Recent content by 41-44-45-48

I don't think it's any cheaper to make. Think about it - it takes more machining operations to make the barrel and the sleeve rather than one combined part. I do think it saves them money in QC though. The problem with "normal" threaded barrels is that you're trying to get torque within spec AND...

If you're referring to the 454/480, then I'd say no way. The only way Ruger got that revolver to pass design muster with a standard diameter cylinder was the use of that crazy Carpenter super alloy cylinder. Anything that could be blued isn't going to have the necessary material properties. Now...

Interestingly enough, ftf transfers are still legal in IL of all places. You have to use the online portal thing to validate the buyers FOID card but you don't need an FFL to perform the transfer.

Mine seems to shoot best with a cast 320 gr WFN over a max charge of H-110. I've tried lighter magnum loads and special loads, but they don't shoot to the sights. That 320 gr load is dead on with the sights and shoots tight groups too. Sure is a real handful in that little gun though.

So let's see... In the last year or so we've seen 20" blue/walnut in 44 mag, 460s&w, 475 linebaugh, and 450 marlin. Looks like they're working down a supply of large bore profile 20" forging blanks. Who bets we see 45 Colt, 45-70, 444 or 41 mag in the same configuration next?

Don't let the price tag fool you, they're for real! Ruger didn't skimp on the barrel and that's the main thing that matters in rifle accuracy. The stocks are a cheap piece of ugly plastic but the bedding system is very innovative in that it works well yet is cheap to mass produce. Beyond that...

.243 was a 2016 offering in the 1V configuration. They're probably still available.

32 win special would also be a nice one

I'd definitely plunk down for a .348 :lol:

It doesn't matter how long the barrel is. If it enters crooked and engages the rifling cockeyed, it's going to leave the muzzle cockeyed. Yeah I know we're probably only talking an moa or less, but an moa matters when we're talking about a $1200 rifle.

Yes, we don't have empirical evidence yet. However every other firearm chambered for the longer brass in a given caliber generally shoots with less accuracy when using the shorter brass due to the bullet having an unsupported jump between the end of the case and the throat. Perhaps we could try...

Would it have been that hard to make it 480 instead? Why would they do 475 when all their revolvers are 480? Same thing with 454/460. If I buy one of these rifles I'm going to have to buy new brass if I want rifle accuracy out of it. Also, don't 460 ballistics pretty much duplicate 450...

I've got a 1:8 shaw barrel on my 6.5x55 large ring mauser. It struggles to fully stabilize 140 gr Berger VLDs, even over a case full of 4831. So I wouldn't take it for granted that a 1:8 will stabilize 160s.

A year and a half or so ago I emailed the CEO asking about GP's in 44 special, 41 mag, and/or 40/10mm. I got a response saying he believed "a couple of these projects are in the works".

My guess is something close to 6.5 creedmore. Supposedly the army balisticians are currently enamored with 6.5mm bullets. Although I wouldn't be surprised to see a cartridge that's shorter/lighter than the creedmore. The army isn't going to accept something that's significantly heavier than...