.480 decline

[bigbore5]

I don't have a 480. Yet.

The SRH has never appealed to me. I simply don't like the looks and don't scope my revolvers.

However I have wanted a Bisley since they came out. I missed the boat on them when they were out and am not willing to pay the crazy premium price they are going for now.

My BFR and Redhawk 475's are great, but I tend to load them like a mid-range 480 anyway.

[rangersedge]

I don't have a .480 or a .475; but I see it essentially the same as .44 special vs .44 mag and .38 special vs .357 mag and .32 h&r vs .327 federal.

I think most people who are restricted to one or the other gun will go with the gun that can handle the other instead of the other way even if they'll shoot the less powerful version 99% of the time.  If you could order the BFR in either .480 or .475, which would you?

[gnappi]

Aug 3, 2023 16:16:03 GMT -5 rangersedge said:

I don't have a .480 or a .475; but I see it essentially the same as .44 special vs .44 mag and .38 special vs .357 mag and .32 h&r vs .327 federal.

I think most people who are restricted to one or the other gun will go with the gun that can handle the other instead of the other way even if they'll shoot the less powerful version 99% of the time.  If you could order the BFR in either .480 or .475, which would you?

Good point for most or even the majority and it seems as if (AFAIK) BFR and FA agree only offering the longer .475 chamber as standard. 

Anyway, I have one .38 special and several .357's and none of the magnums ever saw a .38 cartridge except by the PO. For me anyway, it's due to my not wanting to give up space for empty brass or loaded .38 cartridges so if I want to shoot the .38 I buy a box of ammo. Other examples are my .44's or .41's I think they're of sufficient power and downloadable flexibility to not ever have to use their "special" counterpart cartridges. 

Honestly if I could "justify" (I know  a silly term here) another big boomer I'd have no problem buying a .480 only chambered revolver and many other do also because the SBH and SRH are out there.  

PS. I own no 454's but several .45 Colts. 

 

[edk]

Aug 3, 2023 16:16:03 GMT -5 rangersedge said:

I don't have a .480 or a .475; but I see it essentially the same as .44 special vs .44 mag and .38 special vs .357 mag and .32 h&r vs .327 federal.

I think most people who are restricted to one or the other gun will go with the gun that can handle the other instead of the other way even if they'll shoot the less powerful version 99% of the time.  If you could order the BFR in either .480 or .475, which would you?

Please no. They are not that far from being the same. They (the 480 & 475) do not have a 38/44 special to 357/44 mag relationship. Those pairings increase in pressure by about 100%. The 480R increases about 5% going to 475L. There is really no gun that can handle the 480R and not the 475L.

[bigbore5]

I don't think anyone loads to the ragged edge of either cartridge. Most of the heaviest loads in either will in reality be about 38-40,000. They are essentially the same under real world use.

[parallaxbill]

Need is never a consideration when I purchase a handgun or rifle that I find I "want".
Ammo and brass has never been a consideration either as I bought a lot of unwanted factory ammo in 325 and 400 shortly after I bought my 480. I also bought 400 new cases too. I doubt that I will ever use it all up.

[crobloc]

I have a 480 SRH. and I really love the cartridge. I don't see it as a failure at all. Mostly just frustrating if
you're trying to find components right now. Speer previously always had some very good bullets for it. Hopefully
they will again. I would think the brass availability will come back. And 480 brass in my experience holds up
very well.

Everything got really screwed up the last several years. I'm hoping things will straighten out eventually. Unfortunately
our uses don't constitute a very big or lucrative market. So we get to be ignored for a while

[bula]

Sooo, now that Ruger holds the reins to the 1894 and 1895's, which would you prefer for  480. If both are doable ? I'd not want length constraints for OAL . Don't want to be stuck with jacketed bullet nose length and shape to feed. I have a 1894 Marlin 44mag, do not know if it flex up to 480 ? But I'd suffer the heavier 1895 gladly if it would feed long seated 385gr cast HP's. 

[contender]

I wouldn't look for a Ruger/Marlin in 480 Ruger for a pretty good while. They are still trying to catch up with the more popular models & calibers to meet demands. Lots of demand,, too many others to consider building first.

But since you asked for the preference,, I'd like the 1895 myself.

[bula]

Well, the 480 does have THEIR NAME ON IT, it kinda should move move to the front of the line. IMHO. A short barreled , straight gripped M1895, I'd consider. 

[Encore64]

I'd like to see this happen, but...

Something to remember, Marlin's first 44 Mag was built on the 336 Action.

I also don't think the 480 Ruger is dead.

Starline will eventually get brass back in stock. My rule of thumb is to buy 500 Minimum Rounds of Brass for every caliber I buy.

[bradshaw]

Aug 2, 2023 4:47:46 GMT -5 gnappi said:

Funny, I've yet to hear any major negative comments (other than ammo / brass issues) about the .480, quite the opposite. It seems like it has garnered quite a following.

Was the apparent failure of the .480 slow adoption of the cartridge by shooters, lack of launching platforms or other factors that led to the decline?  

*****

Ballistic efficiency doesn’t automatically translate to popularity. On a practically scale of “overbore” revolver rounds, the .480 Ruger must rank huge. Its name, however, doesn’t conjure concussive impact in print. Literally overshadowed by .50’s namely John Linebaugh’s .500----and that one intensionally “bigger'd" if not bested by S&W's bull testosterone .500----the .480 Ruger deserves revival in front of a Ronnie Wells grip frame to moderate recoil for the so-called “average” revolver hunter. (Note: there is nothing average about the challenges a serious revolver hunter sets him/herself up for.)

Must as I love the .45-70, it is not a revolver round. Having made shots on whitetails which a .45-70 would have been too slow for. The .480 Ruger fits carry-able size, and with a rubber handle on the Super Redhawk, of a Ronnie Wells grip frame’d single action.... versatility at hand.

A stout carbine, insensitive to nose profile, with near straight-on feed, would make for a dual gun intro. keep all ten fingers crossed. (Note: the great super smooth----albeit weak----1873 Winchester features straight-on feed, yet still relied on the tapered .44-40, followed by similar profile cartridges. Ruger might want to hire Ronnie Wells to sugar off that challenge.)
David Bradshaw

[bushog]

I don’t see what the problem is…..

[AxeHandle]

I think they are trying to trick me into buying that 7.5 inch SRH... The .475 bore started my bullet casting and sizing adventure. Owned a few 480s and 475s. Plan to own more...

[leftysixgun]

I dont see the 480 being dead. But, of coarse the bullet and brass makers have higher priority list to fill at the moment given the current demands and political agenda. I think the 480 will come around again.