454 casull vs 460 sw

[buck460XVR]

As for extending the range of any firearm, that is totally dependent upon the capabilities of the person pullin' the trigger.

Originally posted by newfrontier45:

I've been saying that all along and you have argued with me all along.

If that's true, since you are always right......quote me. I did state that friends with little experience shot my .460 very well @ 75yards and better than with the .357s and .44s at half that distance. Extending the range of their accuracy with any of those calibers is totally dependent on increasing their skill level. My statement was that the .460 is a very accurate platform.....you have yet to show any evidence that this is not true.

Originally posted by newfrontier45:

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.

I'm using the same formula you are and only stating what the results show. If it shows that the results of John Taylor's "Knock Down Factor" are not always gospel and do not always fit into every hunting scenario, it is only what I have been stating in my responses to this thread. You wish to only use those results that prove your point....I am willing to consider them all. I am the first to admit, I am far from an expert........but I do know what works better for me than a stranger on the internet, regardless of the amount of name calling they use.

 

[mikejonestkd]

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.

Ask Bell what he used for elephants....the modern loads for the 30-06 are magnums compared to what he ended up favoring.

Use what you like, both the 454 and 460 are more than enough for hunting anything on this continent.

 

[newfrontier45]

Ask Bell what he used for elephants....the modern loads for the 30-06 are magnums compared to what he ended up favoring.

Again, look at the game laws in those countries. The .375H&H is the LEGAL minimum for dangerous game and heavier is preferred for everything but the cats. The .22Mag is a great deer cartridge for headshots but such comments are completely irrelevant.

I'm using the same formula you are and only stating what the results show.

You're using it in a way that was never intended to make a bogus point. Not unlike complaining that your new Ferrari is a piece of junk because you can't pull a 10,000lb trailer with it. If you would actually READ what I posted, you would see that I DID make the point that it is not applicable to small bores or useful in assessing them. In plain, explicit language. I don't care for the .460, it's your sacred goat and you're creating an argument where none existed because of that fact. Why are you so defensive?

My statement was that the .460 is a very accurate platform.....you have yet to show any evidence that this is not true.

I never refuted that statement and saleen322's pics are evidence to that fact.

If it shows that the results of John Taylor's "Knock Down Factor" are not always gospel and do not always fit into every hunting scenario...

No one said it was, nor did I ever say it was applicable to small bores. In fact, I said it was NOT applicable to small bores in my very first reference to it but you applied it in the wrong context anyway. To make a bogus point. I predicted that too. Don't put words in my mouth. I believe I said:

"So there is no magical formula that precludes us from using some common sense."

...regardless of the amount of name calling they use.

I would like the guy who has called me a troll numerous times to point out the personal insults I have used. That's your game, not mine.

 

[Winchester_73]

Some of this is kind of like the differences between a buffalo and a cheetah, and then some ask "well, which is best?" while the others state which is best. Well the first question is "what do you wish to do" or "what do you expect or desire" ? Many people may need both, since they serve different purposes and have different strengths, and different weaknesses.

I will admit, I never heard of the TKO until this thread, and the article was interesting.

I am a 460 owner myself, and I must say, I did (and still do) like the platform a lot myself when I bought it, which factored into my decision to buy it. I later would get a Freedom Arms 454 premier, and it was nice too. Since most shots are going to be taken SA with a 460, I suppose getting a SA revolver in these calibers is not a disadvantage. When I bought it, however, I thought the DA trigger, if you ever need it, was good to have. Many people want a big caliber S&W even though there are Ruger, BFR and FA big bore revolvers. I think that in part is why the 460 has a following

As far as the 45 colt in some loads being perfect for deer at a 100 yds, and a 460 power not being needed, I can see that opinion. However, when hunting, a big part of it is killing the animal efficiently and humanely. If the 460 enables that, then is it too much power? On the other hand, if one is taking a shot on a deer with a 460 at say 75 yds, much of its energy would be wasted at that range. However, if you are accurate with it, and you feel confident with it, then its the right gun.

NF45, you mentioned the 475 can get anything on this planet? Is it used in whaling? Can it kill a blue whale? Just curious. Whales are also on this planet, you know

 

[newfrontier45]

But they're not hunted with firearms, are you an RN or a lawyer?

It's not really a matter of too much for the deer but potentially too much for the shooter. I love all kinds of big bores but for me, they must be practical first. I just don't consider a 7lb revolver to be very practical. All I suggested is that if you don't "need" the range, you might not "want" to deal with the weight/blast/expense.

 

[claimbuster]

My FA M83 454 7.5" with Trijicon RMR. I carried and hunted with N-frame 44's for many years. A couple of years ago I got a FA in 44M and that was the end of the big S&W's for me. It's also a M83 but with a 6".

So when I finally decided to go one bigger, the X-frame was never considered. I really like this 454 as it is a lot tamer than I expected it to be.

Now I've got my eye open for a FA 475. Why, damned if I know.

BTW at 68 y.o., I don't go around thumping my chest unless I'm trying to get some phlegm cleared out of my throat.

 

[Gdawgs]

I drool all over my keyboard every time someone posts a picture of an FA revolver. Thanks for that claimbuster! I'm going to have one someday. I'm thinking of going with the 41 Mag.

 

[thedudeabides]

454 is easier to find, that's what I shoot.

 

[Flyboy_451]

Lots of opinions have been shared...

a few arguments and one or two facts have even been presented. I do not own, or have the desire to own a 460, but I do own a 454 and a 475 Linebaugh. My preference for revolvers is for short barreled guns, easily paked on the hip. My opinion of the long cylinder guns such as the Smith X frame and the Magnum Research BFR is that they are ugly enough to knock a buzzard off of a dead Rhino.

Having said that, the performance of the 460 is mighty impressive. Still don't want to own one, but it did interest me enough to do a limited ballistic comparison using the program "Load from a Disk". Since it seems that many of the 460 fans tout the extreme velocity of 460 I selected a 250 Hornady XTP at a muzzle velocity of 2,000fps as the load of choice for that caliber. The 454 load is my handload using a 335 grain hard cast LBT bullet at 1460fps from a 6" Freedom Arms, and the 475 Linebaugh load is my handload using a 420grn hard cast LBT bullet at 1,300fps from a 5 1/4" BFR. Velocities for my handloads are as measured using an Oehler 35P chronograph.

Here are some graphs showing the results...

T1= 460 Smith and Wesson
T2= 454 Casull
T3= 475 Linebaugh

[/URL][/IMG]

[/URL][/IMG]

[/URL][/IMG]

Taylor values for those who are interested...

[/URL][/IMG]

Wind drift from a 10MPH crosswind

[/URL][/IMG]

Interestingly, Among the loads compared, the energy numbers at 200 yards are very similar, with 460 coming in last place by small amount. It starts out well above the other two, but gets overtaken by the 475 at about 125 yards and then by the 454 at just short of 200 yards.

The 460 does hold a significant advantage in trajectory at the 200 yard point, but the graph does show that you had better know the distance to the target within a pretty small error factor and exactly what your chosen load does if you choose to try to take advantage of the flatter trajectory. Twenty inches of drop is still a lot. When you start stretching the distance, the bullet begins a fairly steep plunge with any of these three.

Wind drift is the other area where the lighter bullet takes a a little bit of a beating by the heavier bullets. None of them are what I would call a "straight shooter" when it comes to bucking wind, but the heavier bullets hold the advantage.

For those interested, the results of the Taylor numbers are pretty predictable. Larger heavier bullets have a distinct advantage in this race. Good, bad, or indifferent...I'll let others argue about it.

There are a few things to keep in mind while looking at this information. Any bullet suitable for the 454 is also suitable for the 460. My personal preference is for heavier bullets, and I will sacrifice velocity. My experience is that this is a very reasonable trade. The barrels of the 454 and 475 are much shorter than the 8 3/8" 460 from which 250 grain bullets at 2,000 fps is attainable. I do not know how quickly the performance will fall off as barrel length is shortened. If anyone as verified data from a short barreled 460, I would very much like to see how it compares.

At the end of the day, all three are powerful and very capable of taking large game at distances that are well beyond an average shooters ability. If you intend to shoot much past 100 yards, you had better know your business and be well practiced and proficient. Beyond that, it is as much a matter of personal preference as anything else.

JW

 

[TMD]

Flyboy_451 I'm not sure where your getting these lame figures for the .460. IN my 10.5"PC model I'm pushing a 300gr XTP @ 2070fps using 44gr of Lil'Gun. It will also push 395gr LFPGC to about 1800fps with 37gr of the same powder.

 

[saleen322]

Flyboy_451, During hunting season, I have my .460 set to be about 2" high @ 100 yards. In actual shooting, it is about 5" low @ 200. My approach is to not have to guess distance and within 200 yards (my self-imposed limit) just point and shoot and not waste effort on guessing holdover. I am guessing you had the program zero them all somewhere around 50 yards? Nice post and good information, thanks.

 

[Flyboy_451]

TMD,

Just as I stated in my previous post, I do knot own a 460, so can only rely on secondhand information. The figures I gave were simply what was revealed in a very quick Google search.

As for what your load and gun do in comparison with the load I quoted, you gain about a 4" advantage in trajectory and about 500 lb ft of energy, a much bigger gain in terminal energy at the 200 yard mark. Thus my preference for heavy for caliber bullets.

Saleen,

You are correct that I set the zero range at fifty yards. For comparison purposes, the sight in range doesn't matter as long as they are all the same. Fifty yards if where my guns are sighted in, so that is the number I used. There are a variety of ways to determine "point blank range" zeroing distance to accomplish exactly what you are talking about. Just a "SWAG" (Scientific Wild A** Guess), I would think that if you zero about 3 3/4" high at 100 yards, you would have a dead hold about to close to 200 yards. If you know the bullet and actual velocity that you load and gun combination deliver, I can plug in your numbers and post the info for you.

JW

 

[buck460XVR]

Just as I stated in my previous post, I do knot own a 460, so can only rely on secondhand information.

But you do claim to own and reload for a .454. I'm curious why then you chose to use the 250 gr XTP as a example since it is not only inappropriate for use in the .460 at the velocity stated, but also in the .454. I only mention this as some folks may read this thread and try to load a 250 gr XTP @ 2000 fps for their X-Frame. I tend to stick with 300 gr jacketed in my .460 for deer. I am not a fan of the 200 grainers for anything other than paper and yotes. The 240s I use for range and varmints. Since I still use irons, I tend not to shoot much past 150 yards. My gun is sighted dead on @ 75 yards. While I aim high @ 150, my sights are still on the deer.

 

[TMD]

TMD,

Just as I stated in my previous post, I do knot own a 460, so can only rely on secondhand information. The figures I gave were simply what was revealed in a very quick Google search.

As for what your load and gun do in comparison with the load I quoted, you gain about a 4" advantage in trajectory and about 500 lb ft of energy, a much bigger gain in terminal energy at the 200 yard mark. Thus my preference for heavy for caliber bullets.

I like how you casually say it has about 500 lb ft more energy

 

[Ruger45LC]

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.

Yeah, I mean the 454 came about as the result of warmly loaded .45 Colts, and I guess the 460 I just a longer 454. I would say that while it's great you can and do take 150yd shots with a handgun, most do not. So yeah there's always an exception or two to the rule, but most can't accurately hit very far off using iron sights. I'm guessing on 150yd shots you use a scope? I had one on my SRH 454 but I never could warm up to it, but if someone else loves it, great!

 

[Flyboy_451]

Buck460XVR,

If you go back and reread my post, I said exactly why I chose a 250 grain bullet for the 460. It was because there seems to be a great number of people that tout the extreme velocities the 460 is capable of. Generally speaking, the lighter the bullet, the faster it can be pushed. Regardless of the bullet design, whether it be solid hardcast, or violently expanding and intended for thin skinned, light game, has no impact on ballistic coefficient. Two given bullets of the same caliber and weight will have BC numbers that are so close to each other that it would make little difference in trajectory or retained velocity.

High initial velocity does not necessarily equate to flat shooting at long range, as demonstrated with the charts I posted. You may also notice that the other loads I selected are not the pinnacle of performance for their respective cartridges. I have never argued that the 460 does not shoot flatter or hit harder than the 454. I was simply showing SOME of the characteristics of each cartridge. By looking at all of the data presented, anyone can see that the heavier bullet does very well in the 454 and thus, would also do very well in the 460. This is why I included the note about bullet interchangeability with the two cartridges. But, regardless of which cartridge is used, the flight path of the bullet must be considered when selecting a zero range and making decisions on realistic ranges to use each.

Not to worry, I'm not poo-pooing your pet cartridge or anyone else's choice. I'm just presenting a LIMITED amount of information from which other information can be derived. If you, or someone else, wants to compare every possible combination of bullet weights for each caliber, by all means, do so. I would encourage it.

TMD,

My "casual" mention of the energy levels? As stated in my post, this is a big gain in terminal energy. If your concern is only energy values, go pick an argument with someone else. I have no interest in rehashing a topic that has been argued over thousands of times. The energy values shown are simply there as a measurable comparison factor for those who care. I'm not one who places energy, or velocity for that matter, in the realm of awe and wonder. Experience leads me to believe that the potential of any load is determined by shot placement, bullet form and construction, bullet weight and diameter and impact velocity. As an example, if you were able to drive a needle at a velocity that produced 1,500 foot pounds of energy, I do not believe that it would have more killing potential than a good hardcast 45 caliber bullet delivering only 1,000 foot pounds of energy. Each facet plays a roll.

JW

 

[buck460XVR]

Originally posted by Flyboy_451:

Buck460XVR,

If you go back and reread my post, I said exactly why I chose a 250 grain bullet for the 460.

My issue is not with the use of a 250 gr bullet, my issue is with the use of a thin jacketed bullet intended for .45 Colt pressures and velocities being used in a .460. Since the introduction of both the .454 and the .460, bullet manufacturers have been continuously warning handloaders about the use of light jacketed .45 caliber bullets and the damage they can do to forcing cones when run @ .454 and .460 pressures and velocities. Since you claim to handload for your .454, it just surprised me that you used just such a bullet for your example. I could give two hoots about charts and pictures with circles and arrows, with a explanation written on the back of each one. My concern is that someone will read Flyboy is using a .452'' 250 gr XTP pushed to 2000 fps....must be okay. That's all.

Originally posted by Flyboy_451:

High initial velocity does not necessarily equate to flat shooting at long range, as demonstrated with the charts I posted.

I dunno......In the one and only chart you posted showing trajectory, it did indeed show us that the gun with the higher initial velocity shot flatter. 12 to 18 inches flatter @ 200 yards. Did I miss a chart somewhere?

I ain't tryin' to be argumentative...just havin' fun with this one.

Over the years since I received my P.C. X-Frame as a gift from my oldest son, folks on these internet forums have come up with all kinds of reasons of why I use it for deer hunting, From attempting to compensate for a inadequate sex organ to tryin' to make up for being a pitifully poor shot. Truth is, it's a fun gun to shoot and accurate as all get out. I enjoy using it at the range and in the field. Because of the thought that came with it, it will always have a special place in my safe. Regardless of how many folks scream "nobody needs a .460 to kill deer!" till they're red in the face....I'm still gonna use it.

 

[TMD]

High initial velocity does not necessarily equate to flat shooting at long range, as demonstrated with the charts I posted.

Actually this is one the .460's claim to fame. When first introduced it was published that with a 200gr bullet at around 2300fps if you zeroed your scope @ 200yrds it was 4"high @ 150yrds and only 4"low at 250yrds. About the flattest shooting revolver cartridge out there.

 

[newfrontier45]

Regardless of how many folks scream "nobody needs a .460 to kill deer!" till they're red in the face....I'm still gonna use it.

Nobody is saying that and I don't know why you guys get so defensive. All I've been saying is that if you do not need to shoot deer past 125yds, you can get the job done with less fanfare. No different than saying that if you never have to shoot past 150yds, you do everything you need to do with a 6lb, peep sighted .30-30, rather than a 9lb .300WM with a 4-16x. If you know all that and still 'want' to use the .300, that's fine & dandy but they should go into it with their eyes open.

That and...

About the flattest shooting revolver cartridge out there.

Flat shooting cartridges don't make you a 200yd revolver hunter. I'm just glad S&W stopped doing their stupid "200yd club".

 

[TMD]

Flat shooting cartridges don't make you a 200yd revolver hunter. I'm just glad S&W stopped doing their stupid "200yd club".

I've never once in any of my post even mention hunting so please don't take my post out of content. In fact I gave up hunting many years ago. I purely target shoot. Oh and with my .460 its 12x scope and a solid rest I have no problem keeping all 5 shots under 6" @ 300 yrds.