Felt Recoil ?'s

S

salukijoe

Inactive
I've got the itch for a 45 colt sixgun. I have been fortunate to shoot a 45 colt Bisley and Redhawk with the same 325 gr. LBT ammo (about 1300 fps) for comaprison. The Bisley is doable...the Redhawk plain hurt. Has anyone shot a SRH 454 with heavy 45 colt ammo in addition the the sixguns mentioned? If so, what are your impressions/feedback regarding felt recoil as compared to the other two?
 
I want one of those Bird's-Head grip Vaqueros in .45 LC. I've heard that the grips are rather odd until you get used to them and that they help make the recoil easier to tolerate. I'd love to have one with the case-colored finish.
 
Nothing like going right to the top!

Starting out on .45 revolver with 325 gr, 1300 fps loads is a little like learing rifle by skipping right past the .22 rimfire and going right to a .300 Win Mag. Sure, it can be done, but you'll develop and need to unlearn a lot of bad habits along the way.

At least--At the VERY least, buy a boy or two of the light, "Cowboy Action" .45 Colt loads--or, better still, some .45 S&W ammo-- The "Scofield" load. Short cases, to easily tell the difference. Recoil, etc, approximating .45 ACP. Use these. Then move to NORMAL .45 Colt loads--a 250 or 255 at around 800 fps. this is plenty for most people. Then, if you wish, move along to the heavy loads.

In answer to your question: No, sorry, I haven't shot a .454 SRH. I HAVE shot a couple of full-size, full-weight Freedom Arms Casulls, and they wee far from pleasant.

The .454 Casull revolvers and full loads are purely and simply hunting loads, or for self defense in big bear country. I can't imagine any whitetail deer noticing the difference in a .45 Colt hunting load and a .454 Casull--Energy of the latter is wasted on the far side landscape. Moose, elk, etc, sure--go with the big stuff if you want. Mule deer fall somewhere in between.

I'd rather use a .45 Colt, 270 SWC at about 875, that I can easily control, for most of my hunting needs, than a big ole cannon I can shoot well for one, maybe two shots. Maybe I'm just a namby-pamby, huh? :p I know I'd feel different if I was out and about on Kodiac Island and couldn't keep a rifle at hand.

Best,
Johnny
 
I dont own any but have shot the original Casull...wood grips etc
a 45 LC Bisley Vaq. same style, Raging bull with damn near every ammo made and a "Maxine" BFR 45-70 govt........
The original Casull and Bisley with Colt loads were very tolerable, even nice to shoot.......OVER KILL would be "maxine"...with some stout 425 gr reloads...:D
Shoot well
 
Mr. Guest said a lot that makes sense.

Goin for the gusto first time out has converted more than a few to knitting, stamp collecting etc. That is why one can often find nice heavy thumpers for sale with less than a box of ammo through em.

Sam
 
I have been shooting handguns for something over 30 years. That includes a bunch of 44 Magnums (Ruger's and S&W) and some serious loads in various 45 Colts.
The only handgun that has ever caused physical injury to my hand was a Super Redhawk that belonged to one of my students. After CCW class he wanted to try his new gun and I said sure. He fired 4 of the 6 rounds and offered to let me shoot the last two. Since I had never fired a 454 I said OK. I fired the first shot single action and the second double action. I brused the web of my shooting hand so bad I couldn't shoot anything without pain for three days.
If I need more power than a full load 44 Magnum, I will carry a rifle. No more 454s for me, thank you.
 
SRH

I agree w/ Dave T, but if you insist on .454 I would say go super redhawk. I have The SRH w/ 7.5"bbl in .44 and it has much less recoil than the regular redhawk or the s&w 629. The difference is that the grip on the SRH is a narrow post that goes through the middle of the grip so your hand, esp the web, is completely seperated from the metal frame by rubber. The redhawk and others have a std grip frame that contacts your hand at the front and rear. Also the SRH has more weight foward to control muzzle flip. I find the hotter .44 loads to be plenty.
 
Isn't it interesting that the first poster reported easier shooting with the Bisley, with the same load, despite that gun being about 10oz *lighter* than the SRH he used for comparison?

That's why there's still a market for SA wheelguns. They were originally made to allow recoil control in one-handed shooting. You can use two hands of course, and you should, but the design really shines through in managing big recoil.

Incidently, what Ruger calls a "Bisley" grip is really more of a variation on the SAA grip that Elmer Keith came up with in the, what, 1920's or 1930's, I don't recall the exact date. Point is, it's not REALLY an "old west design" but damn, it sure works :).

I still prefer the standard Ruger SA grip myself, for it's "fast handling characteristics". But the Keith/Bisley type is a bit better for recoil control.
 
I think one of the worst guns for recoil that has come out lately are the little S&W Scandium J Frames in 357. A lot of people buy those for concealed carry and don't shoot them much, but the few cops I've known to buy them sell them soon afterward. It's a real female dog to shoot a 60 round qual with those, since we don't allow "piff" loads for qualification.

I've shot 4" 629s, Contenders in horrendous calibers, Casulls, etc. Nothing hurt as bad as the few times I shot one of those 12 ounce Scandiums
:eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top