I also made this statement, of which I stand behind.

quote:

Originally posted by MS Hitman:
Light and fast is best reserved for backpacking and prairie dogs.

I have all the respect for Mr Jurras, but if the load was so effective, why doesn't it see much use today?

Talk to you later, I am going to the woods with my .45 Colt and cast bullet loads.

quote:

Originally posted by GS:

quote:

Originally posted by Shack:
Were the 180 LEJ loads you referred to Auto Mag ammo or revolver? He was talking about the AM in that link above. And are they Super-Vel? If so, I imagine that means for revolvers.

Only one person knows for sure, but as to "seeing the error in his theory" my best guess is that the Howdah was a case of "also" rather than "instead of"..

REvolver loads, around 1900 fps. Compressed or close, very hard crimp, used tar to hold the bullets in place, or maybe it was tar paper.

Marko is partially right: he used different thickness jackets for different game. Light game, thin jacket, heavy game, thick jacket, don't know, take the thicker jacket.

Jurras did his homework, and, like Marko, shot heck out of that one load, and, was super accurate. Playing card with a full cylinder, at 100 yards, off hand, on good days when he was younger:
which is why, I think, Marko sticks with the 420's at 1350 fps.
Jack told me my .475 custom FA would cloverleaf with 420 casts at 50 yards, a full cylinder, but, the load
was with V110, IIRC, and also around 1350 fps.

There is a certain logic to using one load, one bullet, one gun, and shooting it a ton so you can hit exactly where you aim.

I respect that approach...

The Loading that was commericialized by Super Vel (Lee's company) was a 180 grain non expanding hollow point in 44 mag advertised at 1800 FPS.That was the only on that was marketed and was a heavy jacket. Light wieght expanding bullets penetrate like a rubber ball. The loading worked OK on Deer and Antelope, but when tried on Moose was a disaster. Larry Kelly of Magan Port fame found out the hard way that jacketed 240 grainers in the 44 Mag were poor penetrators on big Grizzlys. No one needs a 475 or 500 whatever for Deer and when I speak about what works best in them I am talking large heavy game. If anyone thinks light and fast is the way to go, then let's go shoot some Buffalo and I'll clean up the mess with some 420 grainers in the 475.
If one stays with a 420 in the 475 or the the 525 in the 500 Linebaugh then you are ready to go hunt anything that walks crawls or flys big little short or tall it kills them all with aplumb.

Whitworth and I watched a guy take over 20 minutes to get a Bull Bison on the ground with a 500 S&W because of light and fast. It was simply the wrong bullet for the task IME and opinon.

The only problem that I have is when guy's on this sight post thier experience and opinion GS counters with "the guys on ------- site do such and such" which is interpretied as they know more than the guy's on this site in GS's eyes.

I find it odd for a person that does not hunt to argue effectiness issues of varius wieght bullets on a hunting forum. Most of the people on hunting forums want to exchange info and learn seems that, one only wants to argue and has no real knowledge or experience to share

quote:

Originally posted by GS:I'll load some 525's at 1100 fps and try em. I've got about 25 left over from my last loading of 525's at 1350 fps.

Really why bother if you ar simply punching paper or plinking? Load what is the least expensive, most accurate, and least abusive and have some fun. If you don't plan on shooting big game, there is no sense in working heavy loads.

My comment as quoted by GS was in reference to platforms only.

Lest there be any mistake, I am not a fan of light bullets driven fast unless I am going after varmints. Once we start talking deer on up, it's heavy for caliber at more moderate velocities with regards to hunting with revolvers.

I have a 329NG, which I shot an IDPA match with, using Remington factory 44 mag loads, and an X frame rubber grip. I was struggling by the end, but managed to make it through the match.

It's OK w. 44 mags, w. that rubber grip, but I usually have 44 specials in it. (I think I either want to cut down some 44 mag brass, or use some 44 special brass, for some loads about 44 mag level, which should freely eject -- I'm only willing to entertain the idea since I don't have any 44 special guns.)

The 454 Alaskan and the 4" 500 are both worse in recoil.

I've shot a 340PD, IMO it's a light, over-built 38 special. I don't know that I've ever seen someone who can control it well enough to really use it as a CCW piece.

quote:

Originally posted by Aglifter:
I have a 329NG, which I shot an IDPA match with, using Remington factory 44 mag loads, and an X frame rubber grip. I was struggling by the end, but managed to make it through the match.

It's OK w. 44 mags, w. that rubber grip, but I usually have 44 specials in it. (I think I either want to cut down some 44 mag brass, or use some 44 special brass, for some loads about 44 mag level, which should freely eject -- I'm only willing to entertain the idea since I don't have any 44 special guns.)

The 454 Alaskan and the 4" 500 are both worse in recoil.

I've shot a 340PD, IMO it's a light, over-built 38 special. I don't know that I've ever seen someone who can control it well enough to really use it as a CCW piece.

That's an excellent point. At 7 yards or less, the accuracy with my 360PD is COM only, no head shots. With a 9mm Kahr it's exactly where I want to hit. Given proper bullets, I'd rather shoot the Kahr. That said, the Kahr is 20 oz, vs, under 15 oz for the 360PD, which means the 360 is a true pocket, sweatpants gun the Kahr is too heavy...

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:

quote:

Originally posted by GS:I'll load some 525's at 1100 fps and try em. I've got about 25 left over from my last loading of 525's at 1350 fps.

Really why bother if you ar simply punching paper or plinking? Load what is the least expensive, most accurate, and least abusive and have some fun. If you don't plan on shooting big game, there is no sense in working heavy loads.

Big bullets, as you know, tend to be VERY accurate. With my old eyes, it's nice to see the holes in the target, and, .510" is a big hole. So, what am I supposed to do with the extra bullets????

Plinking is a fun term. Gary Reeder gave me a bad time, since the 350 grain bullets, at 1350 fps, in the GNR are what I consider 'plinking', yet they have killed everything, including elephant...

Why does the SA have less apparent recoil than the DA?

The DA by design goes straight back in your hand in recoil -- in a way punishing the shooter! My .50 Alaskan actually hurts less (except when it hits the head!) than my .500 despite probably double the rcoil energy.

quote:

Originally posted by GS:
Big bullets, as you know, tend to be VERY accurate. With my old eyes, it's nice to see the holes in the target, and, .510" is a big hole. So, what am I supposed to do with the extra bullets????

I wasn't suggesting you shoot a smaller bore -- just a lighter bullet.......

What does everyone here think of the FA grip design? Is it more like the SA or DA regarding recoil?

I've been thinking of ordering one. The grip doesn't seem to be exactly like either that I can see.

quote:

Plinking is a fun term. Gary Reeder gave me a bad time, since the 350 grain bullets, at 1350 fps, in the GNR are what I consider 'plinking', yet they have killed everything, including elephant...

Details I'd like to see the details. Jack shot a 1000 pound Bison in the neck with a 44 Mag 240 grain jacketed flat point and the bullet went through the hair and hide on through the muscle and hit the vertebrae and stopped causeing no effect to the buffalo and doing no real damage, Light bulles on big heavy game is ridiculous

Whith all due respect to all 350 grain bullets in a 510 GNR on Elephant is the utter most in stupidity

Where are the pictures of the Elelphant on Reeders site taken with 350 grain bullets is the 510?

While a big bullet fan, somehow Bob Peterson killed a polar bear with the little 44 Mag way back when?? I do believe that some folks here are way over the top with regard to bore diameter needed. Smaller hogs have died to my 32 H&R Mag and big ones quite easily to hot 44 Special loads in my 44 Mags... My friend that owns the ranch uses a Python with zero problems. I shoot the big guns for fun but out of zero necessity that is for sure.

quote:

Originally posted by Boxhead:
While a big bullet fan, somehow Bob Peterson killed a polar bear with the little 44 Mag way back when?? I do believe that some folks here are way over the top with regard to bore diameter needed. Smaller hogs have died to my 32 H&R Mag and big ones quite easily to hot 44 Special loads in my 44 Mags... My friend that owns the ranch uses a Python with zero problems. I shoot the big guns for fun but out of zero necessity that is for sure.

Boxhead, this thread was about recoil and each individual's threshold and somehow it morphed into a bullet weight for caliber discussion (admitedly a factor in recoil).

Necessity definitely plays very little in the role I agree, but loading properly does in my opinion. I could get away with shooting much lighter bullets in my .475 for North American game, but it kills so well in full-tilt mode that I see no reason for loading it any other way and in this configuration it will kill virtually any animal one can encounter. One load gets the hunter real familiar with it.

Let's also not lose sight of the fact that when Mr. Petersen killed that polar bear, there was no such thing as the linebaugh cartridges, or the other big bore cartridges in a readily available package. People made due with what they had.

Yes, there are too many people who are arguably over gunned for whitetail deer and animals of similar size.

Now, let's move this thread back to the original topic. I can shoot the .50 Alaskan revolver without getting my butt whipped; who else can make that statement besides jwp475?

quote:

Originally posted by MS Hitman:
Now, let's move this thread back to the original topic. I can shoot the .50 Alaskan revolver without getting my butt whipped; who else can make that statement besides jwp475?

Hey now, wait a minute! It was the eighth shot that got me after 30 rounds of .500 Linebaugh off the bench! It would have never gotten me if I started out with the .50! Oh, and I finished the cylinder off and that was 10 -- count 'em -- 10 rounds of .50 Alaskan in succession! And I'll do it again!

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Plinking is a fun term. Gary Reeder gave me a bad time, since the 350 grain bullets, at 1350 fps, in the GNR are what I consider 'plinking', yet they have killed everything, including elephant...

Details I'd like to see the details. Jack shot a 1000 pound Bison in the neck with a 44 Mag 240 grain jacketed flat point and the bullet went through the hair and hide on through the muscle and hit the vertebrae and stopped causeing no effect to the buffalo and doing no real damage, Light bulles on big heavy game is ridiculous

Whith all due respect to all 350 grain bullets in a 510 GNR on Elephant is the utter most in stupidity

Where are the pictures of the Elelphant on Reeders site taken with 350 grain bullets is the 510?

jwp475:

I agree with you.

That said, you should probably ask Gary Reeder about where the pictures are.

People have taken polar bear with 22lrs, and a lot of elephant have fallen to AK 47's. Doesn't mean it's right.

I have a hard time calling 325-360 grain cast bullets 'light'. I remember when the 325 grain 45 Colt 1350 fps load
was THE load for everything in the 48.

I kind of think handguns on elephants are a circus stunt, but, Otto Candies has done it, and, I suspect that 525 grain bullet,
at 1100 fps or so would be a GREAT cape buffalo or elephant load, if you don't have a rifle.

Many here have told me that the .500's and .475 kill like a 375 H&H rifle, using heavy bullets. I trust you on that, hence
my caliber choices.

I also really like Marko's approach, one load, superaccurate, that works on everything.
Jurras wrote me once about one of his first Safaris. He'd brought both soft points and solids for his 458 Win mag.
The PH said what are you doing with the softpoints? He said buffalo, etc. The PH said get rid of them. What happens
if we are out looking for buffalo, and, we are charged by an elephant? I guess that PH didn't think much of 458 win mag
soft points on elephant.

I'm going to take Marko's advice, and approach. I've got nearly 500 325 grain soft points, and, I'll come up with one accurate
load, though I think either V110 or 4227, and shoot that.

Recoil wise, I'm thinking between 25 and 35 ft-lbs for prolonged shooting shouldn't mess up my old arms...

quote:

Originally posted by GS:I have a hard time calling 325-360 grain cast bullets 'light'. I remember when the 325 grain 45 Colt 1350 fps load
was THE load for everything in the 48.

I kind of think handguns on elephants are a circus stunt, but, Otto Candies has done it, and, I suspect that 525 grain bullet,
at 1100 fps or so would be a GREAT cape buffalo or elephant load, if you don't have a rifle.

Many here have told me that the .500's and .475 kill like a 375 H&H rifle, using heavy bullets. I trust you on that, hence
my caliber choices.

The issue is the weight of the bullet relative to the diameter. 325 to 360 grains is heavy for a .45 caliber round, but light for a .510 diameter bullet.

I don't feel in the least undergunned with my .475 in hand and would rather have it than a .375 H&H for dangerous game......but that's just me.

quote:

Originally posted by Shack:
What does everyone here think of the FA grip design? Is it more like the SA or DA regarding recoil?

I've been thinking of ordering one. The grip doesn't seem to be exactly like either that I can see.

You are referring to the model 83? It's definately an SA grip, and the gun will roll in your hand under recoil. While I like Ruger SA's, in my hands the FA mdl 83 that has been roundbutted is the best grip. Everyone's hands are different, so it's good to have shooting buddies that are gun nuts so you can shoot alot of different handguns to see what feel best in your hands.

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:

quote:

Originally posted by Boxhead:
While a big bullet fan, somehow Bob Peterson killed a polar bear with the little 44 Mag way back when?? I do believe that some folks here are way over the top with regard to bore diameter needed. Smaller hogs have died to my 32 H&R Mag and big ones quite easily to hot 44 Special loads in my 44 Mags... My friend that owns the ranch uses a Python with zero problems. I shoot the big guns for fun but out of zero necessity that is for sure.

Boxhead, this thread was about recoil and each individual's threshold and somehow it morphed into a bullet weight for caliber discussion (admitedly a factor in recoil).

Necessity definitely plays very little in the role I agree, but loading properly does in my opinion. I could get away with shooting much lighter bullets in my .475 for North American game, but it kills so well in full-tilt mode that I see no reason for loading it any other way and in this configuration it will kill virtually any animal one can encounter. One load gets the hunter real familiar with it.

The problem is some folks think that what works under ideal conditions will work under all condtions, and other's know better.

It also comes back to the light and fast vs. heavy moderate speed question. I'm sure that for the pefect broadside through the lung shot that lighter faster is better then heavier moderate speed.

But, the real world might only present a quartering away shot with heavy bones in the the way. So, the real world choice of heavy at moderate speed will produce exits from the quartering shots as well as the broadside shots.

I get precious little time to hunt, therefore I won't handicap myself with too little gun, or too light of bullet.

Paul, that is precisely how I feel as well. I need a load that will work under all conditions without exception. I don't want to have to think about whether or not I have a load capable of reaching the vitals.

quote:

Originally posted by Paul H:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Shack:
What does everyone here think of the FA grip design? Is it more like the SA or DA regarding recoil?

I've been thinking of ordering one. The grip doesn't seem to be exactly like either that I can see.

+1

I've got big hands, and, Jack Huntington did some custom grips on my gun that fit me perfectly. It's my favorite gun to shoot, better then the Bisley, or at least up to 40 ft-lbs of recoil.

I also liked the grips on a BFR that he did, in .500 JRH. Both worked fine with max loads.

Paul H mentioned the rounded 83 grip, and, I'm thinking I'd like to try that, with the thicker grip that Jack did on my 83, on my new 757, along with shortening the barrel.

Also wondering if I should convert it to .500JRH
so I can at least get ammo when the out of state ammo ban goes into effect.

quote:

Originally posted by Paul H:

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:

quote:

Originally posted by Boxhead:
While a big bullet fan, somehow Bob Peterson killed a polar bear with the little 44 Mag way back when?? I do believe that some folks here are way over the top with regard to bore diameter needed. Smaller hogs have died to my 32 H&R Mag and big ones quite easily to hot 44 Special loads in my 44 Mags... My friend that owns the ranch uses a Python with zero problems. I shoot the big guns for fun but out of zero necessity that is for sure.

Boxhead, this thread was about recoil and each individual's threshold and somehow it morphed into a bullet weight for caliber discussion (admitedly a factor in recoil).

Necessity definitely plays very little in the role I agree, but loading properly does in my opinion. I could get away with shooting much lighter bullets in my .475 for North American game, but it kills so well in full-tilt mode that I see no reason for loading it any other way and in this configuration it will kill virtually any animal one can encounter. One load gets the hunter real familiar with it.

The problem is some folks think that what works under ideal conditions will work under all condtions, and other's know better.

It also comes back to the light and fast vs. heavy moderate speed question. I'm sure that for the pefect broadside through the lung shot that lighter faster is better then heavier moderate speed.

But, the real world might only present a quartering away shot with heavy bones in the the way. So, the real world choice of heavy at moderate speed will produce exits from the quartering shots as well as the broadside shots.

I get precious little time to hunt, therefore I won't handicap myself with too little gun, or too light of bullet.

I agree completely but I read post after post of whitetail does, small bucks and 150# hogs being chased by the 475's and 500's. Give me a break... A great hobby and good fun, yes, necessary, no. Yes if moose or elk are on the table I might go to one of my 475's or 500 L's (debating this now as I will draw my Colorado bull elk tag this year) for fun but really, cannot a stout 44 mag or 45 Colt make it happen regardless of the shot presented? I am sure that all but one of my elk would have easily been dropped with a 44 or 45 cast slug though the lungs. The exception was one taken at 280 yards as I would have never taken the shot with a six or five gun.

Regarding the recoil issue in the FA, the gun I'm thinking of buying is the 97 rather than the 83. I was also thinking .41 Magnum. And, I like the square instead of the rounded grips.

Does that sound like more or less recoil than a Model 57 given same loading and approx barrel length (they don't come in exactly the same length)?

Other recoil questions - is it probably correct to say the difference between the SA and DA is more the weight distribution/balance of the gun itself than the shape of the grips? I'm thinking it probably is. The difference for instance between the Smith N frame factory oversize grips and the SBH traditional Colt-like "plow-shape" grips BY ITSELF I'm having a hard time imagining would be the determining factor in felt recoil. I'm guessing the Smith has more apparent recoil because most of the weight is in or at your hand whereas the Ruger's weight is more forward and therefore rolls back more. Does that sound like the right way to put it?

Then of course there's grip width as a factor. It's obvious that spreading out the recoil forces over a wider area lessens the effect. But that's a somewhat different subject.

quote:

I agree completely but I read post after post of whitetail does, small bucks and 150# hogs being chased by the 475's and 500's. Give me a break... A great hobby and good fun, yes, necessary, no. Yes if moose or elk are on the table I might go to one of my 475's or 500 L's (debating this now as I will draw my Colorado bull elk tag this year) for fun but really, cannot a stout 44 mag or 45 Colt make it happen regardless of the shot presented? I am sure that all but one of my elk would have easily been dropped with a 44 or 45 cast slug though the lungs. The exception was one taken at 280 yards as I would have never taken the shot with a six or five gun.

Yes a a properly loade 44 mag or 45 Colt can indeed take Elk effectively. A properly loaded 45 Colt is a neer ideal sixgun for the lower 48. Make no mistake but the 475's and 500's are in a class by themselves.

A properly loade 45 Colt is a vey effective weapon in my experience

The beauty of the 475 and 500 is you can load a ~300 gr cast bullet at 1000 fps for does, have a very accurate and mild recoiling round, and load it up for bigger animals.

Here's my interpretation of a .475" keith swc, 275 gr when cast from ww's.



And I can load on up to 460 gr should I desire.

quote:

Originally posted by Shack:
Regarding the recoil issue in the FA, the gun I'm thinking of buying is the 97 rather than the 83. I was also thinking .41 Magnum. And, I like the square instead of the rounded grips.

Does that sound like more or less recoil than a Model 57 given same loading and approx barrel length (they don't come in exactly the same length)?

Other recoil questions - is it probably correct to say the difference between the SA and DA is more the weight distribution/balance of the gun itself than the shape of the grips? I'm thinking it probably is. The difference for instance between the Smith N frame factory oversize grips and the SBH traditional Colt-like "plow-shape" grips BY ITSELF I'm having a hard time imagining would be the determining factor in felt recoil. I'm guessing the Smith has more apparent recoil because most of the weight is in or at your hand whereas the Ruger's weight is more forward and therefore rolls back more. Does that sound like the right way to put it?

Then of course there's grip width as a factor. It's obvious that spreading out the recoil forces over a wider area lessens the effect. But that's a somewhat different subject.

Can't help with that gun, even though it is 97% of the 83, since I haven't owned one.

The key for me with the 83 is with heavy loads, read 420's at 1350 fps, the grip presses back into my hand evenly, then rolls up.
The Bisley grip has a bit of a hump high in the grip, and, with 525's at 1350 fps, feels like the entire energy of the load is focused into that one
one inch area, high in my hand, prior to the gun rolling up. That spot gets pounded, black and blued, and hurts for days with heavy loads.

I found with a standard plow handle, on a 45 Colt Seville, that around 265 grains at 1450 was the limit of my ability to shoot. Why?
Anything heavier required such a death grip on the gun that I couldn't shoot it accurately.

Same problem with my .475 and .500. When I first got them, they had grips made for small hands. To shoot them, I had to hold on so hard to make sure the
gun didn't get away from me that I couldn't hit anything at 25 yards.

Jack's custom grips filled my hands, requiring less pressure, and, I can hold on a lot looser, yet still control the gun.

I don't think you'll have any problems really. I don't think the .41 makes it into the 'can't shoot it because of grips' in the 97.

quote:

Originally posted by Paul H:
The beauty of the 475 and 500 is you can load a ~300 gr cast bullet at 1000 fps for does, have a very accurate and mild recoiling round, and load it up for bigger animals.

Here's my interpretation of a .475" keith swc, 275 gr when cast from ww's.



And I can load on up to 460 gr should I desire.

Sot on Paul H

quote:

I don't think the .41 makes it into the 'can't shoot it because of grips' in the 97

I imagine you're right. The 97 (from what I understand) is a smaller frame than the 83 and that's why they don't chamber the 454 and larger cartridges for it. It's more 45LC, 41, 357 and I forget what else. Really, I just like the gun is why I'm interested. I'm guessing in recoil it'll be comparable to the flat top Ruger in 44, but I guess I'll find out.

Btw on the famous "death grip", the way I like to go about it is to first do a little exercise with pounding my hands and fists into each other to get ready for the recoil. Like football players do with their shoulder pads before a game. Then I squeeze until the gun starts to tremble, then back off just enough where it stabilizes, then hold it there, then start the trigger pull. That's kind of a ritual deal. Seems to help me "get into the spirit" when in a deer stand.

Once the game's on however, it's whatever it takes. All that planning goes out the window. If needed, one-hand hold off-hand double action. And what's recoil? Funny how this all works.

quote:

Originally posted by Shack:

quote:

I don't think the .41 makes it into the 'can't shoot it because of grips' in the 97

I imagine you're right. The 97 (from what I understand) is a smaller frame than the 83 and that's why they don't chamber the 454 and larger cartridges for it. It's more 45LC, 41, 357 and I forget what else. Really, I just like the gun is why I'm interested. I'm guessing in recoil it'll be comparable to the flat top Ruger in 44, but I guess I'll find out.

Btw on the famous "death grip", the way I like to go about it is to first do a little exercise with pounding my hands and fists into each other to get ready for the recoil. Like football players do with their shoulder pads before a game. Then I squeeze until the gun starts to tremble, then back off just enough where it stabilizes, then hold it there, then start the trigger pull. That's kind of a ritual deal. Seems to help me "get into the spirit" when in a deer stand.

Once the game's on however, it's whatever it takes. All that planning goes out the window. If needed, one-hand hold off-hand double action. And what's recoil? Funny how this all works.

I use a past recoil pad for big rifles. My concern is I'm 56, my girlfriend says I look 40, and, I'm in great shape for that age. That said, I like my hands and arms, and, see no reason, other then something trying to kill me, to shoot some of the guns with some of the loads I posted. Over 40 ftlbs of recoil is into the potential for long term injury from what I've heard...

quote:

I use a past recoil pad for big rifles. My concern is I'm 56, my girlfriend says I look 40, and, I'm in great shape for that age. That said, I like my hands and arms, and, see no reason, other then something trying to kill me, to shoot some of the guns with some of the loads I posted. Over 40 ftlbs of recoil is into the potential for long term injury from what I've heard...

If sxhot c`orrectly I don't see where one would substain any injury. I wil be 59 on the 30 th of January and I can shoot the 50 without being injured and have shot it 17 straight times before. The Bisley style grips do a great job of spreading the recoil. Make no mistake the heavy recoilers do not suffer bad shooting habits without bitting

I don't think 40 ft-lbs is all that bad if you practice frequently enough. After a while, it doesn't feel that bad.

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
I don't think 40 ft-lbs is all that bad if you practice frequently enough. After a while, it doesn't feel that bad.

Wish I had a picture of a VERY experienced shooter, shooting my .475 Linebaugh FA 83, Linebaugh style, putting the hammer about a 1/4 inch from his ear. I was SCARED to death he was going to have the hammer in his opposing ear, thanks to John L's videos on how to shoot his guns...

quote:

After a while, it doesn't feel that bad.

Kind of like beating your head against a brick wall. It feels good when you stop!
Peter.

You need to develop a consistent grip with the big guns, what you use on the range HAS to be used when hunting too. I made the mistake when I first got my .475. I was too relaxed shooting at deer and the gun came up so fast I took hair off the top of the first three deer, no blood, just a pound of hair. I can not hit a deer shooting it with one hand either. Tried that when a deer came on the wrong side, overshot by a foot!
I have no problems shooting the gun with one hand but all shots will be very high.
So look at the lighter and more powerful gun. There is no way to keep it in your left hand and keep both hands rising with the grip, the gun leaves the left hand so it is like shooting with one hand.
If you wrap your left thumb over the right one, you can break your thumb.
Any change with grip pressure and what point the gun leaves the left hand will string shots up and down. Add fatigue in the right arm and wrist and you can just lose control of where you are shooting.
It takes more strength then most of us have, some guns even leave the right hand!
I don't want any of those light guns thank you. Once control and accuracy goes away, the gun is useless to me.
Then there are the nut cases that say "the grip rolls nicely in the hand!"

quote:

Originally posted by GS:

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
I don't think 40 ft-lbs is all that bad if you practice frequently enough. After a while, it doesn't feel that bad.

Wish I had a picture of a VERY experienced shooter, shooting my .475 Linebaugh FA 83, Linebaugh style, putting the hammer about a 1/4 inch from his ear. I was SCARED to death he was going to have the hammer in his opposing ear, thanks to John L's videos on how to shoot his guns...

Very experiened? In his ear?

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:

quote:

After a while, it doesn't feel that bad.

Kind of like beating your head against a brick wall. It feels good when you stop!
Peter.

What I am trying to impart to anyone willing to listen is that if you want to get competant with a heavy recoiling revolver, you need to spend a lot of time on the trigger. There's a steep learning curve with these guns. If one cannot handle the recoil, maybe they should step down or take up needle point......

quote:

Originally posted by GS:
Wish I had a picture of a VERY experienced shooter, shooting my .475 Linebaugh FA 83, Linebaugh style, putting the hammer about a 1/4 inch from his ear. I was SCARED to death he was going to have the hammer in his opposing ear, thanks to John L's videos on how to shoot his guns...

Damn, they don't kick that hard.

How true, I have a lot of trigger time with the Freedom .475 that belongs to a friend. We found my 420 gr boolit at 1329 fps makes the gun come alive and I have shot under 1" at 50 yards with it. Even shooting with one hand, the gun only rises halfway to the brim of my hat.
Letting it go past your ear is grandstanding recoil and shows no gun control. Great for movies, not great for hitting anything.
With two hands the gun only rises a little more then my BFR.
Initial tests were done from 350 to 440 gr boolits and the most accurate was the 350 gr, getting many groups close to 1/2" at 50. As boolit weight was increased, groups slowly opened and were the worst with the heavy ones. The slower twist is the reason.
Why my boolit shoots so good is strange. 1/2 gr more powder should do even better in the Freedom. Marko uses 1/2 gr more in his SRH that has the same twist and it is deadly accurate.

Since every gun is a law unto itself, maybe my SRH just likes an extra 1/2 grain of powder with that particular bullet.......

I'm not dismissing the significance of twist rate, but most custom revolver builders use 1:18 twist rates across the board for their big-bore revolvers. I don't think going from a 1:15 twist to a 1:18 is all that significant, but I may be wrong.