Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Seeking feedback and help on a bigbore handgun for hunting/backup...

You should take a look at my post on new 357 mag ammo. This ammo lets a 357 mag approach the power of a 41 or 44 mag. You have a lot a experience with 357 mags, you might be more effective with one of them than a new gun. Worth a try anyway.

Conrad

marlinlover,
I use a standard Uncle Mikes sidekick (nylon) in size 8 and wear it on my belt on the left side. Steve

Have you tried one and found it so? Or are you speaking merely from preconceived ideas about such a long barrel?

I have tried several, at some length, and have not found them as awkward as you and I first assumed that they'd be. Granted, they don't pack like 2-inch snubbies, but once you pack 'em right, they're surprisingly handy.

I understand the preconceived bias completely. When I first learned of the Tauruses with 12-inch barrels, I hooted and jeered aloud. My bias was then at least 50 years old and as strong and definite as you'd expect of an old coot in his 70s. But the fellow who told me about 'em let me borrow and use one on several months' loan. My very first actual handling flushed all my old bias away -- completely. I returned the borrowed 12-inch .22 and immediately ordered a new one (.22 Long Rifle) -- and later added a .357 Magnum and a .44 Magnum with 12-inch barrels. I love 'em.

The only problem that I've noticed is that they do threaten to become addictive! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Ken...

What do you think about that Smith & Wesson .500 cannon?

Inquiring minds wana know........... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

ml - I've been rethinking the subject after following the responses you've gotten. BTW great conversation starter, good job.

I agree with Ken - the single-shot makes no sense as a backup as good as they are for the hunting gun.

The only other observation I would make is that the barrel must be relatively short (6" or less). I used to hunt with a Super Blackhawk 7.5" .44. The longer barrel did retard drawing speed.

I recommended a Blackhawk initially. Here's where I've changed my mind. A double-action revolver would be best. And size would be a consideration. Maybe a S&W would be a good choice for size considerations.

I still like the .45 Colt properly loaded for backup.

Great thread.

Had a similar question/issue, and after reviewing responses here I am opting for a S&W 686 357. The only decision left is whether to go with the 4 or 6 inch barrel. Pros and cons associated with each.

Decisions, decisions....

Greg0320,
You will have another decision to make if you ever have to use that .357 mag in a dangerous animal situation--what to do with that LAST round. Then again, maybe the decision will have been made for you by then. Steve

Ken,
That's the first thing I thought upon seeing the taurus for the first time; and, that bias is the reason I carry a 6-inch .454. Prior to the casull, I carried a super blackhawk, which has an overall length 2 inches longer than the casull (I consider overall length to be more important to handling ability than simple barrel length). I'll admit the blackhawk, with its larger, after-market rubber grips handled as easily as the shorter casull. However, the redhawk, which is only one more inch longer (3 inches longer than the casull) feels awkward to me, both while carrying it and in rapid deployment manuveurs.
You talk about 12-inch barrel tauruses--it is definately a different gun, but my 10-inch barrel BFR in .45-70 is a full 6 inches longer (oal) than the casull, and is about as hard to carry and deploy as would be a 20-pound ham.
I've practiced some with the Raging Bull and while it is somewhat more difficult to carry and to deploy, it is a bit more pleasant to shoot. (I do understand that 'pleasant' is not a word used to describe shooting the .454 casull.)
Recently I had a chance to shoot the S&W 500--10 times--in my view, it is no more punishing to shoot than the 6-inch casull. I could get used to it! I haven't handled it enough to get a feel of my ability to deploy it. Steve

Steve

I am assuming that you are referring to the potency of the 357 which is a whole 'nother story.

In my situation, wild boar hunting or deer/antelope out west requires a gun capable of shot shells for rattlesnakes, and 38/357's for varmints or larger game, as well as possibly putting down a wounded boar.

The 357, given that it accommodates 38's, will also double for a defense pistol for my wife whenever I may be away on business (she has a Kimber 38 Super in case I have the 357).

Bottom line, more power, whatever the situation, does not equal the most potent weapon. Shot placement, with a weapon you are capable of shotting dead on, is always more important.

Greg

Well after a long search, high and low... on what handgun to buy, I finally made a decision today and bought one... an Uzi full auto!!!



Just funnin'......... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />



But I did break down and buy a Taurus today.



I bought a 454 Casull 8 3/8" barrel Raging Bull...<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />



They had a SRH 454 long barrel 7.5" and it was pretty nice, but it didn't quite feel right to me. The trigger was pretty decent, maybe a little to easy, as dry firing it almost felt like I didn't know when it was gonna release, or released to soon.



But the Taurus felt like a form fitting glove, smooth as silk in the action, and the trigger was superb. Not to easy, and I could feel right when it was going off, then crisp as a fresh graham cracker.



I wanted the 6.5" barrel, but when I held the 8" it really had a nice balance. With the huff and puff of the 454Casull, I figured having that extra 1.7/8" of extra barrel would make it easiyer to master.



It would be different if it felt barrel heavy but it doesn't, not one bit to me. This made the 6.5 feel a little barrel light, and the 8 just felt better.



Another item was rasing the gun to firing position. The Bull just seemed to come right up on site for me. The Ruger SRH was not as easy for me to pull up and line up on site. Because the rear site seemed higher, then looking to the front site was not as a straight line as with the Bull.



Viewing down the Bull's sites and barrel is an easy straight shot, and I could line up the sites much faster. Just pointing the Bull seemed easy. I think I could learn point of aim well with this Handgun.



I'm sure I could quickly get used to the Ruger, but the grip, balance, and overall feel was better for me with the Raging Bull.



I'm going to design a semi tacticle lower hip holster for this baby. As a kid I was heavy into leather work, and I still have alot of my tools.



Yes it's long, but it just doesn't feel that long, and with the right, positioned holster, and lots of practice, I know I will be able to draw this baby as quik as a 6.5". With the fine balance and longer barrel... once I get it drawn even point shooting this handgun will defintately be learnable.



I've read reviews and post on forums that the SRH that size in 454 kicks damn hard, and some shooters replace the grips right away. The grips did not feel comfortable in my hand. It may have been a good shooter also, but not all of them are. Everyone that has a Bull posted, and the magazine reviews written report they are very very accurate.



So that's my decision for a backup/hunting bigbore.



Come on and let me have it, with the yay's and nay's on my decision,



I'm a big boy, I can take it..............<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Written in a SHOOTING TIMES Handgun Review article:

The key to what I call the "shootability" of today's heaviest power handguns is their application of recoil management technology, primarily in the area of grip configuration and muzzle brake/compensator applications. For example, I do not consider guns like the original-design Smith & Wesson Model 29 .44 Magnum four inch, with its light-profile barrel (by today's standards) and hard-checkered wooden grips, or the relatively lightweight Ruger Super Redhawk .454 Casull with its unported barrel and noncushioned wood-insert grips to be particularly "shootable." Both are very good, very functional tools, but after about three rounds fired in succession, you want to put them down. On the other hand, you can shoot guns like the Taurus Raging Bull .454 Casull with its rubber shock-absorber grip insert and heavy-profile full-lug barrel with integral muzzle brake or a Magnum Research BFR .475 Linebaugh single-action revolver with Pachmayr grips and a good aftermarket muzzle brake all day.

I have to admit that I have not shot a pistol with a 12" barrel except for a contender pistol. I have fondled a 9" super redhawk and it is too long for convient carry. 12" has to be worse.

How do you carry your pistol when holding a rifle ?

Conrad

Taurus has paid a lot more attention to recoil than Ruger. The Raging Bull is ported and is so heavy that it feels like they have attached a boat anchor to it.

Conrad

I'd go real light on the powder when I used those .45-70 mold bullets in that .454. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Boat anchor?... which RB barrel are you refering to the 8 3/8" or the 12"? If there was an anchor on the 8, I didn't feel it. I could hardly tell the difference in weight compared to the SRH 7.5".

I'm still wavering somewhat this morning, and was thinking of maybe changing my mind. It would be because of the lighter weight Ruger, with the 7/8" shorter barrel.

But if the Ruger was not as comfortable to shoot, what would be the point?

Shoot some serious reply's at me... MAKE MY DAY..... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I have a 6 1/2 raging bull 454 I think it is a little heavy.

It shoots awesome the recoil is very managable. The heaviest loads I have shot are the 360 cor-bon penetrators.

It is a little heavy to me for all day carry.

I plan on carrying it in a cross draw holster while bowhunting.

I would like to get a taurus 460 stainless in 45 colt to carry while rifle hunting or fishing. Cor-bons 300 grain at 1300 would be a good pick.

Dude, I own a Colt Anaconda, Ruger 45 long colt in a redhawk, and a Taurus Raging Bull in 454 Csaull. The taurus is were it is at. The magnum rounds for that gun hits like my Kinght 50 cal muuzzel loader with max powder and is almost as accurate. It will drop anything in north america with one well placed shot at 100 plus yards.
My friends hot load their 45 long colts and they still can't touch the casull. Plus it will shoot their ammo.
As far as choosing a make go with the taurus. It looks better than the ruger. kicks less because of porting, and is as or more accurate than those stupid looking super redhawks, plus the redhawks feel like [bleep] in your hand and tha taurus feels great.
I cannot say anything bad about the anaconda other than the fact that it is a 44. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

ar15a3...

What barrel length is your 454casull Bull?

6"1/2

grego320,
You're right--the .357mag will work just fine on rattle snakes, expecially with shot loads. Steve