[andy]

and if use a lw, compact .22,llike a 6" long, 18 oz, 2" at 25m Smith 2214, you can ALSO have a useful centerfire, like a lw Commander in 9x23win, for the SAME total handgun wt as the monster SA revolver, LESS cost, and a LOT more utility. 18 ozs +28 ozs=46 ozs, and the sort of 90 gr 9mm jhp's most useful in the 9x23 weigh a LOT less than 325 gr .45 slugs. 235grs less, along with a lesser case wt, so say, 250 grs each. Say 50 grs for the .22's. So, 9 rds of .22lr, and 10 rds of 9x23, versus as many rds of 45 monster loads, saves another lb of ammo wt. you can use your "shotloads' in the monster SA, on birds, to maybe 25 ft, but the 2214 can take them to 25m, quite handily. If you dont CARE if you miss half of them, it can serve to 50m, too. Some people just LIKE wasting time and money. I don't.

 

[Garand]

yawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwn !!!!!

 

[John in AR]

22's 20x as useful in field as monster wheelgun

And a station wagon's 20 times as useful as a motorcycle. Does that mean that owning a motorcycle makes a person a fool?

 

[andy]

station wagon is NOT even close to being more than 2-3x as useful as a bike, perhaps not even AS useful, depending upon the terrain and climate, and cost of fuel, for instance. The bike can be NECESSARY, the monster revolver is not. It's just a toy, that costs as much as a decent bike.

 

[John in AR]

I agree 90% with you about the "unnecessary toy" aspect of the .454, but where's the harm...?

Should have clarified; I'm talking street bike not dirt bike, for day-to-day living for the average American.

In "normal", non-shtf living, a street bike isn't nearly as "functional" as a station wagon (or suv, pickup, sedan, etc). Bringing home the family groceries, taking the kids to little league, taking a family cross-country vacation (which we just did; put nearly 3,000 miles on my truck in 9 days), going out to the movies, etc... All the non-emergency, day-to-day "stuff" that you use a vehicle for; no question that in those situations, the 4-tire vehicle is more versatile. That said, I go back to "where's the harm" in owning BOTH a 4- and 2-wheel vehicle? Sometimes one's better suited to a particular task; just as the CAR and the pistol are individually better suited to one task or another.

Actually, this is a good example of another issue you and I have debated before; the "individual circumstances" thing. Just as a motorcycle makes sense more often for a single guy (or even a couple with no kids), and the larger vehicle makes sense more often for someone with kids; the backpack survival approach makes more sense for an individual alone, than it does for two adults and two kids all together.

Not trying to "fan the flames" or keep a fight going, just babbling on. Sometimes, the "best" answer for one person or situation isn't always the "best" answer for every person or situation.

:wavey:

 

[41mag]

Soooo,I think that a wheel gun in .454 Casull would be a pretty darn versatile tool to carry.Think a sec.It'll shoot everything from lt wt cowboy/target loads for small game to the heaviest bear stopping loads.It'll safely(w/moon clips)digest close to a dozen different rounds.No,there's no .22 unit but the tolerances are close enough on a Freedom Arms 454 that a suppressor might work pretty effectively.Look a bit funny though!

 

[Magnum88C]

The other nice thing about the .454 is they use the .45 Colt shotshells. Believe it or not, these are hell on squirrels and rabbits, probably most small game. There's damn good hollowpoints available, as well as heavy, dangerous game loads. It's one of the most versatile handgun calibers there is. Same with the .44 Magnum, except it lags at the top end wheere the .454 is still going.

Interesting thing I noticed. Take a Model 66, 686, and 629, all the same barrel length. Hold them next to teach other. You'll se the only real difference in size is that the .44's cylinder is wider. That's it. If you can carry a model 66 concealed, chances are you can carry a 629 concealed as well.

No, in fact, revolvers are very versatile, and with good speedloaders (Safariland) or recessed for moon clips, much of the reloading difficulty is alleviated.

 

[Hard Rock]

Eh... the .454 is okay... it's a little weak but fun to shoot. I prefer the .45-70 revolver for REAL big bore action.

Mike

 

[41mag]

:nuts: :crazy1: :laugh:

 

[Teufelhund]

A hammer is 20X as useful as a Skillsaw when it comes to driving nails, but once in awhile you need to cut some boards. Then you know what?, oh my, the Skillsaw becomes the most useful tool you own.

Your stupid arguments meant to justify your off-base agenda are just fvcking stupid, How's that copy, Over? Reading you loud and fvcking stupid, Over.

The whole "My fantasy .460 Rowland is better than your real revolver" thing is also just plain ignort. A .460 is on the way lower, light end of the .44 mag power range, as in the heavy .44 Special end of things, and thats maxing the .460 out. Run the.44 mag in a revolver designed to handle the 50/55k it was designed to run at, and it goes way past the .460 Rowland with 300 grain and up bullets. The "working loads" I run in my Redhawk, 300 @ 1250fps are just getting the ball rolling the .45 Colt Redhawk has a long cylinder that allows seating the heavies out (more so than Freedom Arms .454's) thus redicing preasures to the point the .454 starts loosing it's light bullet/velocity advantage.

Also be careful folks, running .45 Colt in a .454 cylinder, you need to clean them very, very well before switching back to the .454, you can end up with some high pressure problems. At the Six-Gunners convention Brian Pierce had a Freedom Arms revolver with the cylinder split open caused by leading up a .454 with cowboy loads and them .454's.

If you spend time in the outdoors a heavy revolver can be just the ticket from grouse to moose, I shoot most of my big game and lots of small game with my Redhawk, just because it's handy and really don't need some arm-chair, wannabe ,flatlander telling whats "usefull".

Teuf,

 

[Magnum88C]

The Rugers don't seem to have that problem with the .45 Colt, but I think they set the shoulder longer than the FA chambers. All you have to do is remember to use a piece of aluminum or wood to scrape the shoulder clean as part of the cleaning. But, good thing to remind us of, thanks.

 

[Teufelhund]

The FA revolvers are built like watches, I had a 5" .454 for quite awhile but couldn't get along with the grip frame, I just don't resinate with the plow handles. But, boy oh boy they are fine revolvers and not all that expensive when you get down to it, you find them around here, used under a grand quite a bit. I'm not all that excited about the high velocity/light bullet .454 loads at 55/60k, man they are messy on deer/antelope size game.

My Redhawk will chamber .454's now that the chambers have been trued and reamed a bit. I use .454 brass for my heavy ".45 Colt" loads because it's better brass, this route might not be the best for everyone though LOL. My brothers .45 Colt, Ruger Bisley that I shortened the barrel, put on a new front sight base, trued the forcing cone, reamed cylinder throats, fire lapped ect would chamber ,.454's from day one. So if a fellow has both calibers, you better keep a handle on them.

My next big bore wheelgun will be a blue, 5 shot Redhawk in .480

Teuf,