These are both 1 step below atomic weapon status already, but does anyone have information about the pros and cons of the Smith and Wesson .500 vs the Smith and Wesson .460? Based on my limited understanding, the .500 is simply a bigger round. I think the drawback may be that it only shoots one round. The .460 is supposed to be able to shoot 3 different rounds (.44 colt?, .454 casul, and .460). Any input is appreciated. Thanks.

the 500 was designed from the ground up. shooting one is... interesting. i wouldn't exactly describe the experience as fun. the 460 is a lengthened 454 casull which is a lengthened 45 colt. i believe that you can shoot all three in the same gun but i would wonder about fouling from shooting colt rounds. the 460 is almost .7" longer than the colt. factory rounds for all of the above will be expensive.

The 500 S&W on far right, the 454 Casull next to it.

Basic difference…smaller bullet going faster (460 S&W) vs. larger/wider/heavier/slower bullet (500 S&W). Both will perform the purpose designed for, but they are special purpose pistols.

I’d not get the 460 S&W to shoot 45 Colt, nor 454 Casull bullets…get the 460 S&W to shoot 460 S&W or get the 500 S&W to shoot 500

I'm thinking about getting it to use as a grizzly defense weapon for an elk hunt in Wyoming in September. Not looking to get into the bear spray vs gun debate. I had a 44 mag with a 6.5" barrel, but that seems to be too long to draw from a holster when you're sitting on a horse. The .500 has a 4" barrel version that comes with a compensator that acts as a port at the end of the barrel.

I'd rather hit the bear with a 44Mag then miss with a 500S&W...

I'd not shy away from the 6.5" 44Mag. I've not shot the 4" 500S&W, but for the purpose intended...I'd take the largest pistol I could fire with one hand accurately twice. My 500S&W is 8 3/8" and a heavy SOB...

dp.





[This message has been edited by tlfw378 (edited 12/27/2012 6:36p).]

Have you shot a 4" or 6.5" 44 mag, and if so was the recoil more manageble than your 500? I was thinking the compensator would take away enough of the recoil to make it comparable to the 6.5" .44 mag (which I don't think I could hit something with shooting one handed).

http://www.chuckhawks.com/subscribers/handgun_cartridge_page/50sw.htm

Need a password to access that link.

The thing about the 500 S&W recoil is how much force comes straight back is utterly amazing...I think the 44Mag is easily managed with one hand by me...even with 4". The 500S&W is not.

my 500S&W...

dp

[This message has been edited by tlfw378 (edited 12/27/2012 7:02p).]

Sorry bluto,

I forgot.

I got a 2" 44mag for Christmas. Fun gun but its a beast to shoot. Surprisingly accurate. Not bad for a $270 revolver.

What about .460 vs .44 mag? Sounds like .500 isn't a very practical weapon, even defending against grizzly bears. Not very useful if you can't hit them.

S&W 329PD. Light weight 44 mag. Very easy to carry and draw for emergency purposes.

the 460 is same ballgame with the 500...

If it were me I'd get the S&W 329...

I would get the 329PD for the purpose you stated.

Ive got a model 29 44 mag...ala Dirty Harry. I run hot 300 grain handloads through it and it is quite manageable to operate one handed.

I... Well, let's just say had access, to the S&W 329PD while I was in AK. It's an airlight 44 mag. Great gun. Would recommend. Shooting 44 specials can actually be fun with it.

Why are you by-passing the 454 Casull? You can also shoot very hot 45 long colt rounds (roughly equal to 44mag) in it. Check out Buffalo Bore Ammunition, if you are not familiar with them.

Neither one of them would be good for bears unless you did lots and lots and lots of practice. I have never shot the .460 but have shot the .500. Understanding the dynamics of a bear attack, the chances of you getting multiple aimed controlled shots off with either are pretty slim.

Do me a favor. Go out to wherever you can shoot without rules. Take a 22 revolver, put a pack on your back, give yourself a good distraction, be moving, then, in less than two seconds, draw the .22 and get three aimed shots off at a target moving at more than twenty MPH. Then imagine trying to do that with a .500 S&W. Im not saying it cant be done, but it takes a lot more practice than most are willing to put in.

I will avoid the bear spray argument too.

Agsalaska makes a very good point. I've never hunted Alaska so I don't have first hand experience, but I have read other hunter's takes. Most large magnum revolvers - 454 and up are big and heavy. The point has been made that you don't save much in weight and handling between a large magnum revolver and a lever gun in 45-70 or 450 Marlin. Personally, I think I would lean towards carrying a guide gun in 45-70.

A friend of mine who guides Alaska says essentially the same thing. His fishing clients are hellbent to take their 9mm Glock with them on the river.