454 casull vs 460 sw

A few years ago, when I was new to this forum, I asked questions regarding long range shooting with my 460 XVR, and I was chastised for it then, even though I admittedly knew that I lacked the skill to do it. I wanted to know in so many words if it was a practical goal, something worth attempting to attain. Because of this experience, I never did hunt with my XVR even though I bought a really nice scope for it.

What mounts do you guys have on yours? I remember reading Warne was the one to get due to the recoil. I ended up getting a 2.5-8x leupold pistol scope for mine. I haven't shot it for a few years. The last time I shot it, ammo was LESS than $2 per round ;)
 
Originally posted by Winchester_73:

A few years ago, when I was new to this forum, I asked questions regarding long range shooting with my 460 XVR, and I was chastised for it then.
Click to expand...


Funny how folks can be chastised in a thread for using a caliber as large as the .460 for deer and then a few days later chastised by the same troll for using the "barely adequate" .357. What one uses for hunting deer is determined more by the hunting scenario and/or the skill level of the hunter themselves, than what some stranger thinks is "appropriate". Being trashed by someone else that has no grasp of either means little other than some folks just think belittling others on internet forums, somehow makes them superior. I still prefer to use the irons on my .460 and practice regularly out to 150 yards. Still easy enough to keep all my shots within a deers kill zone. Use what trips your trigger and ignore the hecklers.
 
Funny how folks can be chastised in a thread for using a caliber as large as the .460 for deer and then a few days later chastised by the same troll for using the "barely adequate" .357.
Click to expand...
Yep I saw that too apparently the only acceptable cartridges are 44mag and heavy 45 Colts.

I still prefer to use the irons on my .460 and practice regularly out to 150 yards.
Click to expand...
I love to hear that, I've seen too many that don't shoot paper out that far and just assume they can shoot animals because the cartridge is capable of "such and such".
While the 460 is pretty flat shooting if you think "I'm dead on at 25 so I'm good to 200" and in reality you're 1/2" low, now you're prolly 5 or 6" lower at 200 than you think you are.
This goes for all rounds too.;)
 
Funny how folks can be chastised in a thread for using a caliber as large as the .460 for deer and then a few days later chastised by the same troll for using the "barely adequate" .357.
Click to expand...
I never chastised anyone for anything. You're just upset because I don't drink your brand of Kool Aid.

All I said was that unless you are capable or have a need to shoot deer at 200yds, there are lesser cartridges that will do the job in a lighter, handier revolver with less muzzle blast and fanfare. If you just "want" a .460 for hunting deer at 50yds, that's just fine. It really doesn't matter to me either way. That's my whole point in a nutshell. It's no different than saying on the rifle forum that the .338WM is probably too much cartridge for shooting deer in the eastern woods where shots are limited to 150yds. As with this stupid discussion, there are better, less punishing, less offensive, lighter weight guns and cartridges that will do the job. How you take offense to that to the point of calling someone a troll is beyond me. Tell me exactly where I said anything that wasn't true??? I thought this was supposed to be a discussion board. Not a place for everyone to always agree with everything.

The .357 is no more than "adequate". There are no less cartridges that anyone with any credibility will recommend for the job. It is the minimum recommended cartridge and that is a fact. I didn't say it wouldn't do the job. If you think a 125gr at 2200fps is a dandy deer load, have at it. Just report back on how many deer you lose because penetration is almost nothing.

Folks around here sure are sensitive when their choices/opinions/preferences get challenged.
 
Yep I saw that too apparently the only acceptable cartridges are 44mag and heavy 45 Colts.
Click to expand...
So let me get this straight. The .357 is not minimum and the .460 is not too much. If not the .357, then please tell me what cartridge is considered by you fine folk, who are apparently all smarter than the most infamous of experts, to be the minimum for deer. The .22Short? By the same token, also please enlighten me as to which cartridge would be considered too much for deer at ranges up to 100yds. Are there any?

I must've gone to school for gunology on a different planet.
 
The .454 is a fine round for deer. If you get a .460, you have a .460 with very good range AND a .454 if you want a little less as well as a .45 Colt for plinking with either. Folks have argued over what is enough or too much gun for deer for years. It is interesting that a person with a .45 Colt and off the shelf Federal .45 Colt ammo (not Buffalo Bore big buck stuff costing about a $1.75 a round) that has less than 375 ft/lbs of energy will tell a guy carrying a .327 magnum with Federal factory loads that has over 500 ft/lbs of energy that the .327 is too little gun! :rolleyes:

If you handload, you have more options with any handgun. Buy and shoot what you want as confidence in what you have usually means knowing the gun limitations and better shot placement which means more than the caliber.
 
It is interesting that a person with a .45 Colt and off the shelf Federal .45 Colt ammo (not Buffalo Bore big buck stuff costing about a $1.75 a round) that has less than 375 ft/lbs of energy will tell a guy carrying a .327 magnum with Federal factory loads that has over 500 ft/lbs of energy that the .327 is too little gun!
Click to expand...
It is interesting that some people actually still believe energy has anything to do with a handgun cartridge's effectiveness. A 250gr .45 at 900fps will fully penetrate any deer that walks and kill it deader than fried chicken, all the while producing a paltry 450ft-lbs. Meanwhile, that .327 load will work fine for personal defense but no one would suggest it for hunting anything larger than coyotes. Although with this crowd, anything is possible.
 
No, just those who make their choices according to ballistics tables, which takes the intellect of a gnat. Those who REALLY have A LOT of hands-on experience disregard energy figures for the reasons stated. It's simply not an accurate way to assess a cartridge/load's effectiveness on live critters and is FAR too dependent on velocity. Which is the most rapidly diminishing factor. Energy places far too much importance on velocity, little on weight and none on diameter. Unless of course you think you're smarter than John Linebaugh, John Taffin, Brian Pearce, Ross Seyfried or virtually any other authority on the subject.

"Most knowledgeable shooters know the foot-pounds of energy formula the industry uses to measure or compare bullet energy leaves a lot to be desired. First, it just is not an accurate way to measure comparable bullet effect on critters, and second, critters can't read."

http://www.customsixguns.com/writings/heavyweight_bullets.htm
 
No, just those who make their choices according to ballistics tables, which takes the intellect of a gnat. Those who REALLY have A LOT of hands-on experience disregard energy figures for the reasons stated. It's simply not an accurate way to assess a cartridge/load's effectiveness on live critters and is FAR too dependent on velocity. Which is the most rapidly diminishing factor. Energy places far too much importance on velocity, little on weight and none on diameter.
Click to expand...

Is there a more reliable / accurate way of assessing a bullets weight and velocity which also considers caliber? Is there another way to assess ft:lbs of energy? I'm just wondering.
 
Read the article I linked above about TKO. No, it ain't perfect but it's a better way to compare the big bores to each other than kinetic energy. I bold that part because some critics will chime in and use it to compare big bore revolvers to high velocity small bore rifle cartridges but it was never intended to be used that way. It's just as silly as using energy to compare two completely different killing machines.

For example:
250gr .45 at 900fps = 450ft-lbs or a TKO factor of 14.5
55gr .224 at 3200fps = 1250ft-lbs or a TKO factor of 5.6

Given what we know about the size of critters each load would be able to take cleanly, which do you think is the better gauge, energy or TKO?

By contrast and closer to topic:
225gr .460 at 2200fps = 2418ft-lbs or a TKO factor of 31.9
430gr .475 at 1350fps = 1740ft-lbs or a TKO factor of 39.5

If you worshiped energy, you would think the .460 would be more potent and capable of killing bigger critters but we KNOW from extensive penetration testing that the 430gr .475 cannot be beat and is suitable for anything that walks planet earth. Certainly infinitely better for big critters than the 225gr .460 load. It could also easily be argued that the same diameter projectile, only 360gr and running 1200fps would also be a FAR better choice for large game than the .460 load, despite the numbers.

360gr .45 at 1200fps = 1151ft-lbs or a TKO factor of 27.8

Because, like I've said throughout this thread, all the .454 and .460 offer over the .45Colt/.44Mag is range. They won't kill anything any deader within 100-125yds.

So there is no magical formula that precludes us from using some common sense.
 
I read this decades ago so some of the details are fuzzy but here is the crux of the TKO system. John Taylor was an African big game hunter. The large English double rifles were the premier guns at the time with the .600 Nitro Express at the top of heap-most powerful rifle you could have. In the late 1950s Roy Weatherby comes out with the .460 Weatherby Magnum and claims it as the most powerful commercial rifle in the world with like 8100 ft/lbs of energy—which was more than the .600 Nitro. As I recall, the story goes that a guide (could have been Taylor himself?) was with or guiding some guy with the first .460 WM seen firsthand while hunting cape buffalo. The story expounds how he witnessed the guy shoot a buffalo and the buffalo was not impressed with the paper ballistics. The Taylor system “proves” the .600 Nitro is really more powerful by weighting a system that benefits bore diameter. This was the TKO system. I have to admit it is also clever marketing to use the TKO system to hype the benefits of large bore handguns for a company selling them.

While neither system is perfect and neither account for bullet design (expansion, fragmentation, etc), the kinetic energy system is based in physics where Taylor developed his system to have some numbers support what he believed based on his experience shooting large animals and the guns he used. To get on point of the OP, use the .454 Casull with a 260 grain bullet @ 1800 fps has a TKO of about 30 and 1870 ft/lbs of energy. Compare that to a .300 Winchester Magnum with a 180 grain bullet @ 3150 that develops over 3950 ft/lbs of energy BUT the TKO system rates it around 25. So if you believe Taylor, a .454 is 20% more powerful than a .300 Win mag rifle while kinetic energy would have you believe the rifle has over twice the power. The readers can decide which they believe but it is worth noting that all commercial ammunition manufacturers use the kinetic energy system. Enough writing, I think it is time to go outside and shoot…
 
Last edited:
Compare that to a .300 Winchester Magnum with a 180 grain bullet @ 3150 that develops over 3950 ft/lbs of energy BUT the TKO system rates it around 25.
Click to expand...
And just as I predicted, someone was along to use the TKO factor in a way that was never intended as some sort of argument against it.

The fact that the .475 load I quoted is capable of taking ANY game on the planet and the .300Win Mag is at its limit with elk and moose SHOULD tell us that maybe energy is not the proper gauge. But unfortunately, that would require us to think for ourselves and apply a little logic. Rather than relying on the age old foolishness of printed ballistics tables.


...the kinetic energy system is based in physics...
Click to expand...
...it is worth noting that all commercial ammunition manufacturers use the kinetic energy system.
Click to expand...
I guess that settles it. So much for using our brains and a little common sense. :rolleyes:
 
The fact that the .475 load I quoted is capable of taking ANY game on the planet and the .300Win Mag is at its limit with elk and moose SHOULD tell us that maybe energy is not the proper gauge.
Click to expand...
Another opinion stated as fact lol.
The lowly 30-06 which is less powerful than the 300 win mag is not only capable of taking any game on the planet it has done it many times over.
TKO only works for solids;) and has mighty little to do with a broadside chest shot on light skinned deer.
 
Count me in among those who think that energy isn't the best means of determining a cartridges effectiveness. For example in the handgun world it's amazing to me how many people think an extra 100-150 fps (with the exact same caliber and weight bullet) makes all the difference and that it can make performance go from ho-hum to dazzling, kind of like 10mm vs .40.

In terms of this discussion of the 460 S&W vs. 454 Casull, my choice is neither. I had a SRH 454 that was very nice, and really wasn't that bad to shoot, but it's not going to kill anything any deader than my Ruger Bisley .45 Colt loaded warm. The extra range the 454 gives isn't a bad thing in itself, but it's not really useful either considering it's a handgun and isn't likely to be used for long range shots anyways.
 
Originally posted by Ruger45LC:

I had a SRH 454 that was very nice, and really wasn't that bad to shoot, but it's not going to kill anything any deader than my Ruger Bisley .45 Colt loaded warm.

The extra range the 454 gives isn't a bad thing in itself, but it's not really useful either considering it's a handgun and isn't likely to be used for long range shots anyways.
Click to expand...

But what is a .454 or a .460 but a .45 Colt loaded warm? As for extending the range of any firearm, that is totally dependent upon the capabilities of the person pullin' the trigger. Back when my handguns were secondary or backup to my long-guns when deer hunting, I was perfectly content to carry a revolver that's effective range was 75 yards or less without having to aim it like a mortar. Once I retired my long guns for hunting deer, I desired something that was accurate and effective to the ranges I generally encounter in my area......out to 150 yards. Very few folks recommend using a .44 mag or a .45 Colt with standard loads for those types of scenarios. As I said in an earlier post, I have killed deer with .357, .44 mag and the .460. All were quite capable of the task, and all did the job well within their limitations as long as I did my part.
 
Originally posted by newfrontier45:


Unless of course you think you're smarter than John Linebaugh
Click to expand...

John Linebaugh touts his custom .45s that push a 260 Jacketed @ 1700 FPS. This is not your Grandpa's .45 Colt. This is basically a .454 or .460 type load, producing their velocities and their energies. This goes back to the same thought process that Ruger45LC posted. Take a Porsche engine and put it in a VW beetle and you no longer have a VW Beetle. When you start beating Corvairs at the drag strip, you legitimately can't claim to have beat them with your "VW Beetle".

TKO is just another man's ballistics table designed to give the type of results he wanted. It worked for him and it works for others. But his calculations also put the .500 S&W as a more potent cartridge than the 30.06. Very few of us would attempt a shot @ 300 yards on a Elk with a .500 S&W, but would do it in a heartbeat with a ought-six. Apples to oranges. Any firearm regardless of caliber or who endorses it, is still limited to and it's effectiveness relative to the skill of the hunter behind it. The firearm is only a tool. Some folks can build a grandfather clock outta a handsaw and a hammer, while some folks have a hard time with a whole shop full of the latest fancy tools. Who is the better craftsman?

Part of being secure with your own choices and opinions is having to have the capability to respect other folk's choices. Having to think you need to always "win" or get the last "word" in an internet discussion is not a sign of that. Dishin' other folk's opinions and choices, using derogatory names and innuendos does little to impress folks with your knowledge......and that does not take the " intellect of a gnat".
 
The lowly 30-06 which is less powerful than the 300 win mag is not only capable of taking any game on the planet it has done it many times over.
Click to expand...
Yes, try taking a .30/06 after dangerous game in Africa. Better yet, go to the Accurate forum and start a thread about using the `06 for the Big 6.


TKO only works for solids and has mighty little to do with a broadside chest shot on light skinned deer.
Click to expand...
Duh!


As for extending the range of any firearm, that is totally dependent upon the capabilities of the person pullin' the trigger.
Click to expand...
I've been saying that all along and you have argued with me all along.


John Linebaugh touts his custom .45s that push a 260 Jacketed @ 1700 FPS.
Click to expand...
Yes and go back and read what he says about a 260gr at 900fps.

No, that's 300fps behind the .454.


But his calculations also put the .500 S&W as a more potent cartridge than the 30.06.
Click to expand...
Once again, it is inevitable, some internet expert is going to use TKO in a way NOT INTENDED. I don't know how many times one has to say it. I guess some folks believe so strongly in some things that they will never be swayed. :rolleyes:
 
Once again, it is inevitable, some internet expert is going to use TKO in a way NOT INTENDED.
Click to expand...
To be clear aren't you the one who brought TKO into a thread about shooting thin skinned deer with handgun rounds of which many use expanding bullets :rolleyes:
 
Good Lord, reading is a wonderful thing. :rolleyes:

The question:
Is there a more reliable / accurate way of assessing a bullets weight and velocity which also considers caliber? Is there another way to assess ft:lbs of energy? I'm just wondering.
Click to expand...

The answer:
Read the article I linked above about TKO. No, it ain't perfect but it's a better way to compare the big bores to each other than kinetic energy. I bold that part because some critics will chime in and use it to compare big bore revolvers to high velocity small bore rifle cartridges but it was never intended to be used that way. It's just as silly as using energy to compare two completely different killing machines.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top