.460 S&W Magnum Personal Protection Gun

Would the .460 Smith and Wesson Magnum Revolver be a good personal protection gun?

  • Yes

    Votes: 17 20.7%

  • No

    Votes: 65 79.3%
  • Total voters
    82
Status
Not open for further replies.
Loaded down with 'midrange' .460 loads I guess you can pack it.

250gr DPX at 1000 fps ought to fill the bill.

And yes if OC was allowed, you can drag that hogleg around fine.

Deaf
 
not a fan of X-frame handguns

They get so big and heavy they come close in weight to a carbine. Three pounds + or minus is about all a serious handgun should weigh on your hip.
 
Whoa cowboy - way to much gun for two legged critters.
Ya want to kill'em not blow them to hell.
Judgment is best left to the man up stairs.:D
 
Since S&W used the term "intimidating" I assume they mean intimidating to another human, therefore I think they are referring to protection against two-legged threats. They certainly are right about the intimidation factor, but .460 magnum for "anti-personnel" (political correctness be damned) use is unwise on many levels. However, slap some nice warm .45 Colt hollow points in there and sure it would be very appropriate in terms of ballistics, but I wouldn't limit myself to the 5 round capacity.

Also it may very well be just a misunderstanding or poor choice of wording by a writer.
 
A better choice, for about the same money, weight of gun, but WAY more capacity, would be the Thompson 1927 .45acp "pistol" with a 50 round drum
Click to expand...

Not even close in terms of weight. The Tommygun pistol goes about twice what the S&W does, and that's before you add the weight of a loaded 50rnd drum.

too powerful (that is, too powerful to serve the function of a self-defense handgun)
Click to expand...

this makes it sound like it cannot work. Certainly it can. Best? no. Ease of use? no. Ability of average shooter to fire more than once? AND be accurate? And FAST? I'd say no to that too.

Not the ideal choice, certainly. But it can work. Hell might even work without being fired!;)
 
We probably should not be limited by what others may think, but IMHO, I can't imagine a gun a prosecuting attorney or a plaintiff's counsel would have more fun with, except maybe a "Ma Deuce" or a .500 S&W. The "reasonable person" argument sort of goes down the tubes with that kind of overkill.

Jim
 
IMG_2287.jpg


I usually carry it appendix. Occasionally ankle carry if I'm wearing some old bell bottom jeans.

Don't listen to these lightweights who tell you it's too much gun. Nothing says leave me alone like 300 grain bullets at 2000 FPS. Once you get into about one ton of muzzle energy, you're starting to talk about real stopping power.

5 rounds against 10 adversaries is doable if they cooperate and come at you in close ranks.




um.....not
 
I love the dichotomy of logical ends of the firearms power spectrum when a .460 or .500 is too much for self defense, when occasionally even the .45 or .357 mag require multiple shots to down an assailant. Limiting power to medium powered handguns like the police use (.40 or 9mm) might meet some politically correct requirement, but still leave you dry if you have to empty the gun into someone. You might even get sued for "cruel and unusual punishment" if shooting a person multiple times.......a jury may not understand the "shoot til they stop" doctrine. A ".460 or 500 is too much" philosophy would also rule out the use of a shotgun or high powered rifle in any kind of defensive situation, too. Sometimes, I just do not GET trying to limit the tool used to defend one's self, based on conjecture by people that could only guess over the matter, and have no real understanding of effective firearm ballistics.
 
Last edited:
Sgt127, would you settle for a weapon that could that could insure 5 one shot stops? When's the last time ANYONE in a SELF DEFENSE situation has been confronted by more than five assailants?:D
 
Sgt127, would you settle for a weapon that could that could insure 5 one shot stops? When's the last time ANYONE in a SELF DEFENSE situation has been confronted by more than five assailants?
Click to expand...

Ya know, after the five rounds, if it came to fisticuffs and pistol whipping, you might still have an advantage.
 
I actually came into that monster in a great trade. I didn't know it was a snub nose when I said "I'll take that deal!" (It was really that good..seriously, I have less than $400 bucks in the gun)

Now that I have it, I've shot it a few times and, it's usable. It's very usable with .454.

It doesn't eat much, doesn't take up much room and, it's kind of a neat novelty. If I get a chance to hike or camp in grizzly country, I got that covered too.

It would certainly work for self defense. But, it's not a practical tool for the job.
 
In the end days of marketing that gun, S&W sold them through closeout at CDNN, and I believe they were under $600 ($579?). I wish I had picked up a few. Now the snubbies in the special ES (yellow for .460 and orange for .500) boxes are fetching $2000 plus on gunbroker.
 
Personal Protection and such...

44 AMP said:
by your own admission, S&W did not say it was a good personal protection gun, they said it was "intimidating".

Not the same thing, and in this case not even close...
Click to expand...


I agree that saying a gun is intimidating is wholly different than saying a gun is good for personal protection. The problem is when you say, "An Intimidating Personal Protection Gun," you're implying that a gun is good for personal protection use. If the gun were merely intimidating, it would not need the Personal Protection part added on. And unless you're going to argue something along the lines that a Bear is impressed with the size of your gun, I think the intimidating part refers to people. My main concern would be if a .460 Magnum has a good chance to pass through human sized targets at typical handgun ranges and if so, would be dangerous to use as a personal protection weapon against people.
 
Last edited:
This is hilarious! Last week everyone was deriding the 44 magnum as too much gun for SD and NOW people are semi-seriously debating a gun 4 times more powerful.....:confused::eek::D
 
Admittedly lacking experience with such a weapon, I'd imagine that to make it a viable self-defense weapon, one would have to load it with manageable rounds; e.g., .45 Long Colt. Then the question leads to gun. Why carry a heavy gun for 5 rounds of snub-nose .45 Long Colt performance when one could carry a lightweight .45 ACP weapon?

If I were to fish in griz habitat, such a gun would make sense. However, I think that were I to fish in griz habitat, I'd carry either an 18" 870 with slugs or an 1895G.

keep in mid that a Model 29 has more recoil than I'm willing to endure.

A heavy .357 Mag revolver is at the upper end of my recoil limit.
 
I tend to think the "intimidation" factor talked about so often is about as useful for self defense as taking the old double barrel outside and firing off two rounds to scare them away.
Click to expand...

Well now that you mentioned it.. I don't know of anyone that wouldn't be intimidated by two rounds from a double barrel.

The intimidation factor can be and is a factor sometimes. Seen it with my own eyes. And that was with a single barrel shotgun.


And if the intimidation factor doesn't get them.... A .460 bullet will.:eek:

Seriously... I carry a subcompact .45acp when I do carry. My .460 has a 7.5" barrel and weighs 72 oz empty. I'd walk with a limp if I carried it concealed haha.

But if a guy wants to carry his .460... Why not?
 
I shoot a .500 S&W snubbie with slightly reduced loads when the need for entertainment or stress release arises. The concussion from the muzzle blast never fails to rattle the neighborhood, so two rounds from a .460 into the turf, or God forbid, into the floor of your residence while being invaded would definitely arouse the weak nature in an intruder if he had half a brain. However, the shooter and other legal residents should be wearing ear protection if shooting in OR outdoors, and that is the problem: the .460 or .500 WILL make you deaf in a hurry. They DO sound like concussion grenades, and do not require destructive device licensing. Shooting into dirt is one thing, but having a heavy, high velocity bullet bouncing off the basement floor is not good. Perhaps they have pre-fragmented projectiles available to load in the .460, like Glaser Safety slugs?:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top