I won't bore y'all with my circuitous history with Ruger Super Blackhawk and Bisley revolvers. Point is I should have bought one of the stainless, Bisley, 5-1/2, .44 Magnums. But I didn't, and now they seem rare and expensive.

However, similar revolvers (i.e. stainless, Bisley, 5-1/2) are still available and reasonably priced in .41 Mag., .45 LC and .45 LC/.45 ACP conversion. There is also the smaller framed flat top .44 Special.

I am not interested in hunting with a handgun "on purpose", but could see using one on game as "targets of opportunity." The largest game would be whitetails or feral hogs. I’d be happy with a 250 gr. .44 at 1000 fps or a bit more. I’d be happy with similar sectional density and velocity in .41 or .45.

My vision is now such that I cannot aim like I used to. I may be forced into optics someday, but I won’t go larger than a Burris FastFire or similar.

The gun that interests me the most is the flat top .44 Special. Nice and light at 41 oz. But it doesn’t seem easy to mount a RMR without drilling & tapping.

The .41 Mag. is of interest because I already load for that round in a S&W M58. If the specs are correct, it is heavy at 50.4 oz. Must be the smaller hole?

Questions:
- Are the smaller framed flat tops noticeably smaller and easier to handle than the larger framed guns?

- Does anyone know of a small RMR mount, similar to the Evolution Gun Works for the flat tops?
http://www.egwguns.com/pistol-and-red-dot-mounts/trijicon-rmr-sight-mount-for-ruger-revolver/

Thanks in advance for any responses or comments.

Gun Doc

I am not as familiar with various Ruger models as some others on this forum. And hopefully someone will correct me if I am wrong.

I do not think the bisley grip frame was ever produced in a lightweight alloy. Thus any bisley model will be considerably heavier than a counterpart with alloy grip frame.

For example my 5.5 inch 22lr bisley single six weighs 42 oz.

ETA, Buds currently shows model number 0471 as available. 5.5 inch satin stainless bisley blackhawk in 41 mag. 50.4 oz

I have these two 5.5" Bisley's, the 45 and 41 are real thumpers and extremely accurate loaded with my heavy cast bullets. Been around Rugers a long time however never heard of a stock Bisley with aluminum frame.

My one and only dislike is the Bisley grip contour that isn't kind if you have Sasquatch hands and fingers negating a change of hold vs the more comfortable conventional plow handle contour..

The weight of each 50.4 and 46.8 ounces is a necessity IMO especially since I primarily load the heavy end of the spectrum.

.

This hold is a knuckle buster so I slide the pinky finger down a notch.

Thanks for the replies so far. I have never heard of an alloy Bisley grip frame. The flat top .44 Special I mentioned is a bit lighter due to the ".357" sized frame.

I have one in .45 Colt. Shoot hardcast Keith 285 grain SWCs at about 1100 fps. It's a handful but a blast to shoot.

Ron

The smaller framed 44 Flattop Bisley is going to be a lot smaller than the New Model Std. Blackhawk, but is easily capable of Elmer loads, should the need arise (and those "needs" are few and far between).

You are correct, there are no aluminum grip framed Bisleys.

The 41 Mag Bisley is based on the larger 44/45 frame and will be larger than the Flattop 44 Special, just so you know.
I really admire the 41 Mag, but handguns rely on frontal area over velocity, noise racket and recoil, so I would rate the 44 Flattop Bisley "mouse gun" a bit higher than the larger 41 gun.

Ruger has the throats on the 44 Bisley in the .430-.431 area. I'm certain the 41 would be its usual tight dimensions for that cartridge.

Can't help you with scoping, but the 44 Flattop Bisley I know is conducive to bad eyes with its short barrel and standard irons.

I have all these except the .44 Mag. I don't notice much difference in weight. I'm kind of excited to spend more time with the .41. The .44 Special is nice, too.

Thanks all for the replies so far.

After thinking about it some more, I'm down to the flat top .44 Special or the .45 LC/.45 ACP conversion.
A nice trim RMR mount for the flat top would tip my decision that way. But so far I haven't found one.

Another thing I cannot find are good pictures of the 44/45 frame and smaller flat top frame Bisley revolvers arranged to clearly show the size difference between the two. A great picture would be from directly above with the revolvers butt to butt and the bores aligned by placing the barrel center lines over the edge of a single yard stick. One would see the left side of one revolver and the right side of the other, but that is no matter. It would really show the difference in size. If anyone could take such a picture I'm sure many people would greatly appreciate it. I know I would!

I’ve been thinking about using the raptor engineering mount to try a fast fire or similar on my 5.5 .45 colt Bisley.
https://www.raptor-eng.com/

On a sort of related note, I’ve been having tons of fun with a recently acquired 6.5” Bisley single six. Perfect understudy to the big gun and quite accurate.

^^^^^^^
Thanks for the reply. So it looks like there is a trim RMR mount for the flat top from Raptor. It would be nice if they would anodize it, but that is a small complaint.

If someone would oblige, I would still love pictures comparing the size of the two center fire Bisley frames. I cannot believe I haven't found any yet.

You may want to consider buying a BB gun to practice with because of the horrendous recoil of the howitzer you are considering. Dropping down to a BB pistol will help you handle the recoil.

I have several Bisleys. In 22LR to 500 LB. My favorite is the Flattop 44 Special. At 45 ounces (according to Lipsey's specs), it's not a lot smaller than the larger framed model but it is some smaller. Not enough that it makes any difference in a holster. I use my Barranti holsters interchangeably between the 44 special and my 45 and 500, both of which have the 5.5 inch barrels.

I doubt you'll notice a big difference between the 44 Special at 45 ounces and the 41 Mag at 50 or the 45 Colt at 46 ounces, even though the 41 and 45 are on larger frames. All will meet your needs based on what you described.

I'm at work on the north slope for a couple more weeks or I would shoot some pics of the guns side by side. I do have this picture but it doesn't illustrate the frame size difference. This was taken before I had rounded out the accumulation. Missing are the 22, 32 H&R, Lipsey CCH 5.5" 45 Colt and 500 LB that all joined the group since this picture. Time for a new family photo. They are from left to right, 357 Magnum, 357 Maximum, 41 Magnum, 44 Special, 44 Magnum, 45 Colt and 480 Ruger. The favorites are the 44 Special and the 480.

2'nd from the left, 357 maximum. Absolutely beautiful grips.

Amen brother I'd take it also.

I handle recoil fine. It's sarcasm I have trouble with. But thanks so much for the well meant suggestion.

Thanks for the detailed reply. I have seen the .44 flat top listed at 41 oz., but I'd trust Lipsey's specs. Opinions seem to vary about the difference in frame size. Some say it is significant, and some, like you, don't think it is much at all.

Thank you sir. I picked it up from a member on the Single Action forum. It's a good shooter. Here's a couple of pictures of the grips.

Beautiful Grips!
A 5.5” Ruger Bisley in 45 Colt is one of my favorite Single Action revolvers.

I'm not a big fan of the Bisley grip. Each person is different so I can only speak for how it works out for me, but for ME ... there's no point in the Bisley grip until you've exceeded .44 magnum recoil by quite a bit .. in other words, the only place it is of any value to me is for shooting .454 and probably .480. I say probably because I have a Ruger Bisley .454 but not a .480. The negatives, for me, at .44 / .45 colt level outweigh the positives by a good margin. The Bisley grip doesn't work well for me drawing from a holster. It is ok once the sights are lined up, but 'til that has happened, all factors favor the old XR3 and XR3-RED designs. (I'm not a huge fan of the square-back dragoon grip on some Super Blackhawks either.)

I wouldn't mind having a Ruger .44 special but it would be the std flat-top, not the Bisley. I'll just stick with my 4-5/8" barreled Super Blackhawk since the weights are less than an ounce apart.

But like I said, we're all different and YMMV.

Tom

I have a Bisley 5.5" in 44 Special, 45 Colt and 500LB. To me it's the best combination of barrel length, packability and shootability of all the single actions. That's just my opinion. I wish Ruger had offered the 5.5 inch Bisleys when I was collecting all mine. I've thought many times of sending the 357, 41, 44 and 480 off to be trimmed but haven't done it yet. I haven't used my Lipsey's CCH 45 Colt 5.5" much yet but the little I have, it has shown great promise. I did have the throats opened up to .4525. Seems every Ruger 45 Colt I've encountered has undersized throats.

I have a first run 5 1/2" Bisley in 45 Colt, a custom 5 shot hard chromed one in 45 Colt and had a Bowen 500 Linebaugh Nimrod that I sold a couple of years ago. This 44 Mag is my hands down favorite though.

That's a keeper.

Is that .44 of your's wearing a Clement's front sight Ed?

I think this is what you're looking for, though I doubt it tells you much.





Left is mid size 44 Spec, right is Large frame 45 Colt, both 5.5".

Their weights on a very accurate scale: 44 - 2.82 lbs (45.12 oz)
45 - 2.89 lbs (46.24 oz)
A little over an ounce difference.

Lipsey's has a sweet 3.75" barrel Bisley .44 that needs to join my 44 platoon.


https://ruger.com/products/newModelSuperBlackhawkBisley/models.html

Savuti,

Thank you very much for going to the trouble!

I'm not sure what you mean by "though I doubt it tells you much." It seems to me is tells me about all such a picture could. (Short of being on some sort of grid where one could try to measure to the gnat's azz. And even there you have the issues of perspective to deal with.)

I don't see much difference in size. Are you telling me there are things you sense when handling them that are hard to see?

As for the weights, thank you for that too. The .45 has bigger holes in cylinder and barrel, but an un-fluted cylinder. Steel weighs about 4.5 oz. per cubic inch. So the difference in weight works out to a volume difference of about 0.25 cubic inches. This is a piece of steel 1 x 1 x 0.25, but spread out all over the gun.

On another forum, I found the following dimensions for Ruger cylinders:
New Model Blackhawk .45 Colt, 1.731 diameter, 1.705 long.
New Model Flat Top .44 Special, 1.675 diameter, 1.610 long.
That is 0.056 difference in diameter (0.028 radius) and 0.095 in length.
It also seems to me there is a bit more “extra space” in the .45 window because the forcing cone projects into the window a bit more on the .45.

I don’t know if I am right, but my educated guess is there is not much difference in height between the two guns, but the larger frame is about 0.25 longer in the “cylinder window.” Is this your perception as well?

I wonder if both frames use the same grip panels? I don’t remember seeing “Blackhawk” and “Flat top” Bisley grips being offered.

Again, thank you, and do you perceive much difference when you handle them?

Yes, the large frame is about that much longer in the "window"..

There is only one size of Bisley grip frame, whether on a Single Six or a Flattop or a 480 Super BH.

Picking them up with eyes closed I can't tell which is which.

Savuti,

Thank you again. You have helped a lot. And your last sentence really puts it in perspective.

One of my Bisley SBH .480 Ruger frames is 1/16" longer than the other.

Just happened to see the scale on the desk after reading this thread last night . 44 spec 4 3/4 barrel empty if it matters to you

Buying a SA revolver today is apparently a much more scientific process than it was in the late 1800's when you just walked into the local mercantile store, put your $15 on the counter and walked out with whatever they had.

I'm not criticizing anyone, but I am just picturing the looks you would have gotten had you gone gun shopping with a tape measure, a protractor, and a postage scale that was accurate to the tenth of an ounce. Then just as the shop owner thinks you're a turnip short of a bunch, take a practice aim and say, "This one's bore axis is too high. By the way...do you have any guns made of plastic?"

I think it's been 10 years since I last walked into a LGS and bought a gun across the counter.
I find the more info I have the better when buying on the internet. YMMV.

FWIW, I've owned about a half dozen Bisleys in .22, .32 H&R, .41 Magnum and .44 Special. Still have one of each of the .22, .32 H&R and .44 Special. The grip frames all seem to be the same size. The .44 Special was part of a special run for one of their large distributors (Lipsey?) and is on the original sized Blackhawk frame. It has the 5-1/2 inch barrel. They are very nice guns and I'd certainly recommend them. I suspect you could load them up to Elmer Keith levels, but I find that 210 grain cast bullets at about 1000 fps will do anything I expect a handgun to do and without pounding me senseless in the process.

The Ruger Flattop will take the Keith load, 17 grains of 2400 under the 429421 bullet with no problem. A lot of folks focus on that load alone as a Keith load, but he was also fond of 7.5 grains of Unique and 5 grains of Bullseye under the same bullet. I use those three loads almost exclusively in mine and it likes all three. Keith indeed did load heavy loads but he wasn't opposed to light loads.

I recently got an MP mold for the Hensley and Gibbs #503 which is the H&G version of the Keith bullet. The mold comes with pins for solids or hollowpoints, making that bullet even more versatile. I'm anxious to get some cast up and run them side by side with the 429421.

As classic and useful as the Keith bullet is in a 44 Special, Remington40x is right. A 210 grain at 1000 fps will do a lot of good work. There are a lot of great options for cast bullets today in all diameters. We are in a golden age of custom bullet mold availability. LBT, Accurate, NOE, Arsenal, Mihec (MP), and Mountain are a few that come to mind. In many cases you're limited only by your own creativity.

Got one of them in a chest rig. Very precise shooter.

Based on the above, I bet about the time i pull the trigger on a stainless 5-1/2 Bisley .45 colt or .44 Special flat top, they will finally make another run of .44 Magnums.

Thanks all!
Based on:
Some great input from many on this thread
Savuti's excellent size comparison pictures and observations of the 44/45 vs. flat top frames
Responses to my thread asking about extra .45 ACP cylinders in .45 Colt revolvers
Responses to Ky221's thread New sixgun . . .input needed
and the fact that I have wanted a 5-1/2" stainless Bisley for at least thirty (30!) years
. . . . . . .
I put in my order for an 0472 Ruger Bisley stainless .45 Colt/.45 ACP 5-1/2".

Whoo-hoo, looking forward to it!

I think you're going to love it. Lot of versatility in one gun there. Enjoy and post some pics.

^^^^^^^
Thanks. I really had trouble deciding between the .45 Colt/.45 ACP and the same configuration in the .44 Special flat top.

There is a certain "cool factor" to a .44 Special flat top. For me, it probably comes from this Seyfried article in Guns America:
https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/ross-seyfried-lipseys-ruger-flattop-44-special-bisley-revolvers/
But objectively, from the good comparison pictures and accurate weights Savuti graciously supplied, the difference in size and weight seems negligible.

So it came down to the difference between the two, actually three, cartridges:
I already have dies for .44 Magnum/.44 Special and .45 ACP. I will have to buy some .45 Colt dies.
But I progressively load for .45ACP and .357. It is a bit of trouble to switch between the two. I won't have to add another cartridge to volume load, as I would with .44 Special. Plus .45 ACP brass is more common than .44 Special. Not to mention cheap .45 ACP if it comes down to buying ammo.

I plan to shoot a lot of .45 ACP and come up with a "heavyish" bullet load, maybe 270 grain, at about 1000-1100 for the .45 Colt. I know there is more to be had, but that should pretty well hammer any critter I will encounter in my part of Texas.
Had I gone with .44 Special, I was going to go with a light load and a similar 250 grain, 1000-1100 heavier load. Not much difference, but at the lighter end of things .45 ACP seemed easier than a light .44 Special.
(I'm not one for a lot if different loads. In hunting rifles, I usually stick to one load, and the older I get, the more I favor bullet weight over velocity.)

Other considerations: I already own a Bowen sight and Evolution Gun Works RMR mount for the the larger frame.

So I fretted a bit. But if the one I picked shoots well, I'm pretty sure I'll forget all about it.

The posters on this thread and few other threads really helped. Thank you all again!

I don't really consider the 270 grain bullet to be all that heavy in a 45 Colt. Its a good weight, just like the 255 Keith is a good weight in the 44. Might even say an optimum weight. A 270 grain bullet at 1100 fps would suffice for pretty much everything in NA. I wouldn't hesitate to carry that here in Alaska and do carry a similar load myself in the form of a 280 grain SWC when I carry a 45 Colt. In Texas, your choice would be outstanding and would indeed hammer anything you're likely to encounter.

There is one caveat with your choice and cast bullets. Ruger 45 Colt/ACP cylinders are notorious for having undersized throats. I have three and they were .450 on two of them and .449 on the other. I had them opened up to .4525 by Doug Phillips. Fermin Garza is another. Both do outstanding work. Doug is on FB under Cylinderhone and also on the CastBoolits forum under his name. Fermin is on the Single Action forum under 2dogs. When you get the gun I'd slug and measure the bore and get next to someone with a set of pin gauges who can check your cylinder for you. Fermin or Doug will pin gauge/measure your cylinder and let you know if if needs reaming or not. A cylinder with throats undersized of the groove diameter are never going to shoot to their full potential with cast bullets. Most Ruger revolvers are capable of some outstanding accuracy. Amazing really when you consider having six separate chambers in one gun. However, some Rugers, especially 45 Colts, need a little tweaking to get them shooting their best.

Most Ruger 45 Colts will shoot reasonably well with jacketed bullets without modification. If your going to cast your own or load commercially available cast, I'd check the critical dimensions.

mart,

Thank you so much for the information. You have a great deal of experience, and a lot of revolvers, so I expect you know your stuff.

I know I can go a good bit heavier on bullet, which is why I described 45/270 as "heavyish." I've read the trick with revolvers on game is frontal area, to some degree meplat diameter, and enough sectional density to penetrate. I'm not sure what a heavier bullet would buy me on the critters I might encounter, even on "bad angle" shots. I might go a bit heavier depending on what is available. Currently, I do not cast my own. Maybe I should start.

I've heard Ruger's have undersize throats. You'd think they would have fixed that by now. I do have access to gauge pins, so I can measure the throats. I don't know if the pins I have access to are "plus" or "minus", but they should tell me if I need to have the cylinders honed.

Questions:
What is the best way to slug the barrel? I have a micrometer and know how to use it.
Should I slug the muzzle first, and then the entire barrel to see if I have "thread choke"?

Thanks again!

I am just passing on information I've gleaned form other more experienced and more capable handgun shooters.

I use either a 50 caliber round ball or an egg sinker of the appropriate size. You have to be careful with an egg sinker as they are not always pure lead. Sometimes they have some other alloy. The best way to check is with a thumbnail. If you can score it easily with your thumbnail, it's a BHN of 10 or less. Pretty soft lead. If you can lightly score it but with some effort, it's more like 11-16 BHN. If your thumbnail won't score it and it feels almost glassy under your nail it's darn hard. Over 20 BHN. Use a pure lead round ball or a soft egg sinker.

Clean the barrel well and lightly lube with CLP, RemOil, sewing machine oil or other light oil. Seat the ball or sinker at the muzzle and give it a tap with a nylon or brass hammer. That seats the slug so you can use a brass rod or hardwood dowel to drive the slug into the barrel. You'll get a little doughnut of lead that gets sheared off the ball as it enters the muzzle. That's fine. I don't worry much about the muzzle dimensions but you can tap a slug in until it is just a little past flush with the muzzle. Then use a brass screw, threaded into the slug to extract it for your measurements. You do want to push a slug all the way through the bore. Once it's in the bore you should be able to push it with a wooden dowel. If you go slow you'll feel whether there's any tight or loose spots or thread choke as you near the frame. Be sure to catch the slug in your hand or on a soft towel or mat. It sucks to get it pushed through only to have it bounce off the frame and onto the floor. No need to guess how I know that.

You can check for thread choke with a pin gauge. I use a minus set for checking cylinder mouths and thread chokes. That's what is most commonly available. Select a size that will enter just the muzzle and carefully slide it down the barrel with a wooden dowel. It may hang up part way down, indicating a tight spot. Keep a few short pieces of dowel handy to go in from the breech end so you can slide the pin back the other direction if it hangs up. If it hangs up before the frame, drop down a pin size and try again. It should go to the frame and hang up there if there's any choke. Use the same trick with the short pieces of dowel to slide the pin back to the muzzle.

If it has tight or loose spots or thread choking it will benefit from fire lapping. In fact most any revolver will benefit from firelapping. On the Gunblast site there's a link to Fermin Garza's excellent article on fire lapping and the Beartooth Bullets Technical Guide has an excellent run down on how to properly fire lap. I fire lap or will fire lap every revolver I own. I have a few I need to get after but have done several. Accuracy has improved on everyone I've done.

Since you already load for the .58 the .41 Bisley would be a great gun for what you are looking to do...

In 2002 when the standard 7.5" blue Bisley in .41 Magnum was discontinued I had Gary Reeder make up a 5.5" with his modified Bisley Gunfighter grip...it is a very smooth shooter...

Since you reload you can run cast bullets from 165 to 300 grains....

Bob

I recently had Fermin correct two Ruger 32 H&R cylinders for me. Correct (I own a set of pin gauges), quick and fairly priced.

fermincgarza.com

Thanks all for the informative posts.

I may be wrong, but it seems Ruger usually gets the chamber throats right in some calibers, but not in others. Is that the case?

I will say it is a bit irritating to order a new gun in a classic chambering knowing as you do so that having to spend even more to correct chamber throats is very probable. You just know Ruger has a tall stack of complaints about undersized throats in.45 Colt guns!

Yes, and the .41s from what I have read have them right about 99% of the time... The only one I have ever read about was a year or so ago and was surprised as I had never read of anyone complaining about a .41 before...

Bob

^^^^^^^
I believe that between the .41 Magnum, .44 Special, .44 Magnum, and .45 Colt, all will suffice for my desire for a "heavyish" hard cast bullet at 1000-1100. If you keep the sectional density in the 0.19 - 0.21 range, you don't seem to be leaning hard on any of them at 1000-1100. I guess it is leaning on the .44 Special the most, but not so much in a stout Ruger. I believe such loads are easy enough to shoot, yet still let you know you have done something when you touch one off. All should do a fine job on any critter I might encounter. The .357 isn't quite all I want, and the .480 is too much.

In the end, that extra .45 ACP cylinder helped me decide. That and the fact that a 5-1/2 stainless Bisley in .44 Magnum is currently a bit pricey. But even had such been more affordable, I think I would have made the same choice.

Still irritating that there is a good chance the throats will need work!

My first 41 Ruger was a Blackhawk, 6.5 inch. The cylinder throats were good in relation to the bore. The Bisley 41 I have now was undersized. Only 41 I've ever heard of being undersized on the throats. Doug Phillips corrected it for me.

GunDoc,

It is a little irritating that most of their 45 cylinders need work, but it is a simple, quick and inexpensive fix. Doug or Fermin will have it turned around in no time. After reading this thread I got worked up about having a dual cylinder 45 and went out and found a 45 ACP new model cylinder to use with one of my Bisleys. It will most likely have to be fitted but that's okay. Another easy fix. I'll be home later this week from the slope and will see how it fits in either of the guns.

Mart

^^^^^^^^
mart,

Re: Your .45 ACP cylinder. It seems we are sort of "co-enablers." Probably not a unique thing in any endeavor when many have a strong interest!

Best,
Gun Doc

There’s enablers on every forum. And I belong to a bunch of them. Then there’s all the enablers at work and the gun club. I’m surrounded by them.

After all that's been said here, I don't have much to add, except for I frikkin' love my 5-1/2" Stainless Bisley .45 Colt.

And it only has one cylinder............

Potsy, I am with you man! I had Clements do some work on mine to include action job, ream cylinder throats to 0.4525", Taylor throat forcing cone, freewheel the cylinder, pin the ejector rod housing and I have his Patridge front sight and Bowen rear. I have killed 2 black bear and a whitetail doe with mine. It is very accrate. With 2x scope and from the bench with sandbags I have put 10 heavy bear loads into 2" group at 50 yards. Heavy load was either a 335 or 345 hard cast at about 1150 fps.

I also have a 7.5" blued Bisley in 45 Colt with similar work done by a different smith.

Sad thing is the cartilage in my hands is not holding up well. I just had CMC Arthroplasty with an internal brace surgery on my right thumb last week and need to do the left thumb later this year. Not sure my "fixed" hands will still handle these guns.

It sucks getting old.

I’m a fan of the Bisley grip frame. Own two 44’s and two 45’s. I put hogue grips on all of them, they needed a little fine tuning to fit. And I’m not a fan of hogue’s wax finish they use so I stripped them and used an oil finish. Hogue Bisley grips are wider than Ruger factory grips.
Here’s my short barrel pair, no pics of the other two.

Ruf,
I had Bowen to an action job, freewheel pawl, base pin, front and rear sight. Had cylindersmith work the throats over. I'm no pistolero, but I can keep 6 in 2" to 2-1/2" at 25 yards, sandbagged. Usually 286 grain 270SAA's and 9 grains of Universal.
It also likes the same bullet with 20.5 of 2400. It shoots even better with 25 grains of 296, but recoil starts to get un-fun.
I've not truly delved into the heavyweights, but in middle Tennessee, I can't figure what the above wouldn't kill. Hate to admit it, but all I've killed with it is one pig, and that was an "assist".
Hate to hear about the hand trouble. Good news about the old .45 Colt is, she's pretty tame with lighter bullets around 1000fps out of that heavy of a pistol.

It does suck but beats the alternative, right?

The load I used on the deer was with a 290 Keith bullet at about 1000 fps. 55 yard heart shot- plenty accurate.

Those sir, are awesome

This has been a great thread, and I'm not saying that because I started it. I'm saying it because so much good information has been conveyed. I got my questions answered very completely, and I learned a lot extra to boot. I've also seen some great revolver pictures.

Thank you all, so much.
Gun Doc

I agree, great thread. By the way my avatar photo is me and my Bisley with one of the bears (I remembered that I have actually killed 3) I got with that gun.