|
Post by Big Bore on Sept 4, 2020 4:41:51 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure my next gun is going to be a Ruger SRH in .480. For the life of me, I cannot decide on whether to go with a new 7.5" or find a used 9.5" barrel. Purpose for this gun is primarily for hunting deer/hogs from a blind in Texas. Secondary use would be on an annual public land elk hunt.
If I bought the 9.5" it would be purely from an added performance standpoint. Does anyone have a general idea of what the extra 2" would buy me in performance. Most likely I would handload jacketed bullets in the 275-325 grain range.
Thanks in advance.
|
|
bamagreg
.327 Meteor
Woodstock, GA
Posts: 853
|
Post by bamagreg on Sept 4, 2020 5:50:38 GMT -5
I currently have a 7.5" and owned a 9.5" about 15 years ago. I like the 7.5" better just for ease of carry. I don't know the velocity difference between the 2 but I doubt the game animal on the other end will know the difference.
|
|
bamagreg
.327 Meteor
Woodstock, GA
Posts: 853
|
Post by bamagreg on Sept 4, 2020 5:52:49 GMT -5
I'm actually considering having my 7.5" cut down to 5.5" to create a 480 "Toklat" since Ruger never did.
|
|
|
Post by Ken O'Neill on Sept 4, 2020 6:21:42 GMT -5
Depends on the bullet and load of course, but likely to be about 50 fps. Insignificant, in any event.
|
|
|
Post by contender on Sept 4, 2020 8:37:41 GMT -5
I own one of each. Both are superb shooters. Since the primary reason is hunting,, with Texas deer & hogs as the intended target,, you will get much more than necessary out of either one. I'd personally go with the 7.5 barrel, BECAUSE I'd be carrying it for hunting. I haven't clocked my loads with each gun to see the differences,, but for your intended purposes,, I doubt you'd be able to tell the difference.
|
|
|
Post by bula on Sept 4, 2020 8:55:01 GMT -5
I see 60 fps difference between my 2.5" Alaskan and the 4 5/8" BSBH. Then 50 fps difference between the 4 5/8" BSBH and the 6.5" BSBH. I believe Ken is right. Think by the time you add optics or dot to them big guns, I'd sling it, or sew a rifle sling to a pistol rug.. Had a 7.5" RH with a dot years ago.
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Sept 4, 2020 10:02:34 GMT -5
I see 60 fps difference between my 2.5" Alaskan and the 4 5/8" BSBH. Then 50 fps difference between the 4 5/8" BSBH and the 6.5" BSBH. I believe Ken is right. Think by the time you add optics or dot to them big guns, I'd sling it, or sew a rifle sling to a pistol rug.. Had a 7.5" RH with a dot years ago. ***** bula.... reading this, I detect unusually high combustion efficiency in the .480 Ruger case. Plays into good launch speed from a short barrel, amplifying the value of a trail defense gun such as the Super Redhawk Alaskan. This conservation doesn’t intrude on RECOIL, the jolt of which is especially harsh from a short barrel Big Bore. David Bradshaw
|
|
|
Post by dougader on Sept 4, 2020 11:28:39 GMT -5
I see 60 fps difference between my 2.5" Alaskan and the 4 5/8" BSBH. Then 50 fps difference between the 4 5/8" BSBH and the 6.5" BSBH. I believe Ken is right. Think by the time you add optics or dot to them big guns, I'd sling it, or sew a rifle sling to a pistol rug.. Had a 7.5" RH with a dot years ago. ***** bula.... reading this, I detect unusually high combustion efficiency in the .480 Ruger case. Plays into good launch speed from a short barrel, amplifying the value of a trail defense gun such as the Super Redhawk Alaskan. This conservation doesn’t intrude on RECOIL, the jolt of which is especially harsh from a short barrel Big Bore. David Bradshaw This is why I sold my 454 SRH and Alaskan and bought 480 Ruger revolvers. The losses from a 7.5" 454 SRH down to the 2.5" Alaskan was 1430-1174 = 256 fps. This with the Cast Performance 335 grain WLNGC bullet over W296. The 480 Ruger does the job with heavier bullets and lower velocity, creating less blast and recoil on my arthritic wrists.
|
|
|
Post by bula on Sept 4, 2020 12:27:22 GMT -5
Amen guys. Those numbers per Sixshot 390gr HP's on Alliant 2400.
|
|
|
Post by DiamondD on Sept 4, 2020 15:04:50 GMT -5
I'm actually considering having my 7.5" cut down to 5.5" to create a 480 "Toklat" since Ruger never did. I have a 9.5" I've been thinking about doing the exact same thing to.
|
|
|
Post by bigbrowndog on Sept 4, 2020 19:26:56 GMT -5
Randy, I’d agree with the consensus, go with the 7.5” considering you’ll use it for Texas stuff more than your elk hunt I think it will be a much handier gun at 7.5”
Trapr
|
|
|
Post by rws15602 on Sept 6, 2020 0:35:04 GMT -5
***** bula.... reading this, I detect unusually high combustion efficiency in the .480 Ruger case. Plays into good launch speed from a short barrel, amplifying the value of a trail defense gun such as the Super Redhawk Alaskan. This conservation doesn’t intrude on RECOIL, the jolt of which is especially harsh from a short barrel Big Bore. David Bradshaw This is why I sold my 454 SRH and Alaskan and bought 480 Ruger revolvers. The losses from a 7.5" 454 SRH down to the 2.5" Alaskan was 1430-1174 = 256 fps. This with the Cast Performance 335 grain WLNGC bullet over W296. The 480 Ruger does the job with heavier bullets and lower velocity, creating less blast and recoil on my arthritic wrists. Bula, I am curious what powder you used during the tests you referenced above.
|
|
|
Post by dougader on Sept 6, 2020 19:00:00 GMT -5
This is why I sold my 454 SRH and Alaskan and bought 480 Ruger revolvers. The losses from a 7.5" 454 SRH down to the 2.5" Alaskan was 1430-1174 = 256 fps. This with the Cast Performance 335 grain WLNGC bullet over W296. The 480 Ruger does the job with heavier bullets and lower velocity, creating less blast and recoil on my arthritic wrists. Bula, I am curious what powder you used during the tests you referenced above. I believe Steve/bula said he was using 2400 in a subsequent post.
|
|
|
Post by Big Bore on Sept 7, 2020 9:24:18 GMT -5
Appreciate everyone's responses.
|
|
|
Post by 45MAN on Sept 7, 2020 12:10:14 GMT -5
ON 10 OF 11 OF MY HANDGUN ONLY AFRICAN SAFARIS MY PRIMARY HUNTING WEAPON WAS A FREEDOM ARMS 454 REVOLVER IN EITHER 8 3/8ths INCH, 10 INCH OR 12 INCH BARREL LENGTHS. I CARRIED THESE REVOLVERS AFIELD ALWAYS AT THE READY IN MY HAND, OR IN A SOFT SIDED PISTOL CASE/RUG PARTIALLY UNZIPPERED, NEVER IN A HOLSTER. PORTABILITY WAS NEVER AN ISSUE, AND I NEVER FELT OVER BARRELED NOR OVER BURDENED. ON MY SCOPED 454 FA HUNTING REVOLVERS I HAVE ALWAYS FELT THAT MORE BARREL LENGTH WAS MY FRIEND RATHER THAN AN INCONVENIENCE. LONGER BARRELS GENERALLY SHOOT FASTER AND KICK LESS. I AM NOT CRITICIZING CHOOSING A 7.5 INCHER, BUT MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE WOULD BE THE 9.5 INCHER vs THE 7.5 INCHER.
|
|