American Hunter First Look new Ruger .454 and .480

[wildcatter]

Wow! Just what I always wanted Ruger to do. Man you have to just love this!

Thats putting it mildly!!! After over 30 years asking for this very thing in the .454, and since the introduction of the .480 wanting it the the same way, and always in 5 shot!!! Better late than never,,, I ordered the 480 yesterday,,,, and just come to my senses and ordered the 454 also,,,, how sweet it is.

 

[RVM45]

Heavier Guns Kick Less.

These five-shooters are big guns, but nowhere near the limit of what some folks would be willing to carry.

I wish that Ruger would offer some of these ultra big-bores in Super Super Blackhawks upsized to be six-shooters.

Earl Keller's .45-70 revolvers were six-shooters.

God alone knows what you'd pay a Collector for one of Earl's .45-70s if you could find one offered for sale.

{This is a minor criticism—just minor. "Revolver" logically implies "Six-Shooter" in most circles though.}


…..RVM45

 

[wildcatter]

Size is the reason I always wanted one of these, they are big enough to withstand the heavy loads that will be fired in them and much smaller than the super redhawk they were previously made in. One reason I have em coming now, the SR was just not an option for me, to much bulk for less convenience. Now I am happy, as happy as I was in the early 70's when I shot my first Super Blackhawk after trying to shoot Silhouette with a S&W 29,,,, Ruger finally come thru again,,,,

 

[CraigC]

Now, I'll preface this by saying that I love single actions above all else. However, people have this misconception that the Super Redhawk is a massive sixgun and considerably heavier than the single actions. Not true at all. The .480 SRH is one ounce heavier than a standard .44Mag Bisley and two ounces lighter than the Hunter model.

 

[wildcatter]

I have never compared weight, but that doesn't surprise me with the post grip frame and hollowed mainframe cutouts for the trigger assembly, but I would have thought it would still be heavier with the front framework and barrel support. But by size I am referring to mass, even the way your thumb reaches to cock the SR for single action firing, plus the 7.5" being the smallest, to the leather and carrying options, the Blackhawk has always been my preference. I will add the difference in the FA 83 and BH, I use the same holster for each, but the BH is noticeably smaller when handling it, I just wonder if it will feel more like the FA 83 with the 5 shot cylinder heft and beefier barrel??? One thing's for sure,,,, I'm gonna get to find out!!

 

[Three44s]

I think it's great that Ruger brought the SBH in .480 but I also have to praise the SRH.

I have a 7.5" SRH in .480 and I like it very much.

The weight as CraigC points out is not out of line at all.

Also, Ruger lowered the hammer spur on the SRH compared to the RH and I have not found it hard to reach what so ever. I also have a RH (in .44) and don't have a problem with the hammer even though the spur is situated higher than the SRH.

I think what sets folks back about the SRH is the frame shape and it also gives one the impression that it is such a heavy gun ..........

I have spent a lot of time comparing my guns and while the SRH frame is beefier, the barrel is lighter compared to a stock RH.

When I acquired my SRH .480 it was in a trade and I let my SRH .44 mag 9.5" go to get the .480

Now that 9.5" SRH was a moose if you also mounted a scope on it. I did that once an only once.

For the balance of the years I owned that longer SRH, it wore the One Ragged Hole appeture sight and the Ruger gold front bead (painted black). I am glad I went the .480 route but I do somewhat miss that 9.5" with the peep sight once in a while.

VIVA .480 Ruger!

Three 44s

 

[Sugar River]

Interestingly enough, if the weights listed in jeff Quinn's article are correct, these two new Rugers weigh within one ounce of corresponding Bowen Nimrods I use to own.

Nimrod 475L = 50.08 oz
Nimrod 45Cx5 = 50.72 oz

 

[Onty]

Max, do you have info what is forcing cone angle on Bisley 480?

Thanks.

 

[MaxP]

Max, do you have info what is forcing cone angle on Bisley 480?

Thanks.

It is 5 degrees.

 

[Onty]

Max, do you have info what is forcing cone angle on Bisley 480?

Thanks.

It is 5 degrees.

Just found SAAMI spec for 480 Ruger http://www.saami.org/pubresources/cc_drawings/Pistol/480%20Ruger.pdf . Yeah, you're right, it shows here 5 degrees, although per side. If I remembered correctly, Ruger use to put 2.5 degrees per side.

Thanks again.

 

[Chuck 100 yd]

5 degrees per side or 10 degrees included. Sounds pretty close to the supposedly perfect 11 degrees all the gunsmiths claim will make a gun shoot best.

 

[MaxP]

5 degrees per side or 10 degrees included. Sounds pretty close to the supposedly perfect 11 degrees all the gunsmiths claim will make a gun shoot best.

Yes......

 

[Nomosendero]

Size is the reason I always wanted one of these, they are big enough to withstand the heavy loads that will be fired in them and much smaller than the super redhawk they were previously made in. One reason I have em coming now, the SR was just not an option for me, to much bulk for less convenience. Now I am happy, as happy as I was in the early 70's when I shot my first Super Blackhawk after trying to shoot Silhouette with a S&W 29,,,, Ruger finally come thru again,,,,

I agree, in 480 it seems like the perfect balance of size, weight and power. I would have like it better if barrel was same length as ERh, but I am not sure it would be worth the expense to have it cut and recrowned.