Anyone do this on a regular basis? Any diminished accuracy? How about build up on the chamber mouths? TIA...

I shoot the 45LC in my 454 Raging Bull. They both shoot well and the recoil is mild for the 45LC. The accuracy is decent with both, but as I have stated on earlier posts that my RB does not like lead bullets. They lead a lot and ruins accuracy after a couple of cylinders. It also spits copper. I shoot 38spc in my 357mag, and 44spc in my 44mag, so I don't see any problem using 45LC in my 454RB as long as the cylinder is kept clean IMHO.

The RB 454 at 1600fps is more controllable than my Smith & Wesson or Dan Wesson at 1250fps. The muzzle break and grip design has a lot to do with the recoil. I shot the 454 off a rest with open sights at 100yrds last weekend and got a 5 shot group about 12inches. I want to try it with a scope but haven�t purchased the scope yet. My only complaint is I had to use earplugs and earmuffs to keep my ears from ringing. IT IS REAL LOUD. . The people on the rifle range next to me were looking at me and noticing how LOUD THE 454 WAS.

9.3X62

Check out my thread titled "sticky brass". I have shot .45s through my 454, this might be why I'm having such a problem.



gunner

Actually, the FAs are much stronger than the Rugers as well as built to much tighter tolerances. The residue takes up a good deal of what little clearence there is near the mouth of the chamber.

Do you have any marks on the brass in the place where this crease would develop? I find this theory a bit hard to believe given the 32/32H&R, 38 special/357 mag, 44 special/44 mag, and 45 Schofield/45 colt relationships...

Hmmm...

Swede,

What loads do you use/like in your 454 Raging Bull?



gunner

Actually, what I mean is that the metal used in the SRH cylinder is not the same as the standard 416 SS that is probably used on the FAs. In particular, I was conjecturing that the FA, while stronger over all, is so only because it uses only a 5-shot cylinder, hence allowing for substantially more (weaker) steel between chambers. In other words, I bet that a 5-shot cylinder out of the SRH alloy would be even stronger than the current FA cylinder. My main point was that the cylinder scarring described earlier may not apply to the SRH alloy, hence they (Ruger) felt that it would be fine to stamp the barrel with both calibers...

Also, like you say, I suspect build up is a much more immediate problem for something as tight as a FA - may not matter as much (or as soon) for a "sloppy" SRH.

Sounds like BS to me. The liability associated with producing ammo that would destroy all others of the same caliber strikes me as beyond sensible. Likewise, for Taurus and Ruger to build revolvers that couldn't handle existing factory ammo of the caliber inscribed on the barrel also sounds a bit preposterous.

I was advised at the last Gun Show not to shoot the Freedom Arms 454 shells in my Raging Bull they are to hot and will destroy any gun except for a Freedom Arms 454.



Have any of you tried there shells or is this another BS story?