me in a few minutes -- when that time comes. The blasted finish must be reblasted -- bucks!

Love the way that revolver looks, Naphtali!

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
Love the way that revolver looks, Naphtali!

Many thanks for your kind remark. Changes to barrel and frame have improved its balance to favorably compare with the M83. And an unanticipated benefit -- aka undocumented feature?? -- moving the sight blade closer to the rear sight has improved my target-sight acquisition. There is a smidgen more white space between rear sight's cut-out and ramp front's edges.

The work was done by Bob Cogan in Alabama. Cost was acceptable and the finished quality is excellent. The teething problems we had with completion pertained to both of us being in a project we had not attempted previously. Whoever goes next won't have the problem. I recommend him.

I still need to get another 480 srh to cut it down. I've found the hogue grips to be perfect for my hands.