Need a little help here gentleman. I'll be hunting Alaska for the first time this year and was wondering on which of these would be better for carring while hunting there in terms of barrel lenght.
4" S&W 500 or the 6.5 " S&W 500? Could carry my 10mm with some Doubletap Gas Checks....but would rather have the 500. Thanks.

Are you planning on hunting with a rifle and then planning on also carrying one of those very heavy revolvers? I'm sure the AK guys will check in here but having hunted western AK and walking over that real estate in hip waders I can tell you neither of the first choices would get a thought.

If you are determined to have a handgun for ambling around camp I'd take your last choice but it's almost as easy to always have your rifle which is a much better weapon anyway.

Of course I presumed a lot as you gave few details as to the "what, the where, and the how." For example, if fishing a lot with bears as close company along brush shrouded streams would be very different than hunting caribou in higher and much more open country.

Of course I'll be hunting with a 300 win mag for caribou and moose! We will be hunting west of Chicken sir.

10MM has proven itself. The small-medium grizz around Chicken won't be a problem... besides, if you're hunting RC860, you'll have A LOT of company, and I doubt too many bears will hang around.

I'd never carry a 500SW when hunting. To big, too expensive.

I carry either my Glock 20 10mm or my Redhawk 4" in 45 Colt and do not feel undergunned.

Ok awesome, thanks LoadClear.....will load or buy some gas checks for my G20!

If you feel like spending some money, get a KKM 6" barrel for that G20 and a heavier recoil spring (the lbs needed for heavy loads escapes me).

The factory G20 spring is a little light for full house loads, and the 6" KKM barrel gives a little better velocity and is traditionally rifled.

Neither of these are really required though/

I've never had a desire to pack a 500 S&W, simply too heavy for a packing gun. If you want a good powerful packing revolver, get a Ruger Toklat

I wear my S&W Mdl 29 .44 in a chest holster when I'm riding the wheeler in to where I'm hunting. If I'm cutting up a critter in the dark I'll strap it on as well. Otherwise it's just a sleeping companion any more. My .300 packs plenty of punch and is enough for me to carry around when I'm hunting. The longer I live here the more respect for brown fuzzies I have, but less fear and concern also. As far as which handcannon to carry, whichever one you shoot well and want to drag around. That .500 seems like it would be unpleasant. I'd rather carry extra water and/or my 22/45 lite to put some birds in the frying pan if the big game wasn't cooperating that day.

Wow! I think you could drop that thing on a bear and do quite a bit of damage!! What a beast!

Can you shoot the 500, full bore ammo, 6 shots, or is it 5? A full cylinder, rapidly and hit a paper plate every time say around 15-20 steps or so?

Didn't think so.

The glock will work fine IMHO. Plus if you miss a few times you still have more left..

Plus as noted, where you are going to hunt, I doubt you'll see a bear anyway, its possible, but with the pressure highly unlikely.

We have pressure where we moose hunt. Have yet to see a bear. See tracks all the time. Catch them on the game cams at nigth along with wolves, but not during the day.

Ruger redhawkish... hell no, if we are carrying, I sold the super redhawk, it was like a small rifle on your hip, ended up staying in the sleeping bag way to often... even bowhunting... 329PD for a 44... and now the Glock 20 isn't as light, but its a tradeoff...

I had to DLP one Grizzly in my life. It was 28 years ago when I was only 19 years old. It took 4 325 grain hardened garrett lead bullets from a 44 Mag Super Blackhawk to keep it down. It was an injured 4 year old brown bear that was going after a elderly lady we had with us King salmon fishing.

Bears in deep brush bent on destruction can be hard to kill.

I have a 9 mm Glock but I don't take it with me for bear protection.

45 Colt is all you need.

i have a s&w 500, got it several yrs ago. have never shot it.

Bought mine on a lark, shortly after they were introduced, about 13 years ago? It's been a range toy only, so big and heavy...

But fun to shoot! And surprisingly accurate. I put a few rounds through it every year, only haul it out now and again. Thought about it for bear, but it's awfully big & heavy.

Five, 440 grain bullets is kinda cool though.

Guy

Yeah, but it weighs a good pound less than an X-frame. They look bulkier than they really are. There are better, more manageable choices than the .500 S&W Magnum.

The 500 Smith would be too big and unwieldy for me, I practice shooting weak side and one handed in the event my strong side or, one hand/arm was injured.

A good S&W 629 DA revolver with a 4 or 5 inch barrel firing 240 gr XTP's at an easily controlled 1200 fps or so would be my choice.

Yes I have a BarSto barrel and heavier spring already, being Ive been loading for it!!!

Sounds like me. I goty mine when they first came out, just because. It's fun to shoot (sort of, for a couple of cylinders full) amazingly accurate at long range. As far as hunting, you may as well be carrying a small rifle. As far as bear protection (a topic in which I am a keyboard expert only) I would prefer my 627 Smith with 8 manageable 180 grain penetrators on board and go for the CNS hit.)

'
I would not personally pick XTP over a hard cast due to penetration issues. Just me personally.

Like XTPs on deer though. Very much.

If I had nothing else to choose from, I'd take the Glock. The 500 S&W is way too big and heavy to lug around, not to mention I'd not be dedicated enough to master shooting such a handgun. My pet handgun, and I rarely carry one anymore, is a 4-1/4" S&W 5-shot L-frame .44 Mag. Or if I want even more compact, a 2-1/2" M66 .357.

Jeff

I have absolutely no experience with big bears but have used the 240 gr XTP's over 150 grs of P pyrodex back in the day in an old Knight MK-85 muzzle loader, must have been pushing that bullet to over 2K.

It knocked some really nice big and deep odd shot angle holes in a lot of deer and pigs, only remember recovering one or two at most, figured at a more sedate 1200 from a revolver would allow it to retain more of it's integrity, enough I'd hope, to at least turn or kill a bear.

A heavy WFNGC cast bullet would surely penetrate more, just hoping it would impart enough trauma/pain to convince the bear to go elsewhere and let go of my face.

On something like a bear, I"ll take penetration every time.

I don't think you can shock a bear best I can tell. For the most part I"d expect it to be like shooting a druggie thats high... CNS or go home or you have to wait till they bleed out and thats not alwyas good..

Re the glock, watching Carolyn punch numerous holes in a chrome bumper the 10mm impresses me. That with hard plated 180s only... it destroyed a few other things in an old truck that was shot to hell already in AK a few years ago. Sure my 329PD would do the same, but the extra rounds and controllability were nice

I have the Smith 500 and I personally don't think the recoil is all that bad, but it is heavy and when hunting I usually carry my Freedom Arms 454 or Smith 629 because they are so much easier to pack. If you can handle the weight and the recoil then by all means use the 500 the 5 inch would be the one to buy. Your choice of holster will make all the difference in carrying this heavy pistol for any extended period of time.

You will only get one shot. Better make it count.

Don't let Whitworth's prejudice against the 500 sway you. You've already got the 4" 500 and it's really not much heavier than his Toklat suggestion. You're going to notice carrying either one. The difference is negligible with a good holster. And that extra 12 oz will let you send a heavier wider bullet as fast or faster with similar recoil.

With that said, your best bear gun is the rifle your partner has, and his is your's.

If one is handgun hunting, I'd take the one I was most accurate with.

Due to recoil or time constraints... yes i know both are somewhat the same.


Would be interesting to know the thinking, if its time, then 16 rounds of 10mm are worthless, and you would be better with the biggest round you can get....

Didn't Phil get 6 rounds off at some insane close distance like under 10 steps?

Several years ago at SHOT I watched Phil shooting the running boar target at the Blaser booth...

Would not want to be a thing if he was shooting at it!

My prejudice? Really? I would suggest that if a revolver is to play the role of backup, it doesn't need to weigh 4 1/2-lbs. If that is "prejudice" than so be it.

Whitworth, what do you consider using false information to discount a fine option?

The OP's 4" 500 weighs 56 oz, or 3.5 lbs. Your suggested revolver that he go out and spend ~$1,000 getting set up instead weighs 47 oz, or just under 3 lbs. That makes his revolver much more similar to your suggestion than what you assume it to be (4.5 lbs).

I wouldn't consider saving 9 oz to be a game changing difference compared to saving the money. Then there's the fact that the 9 oz heavier revolver opens the door to better performance.

But, if we go along with the "it's just a backup gun" and worthwhile to shop for a new revolver to save weight idea, we'd see lot's of steel 44 mag options in 37-40 oz range, and then the titanium and/or scandium 44's in the mid 20's oz range. Or, like others have noted, there's a good argument for his Glock 20.

It's all up to the OP to reason his best decision. Our best contribution is to give accurate facts for him to use.

As the AK guys said while hunting your rifle is best. I packed a pistol some but when slogging through muskeg it would slow me down and make my hips hurt. Good for the tent or late night latrine visits but otherwise just a boat anchor. If you do bring it definitely a shoulder holster is the way to go.

A shotgun with slugs and 00 buck is better in the tent or at night. Also much better for Ptarmigan and Snowshoes.

Make sure you don't have a layover in Canada as the pistol will be a pain to clear.

The question was what do people think of the 500, and most responded too big and heavy as a backup gun. If you have one and like it, great. Many of us have concluded, it's too much of a good thing. I've personally concluded if a revolver needs to be that heavy and requires a muzzle brake to be shootable, I'm not interested. I've shot and carried most configurations of 44, 45, 475, 480 and 500's in SA and DA. I've concluded a 4-5" DA in a 44, 45, 454 or 480 has the best balance of packability, shootability and power. There are certainly lighter guns, easier guns to shoot, and more powerful guns. But they all make compromises to gain in one area and give up in one or two others.

You're right in that I am not a fan of the .500 Smith & Wesson Magnum. I have used them in the field on game and all that recoil, muzzle blast, heavy weight doesn't buy you anything over other .50 cals from a terminal standpoint, negating any "advantage" claimed or otherwise. I have trouble believing the accuracy of some of the weights posted on Smith & Wesson's website, given the overall girth of the .500. My 6 1/2-inch Model 29 weighs 51.2 ounces empty. I have real trouble believing the 4-inch X-frame is only 4 ounces heavier. Seriously. Considering the cylinder of the X-frame is 1.920-inches in diameter, length is 2.3-inches. The frame from the top strap to the midsection of the action bar ahead of the trigger guard is a whopping 2.85-inches, the same measurement the Ruger .454 SRH Toklat is 1.8-inch diameter, cylinder length is 1.750-inches and the same measurement of the frame is 2.650. The Toklat weighs 47 ounces -- 2.93 lbs versus the what 56 for an empty revolver? My .460 XVR weighed 76 ounces empty so I have some trouble believing the posted weights on Smith & Wesson's site. I assume since you are carrying it for bear defense you will probably load heavy hardcast loads and what will that add to it's rather impressive weight. All that girth makes for an unwieldy revolver and rather clumsy. I had a 6 1/2-inch that I let go of a few years ago and have never looked back.

Not to mention the horrendous muzzle blast of a 62,000 PSI round. I know, you will argue that you can load it down which then begs the question, why bother with a .500 Smith if not loading to potential. One could make a similar argument against the .454 Casull, I suppose. A 4-inch Redhawk in .45 Colt would be the cat's meow for the task at hand and they weigh only 46 ounces. There are some really good boutique loads in .45 Colt that I know work well on really big animals, like Garrett's 405 grain RHO (Redhawk Only) load.

Like .458 Lott said, the OP asked us our opinions on the .500 Smith collectively and many have taken a similar position to mine. If that is the only revolver the OP has access to, then by all means he should use it if he can shoot it well. I have had the benefit of using a whole slew of different revolvers and calibers on living and breathing targets, and have drawn my conclusions based on my experiences. Some, I suspect, have decided they like something and no amount of contrary information is going to sway them. So be it.

I'm not suggesting he goes out and buys anything, I'm only suggesting he consider other options as short X-frames are less than optimal in my experience. And having actually shed blood with the .500 Smith, that extra velocity potential isn't buying you much of anything terminally, but it does kick harder.

I disagree on the shotgun in the tent. Unless you have an awful big tent... The handguns lay at our head area at night... shotgun would be a 2 handed struggle while getting out of a sleeping bag... nope.

I'm not against em other wise, though if I"m carrying that much weight, its going to be a centerfire rifle with some extra umph behind it and a GOOD bullet...

The X S&W is too big and bulky for me. Phil stopped a charge with a compact 9mm with the right bullets. No need for such a bulky package.

BINGO!


.

I just brought out my digital cooking scale and weighed a few known weights and the scale looks to be pretty accurate. Then I weighed my John Ross edition 5" 500 in at 57.5 oz. If anything, the 4" is no more than that.

I agree, full pressure 500 loads have questionable advantage over other 50 calibers, and you're right I can make a good argument for loading it down a bit. I personally load my 500 to be to the 475 Linebaugh like what the ruger-only 45 Colt loads is to the 44 Mag. A fatter heavier bullet going still around 1,000 fps with relatively low pressure. The added weight of the platform simply reduces felt recoil. Whether the total weight of the system is prohibitive, is up to the user.

By the way, if I were in the OP's position, I'd base my decision for the backup on his partner situation and the camping, and hunting style. His 500 only represents one end of the spectrum of prudent decisions.

"I disagree on the shotgun in the tent."

We had the really stubby Mossberg Riot guns or alley clearer as we called it. Came real close to using it while still in the bag with a bear 30 feet from me at night. We were camping cold no tent and the only bare ground was a bear trail. Fortunately one of the dogs ran the bear off before I had to shoot. One with a light mounted on it would have been the ticket in that situation. A friend had his 44 drawn and pointed at the bear but he was shaking like Barney Fife I told him don't shoot we may need every bullet we have. If he had gut shot the bear there probably would have been two or three dead fishing guides.

Where did the OP say he already had a 4" 500?

Based on his question, I thought he was asking whether or not to buy a 4" or a 6"?

You said tent or night. I didn't argue the night part, just the tent... Gut shot bears kill multiple fishing guides?

Heads are more important than guns generally speaking. Thats what gets you out without shooting most times.

I think that while I haven't used it, there is a difference between a 44 Mag with full house loads and a 500SW. Nobody has done terminal ballistics study of 700 Grain Underwood factory 500 SW ammo. My view is why the hell not!

Muzzle Energy: 2238 ft. lbs. for 700 Grain Underwood.

Energy: 833 ft/lbs from 7.5” barrel= 44 Mag Garrett hammerhead 325 grain bear loads.

500 SW in chest holster while packing meat is good insurance.

The real question is can you stand ur ground during a charge , retreive ur weapon and put a round where it needs to be, placement being the most critical

I've tested 700 grain handloads (using Ranger Rick's 700 grain bullet and it looks like Underwood is using one of their molds) and they were an abject failure. Too much of a good thing. In wet pack they wouldn't track straight.

I could care less how much muzzle energy a handgun round has. All I want to know is, (A) can I shoot it accurately, and (B) if properly placed, will it penetrate straight and deep enough to stop the critter? Odds are, if a handgun round is so powerful that it can shock a bear to death(whatever that means), there's no way that I could stand practicing with it often enough to make reliable hits with it. JMO/YMMV. For folks that can shoot the hand cannons quickly and accurately, go for it, you have my respect!

Jeff

mines still new in the plastic case it came in.

I wonder how they work in animal tissue? This is interesting. The owner of http://www.ballisticsupply.net/Default.aspx?tabid=252105
said the same thing about his product.

http://www.wideopenspaces.com/alaska-man-kills-charging-brown-bear-with-a-9mm-pistol/

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=388

Mr. Phil done good. Had it been me I'd of sure been firing away but the ground around me might of got too slick to keep standing. Can't help but wonder if he had time to think "Sure glad I didn't bring a bigger gun". grins

My revolver stays buttoned up in the sleeping bag with me. Now if I have to shoot through the bag, all that H-110 is going to burn a rather large hole in it.