Post
by Kilibreaux » 04 Aug 2012, 00:40
I'd go for the Smith in .500 magnum
Don't let anyone kid you...whatEVER the .454 or the .460 can do in terms of brute force, the .500 eclipses with ease. The .454 was originally built to launch 260 grain bullets (way back before the monster, overly heavy bullet craze came to town) and and was touted more for its RANGE than sheer power...and the .460 is that plus....a long, large capacity case intended to push light for caliber bullets to +2000 fps speeds.
The .500 is something else....seriously. That extra diameter results in a much larger slug, with much "better" brute knockdown power. For anyone who feels they simply must have massive power in a handgun, the .500 magnum, with the longer barrels, can be hand loaded to 3200 lb-ft of kinetic energy and more. That is simply BRUTAL power which combined with a half-inch diameter, near one-ounce "slug" will pulverize the heaviest bone, and penetrate through bone and tissue like a HVFSDS round punches through armor.
The two ....THREE calibers were intended for different purposes. Back in the day the .454 Casull was "it" and with the lighter loads showed impressive KE numbers, but it was really meant for the discerning shooter who wanted more power down range....can't really say "flatter" because the high BC bullets we have today did not exist then.
IF I were still into handgun "hunter class" sillhouette I'd probably be shooting the .460 because it can shoot "flat and fast." Since I like to carry a large revolver "backup" in the field, I opt for the .500 6.5" barrel. The 6.5" is only marginally heavier than the 4" and has an honest 6.5" barrel whereas the 4" really on has about 3" of barrel thanks to the compensator. With magnums that have huge case capacity, barrel length matters...yes, even a 2.5" snubbie will still be bad news, but nothing near what the longer barrels will deliver. The 6.5" carries easily, and points well, and is accurate beyond human ability. The one thing I personally would NOT advise with the 6.5" Smith is the use of lead bullets because it does not use the same compensator system as other models. Instead the barrel runs full-length with a series of holes drilled radially that vent propellent gasses into a chamber inside the shroud and up through ports on either side of the front side ramp. Since the system cannot be user disassembled (at least not the intent of S&W), there is no way to scrub out lead deposits that would surely build up between barrel and shroud. I remember a couple of thousand years ago the Dan Wesson .44 used a similar system that the user could disassemble for barrel length changes, but they specified no lead bullet use due to lead deposits building up and making it impossible to remove the barrel shroud.
When I get around to picking up a .460 it will be one of the longer barrel variants because that is really where the cartridge was intended to shine.
So it depends on your use, but one "rationale" I would emphatically NOT adopt as part of my purchase decision is the ability to stick .45 Colt or .454 Casull rounds in the .460. Smith & Wesson went to great lengths to make the .460 an accurate, long-range implement, and part of revolver accuracy is how far the seated bullet sits from the forcing cone...and that slight "neck down to caliber" inside the chamber, just beyond the case. When you stick a .45 Colt round in the much longer .460 chamber, the bullet must "jump" with complete FREE BORE from case neck to chamber "neck" to forcing cone....since the bullet is smaller than the case, this means propellant gases are passing around the bullet creating all sorts of havoc....like causing it to "tilt"...remember it's not spinning during this passage and it is completely unsupported by anything...the bullet is basically "making the jump" to the forcing cone. Accuracy will be terrible, and what's worse, high pressure, high temperature propellant gases will be jetting against the chamber walls creating some degree of erosion which could lead to major problems when firing the round the gun was actually built to shoot.
It's one thing to have a case length difference of a "tenth" of an inch, and quite another when a half inch of chamber lies ahead of the case. In both cases accuracy will be inferior to what could be achieved with a full-length case, but in the latter situation, long-term damage could be the result of excessive use of cases excessively short for the chamber.
As for brand...I LIKE Taurus' guns and have owned many and still do. However, IMO the S&W X-frame series isn't simply an "up-sized" N frame, but a "clean sheet" redesign that resulted in truly powerful revolvers that are actually "gentler" to shoot (comparatively speaking) than the .44 Magnum N frame. With the N frame we handloaders were always looking to push the envelope for maximum delivery. With the X frame we don't need to push the envelope...the envelope is HUGE and the guns can take the pounding. The S&W X frame is impressive....K frame grip size with an amazingly short DA trigger reach. SA is superb, the shroud/barrel/nut system is superior to barrels screwed into the frame...something DAN WESSON taught us many decades ago. The Smith is exceptionally accurate, and with any load delivering 2000 lb-ft of KE or below, pretty darn tame to shoot. The .500 can take advantage of the Barnes 325/375 grain XPB solid copper bullets with extremely high ballistic coefficient. The 375 BC is .261 which is higher than the .224" 55 gr. FMJBT. The Barnes 325 grain can be pushed over 2000 fps from a 10" barrel, sighted to cross the LOS at 15 yards and be within 2" of LOS out to 150 yards where it will still be carrying almost 1800 lb-ft of KE. The round will be only 5" below LOS at 180 yards and will still be supersonic out to 225 yards! Muzzle energy is a "mere" 2900 lb-ft KE.
Believe it or not, a 300 grain Hornady XTP loaded in .460, starting at nearly 2100 fps from the same barrel length will have almost identical trajectory numbers to the .500...but not quite as good, and will be about 100 lb-ft KE lower at 150 yards.
Anyway, not to knock Taurus, but the fact is that S&W logo counts for something. It's like buying a Hyundai versus a Mercedes....doesn't matter that both are built in Alabama, nor that Hyundai builds a superior car with better warranty coverage...the PERCEPTION is that Mercedes is "better" so people will shell out double or triple to be seen driving one. In THIS case I believe the Smith truly IS the better gun which will only increase its value down the road, so whichever caliber you go with, the gun should say "Smith & Wesson" on the barrel.