Battle of the hand cannons. Which to get?

[montanadave]

Serious question, and not a flame, but other than the pure enjoyment of firing a ridiculously large powerful handgun, what are you getting from these guns that cannot be better delivered by a long slide Glock 20 using 15rds of hot 10mm?

Not having shot the 10mm Glock, I might be talking out my ass, but here's my two cents.

I bought a .460 XVR a few years back. Purely impulse buy, that juvenile urge to have a hand cannon worthy of Dirty Harry. And I grabbed up some ammo and headed out to the range.

One of the targets was about a 12" steel square with a couple of rebar "hooks" welded to it hanging from a cross bar. So I load up the gun with some .45 LC and try it out. Ding, ding, ding. Nice satisfying ring and all's good to go. Switch to the .454 Casull. Now we're talking. Clang, clang, clang and the steel's swinging in the wind. So time for the .460. KA-BOOM and the steel target blows right off the cross-bar and lands in the dirt.

I couldn't wipe the grin off my face.

If silly shit like this makes you smile, I'd get the .460 for all the reasons you listed.

[Coal Dragger]

Well if you plan on hunting with a handgun where the goal is to cleanly take large game animals a 10mm Glock is frankly a piss poor to marginal choice compared to a big bore revolver. There is a very large difference in effectiveness on game between a 200gr bullet at 1150fps from a 10mm and a 240gr bullet at 1900-2000fps from a .454 Casull or .460 S&W. Plus that "little" 240gr bullet is at the bottom end of what you can use, for example in my .454 I can load up to a 395gr bullet and run it up to about 1200-1250fps.

Additionally a big bore revolver will often qualify as a legal weapon to hunt with for certain species of game. In South Dakota we have a minimum energy requirement to hunt elk with. If memory serves it is 1700lb-ft, which the .454 Casull delivers, a 10mm though is not even close. Plus in most states you are not allowed to hunt with autoloading firearms with magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds and many states allow for even fewer rounds in the magazine.

[WickedWillis]

Serious question, and not a flame, but other than the pure enjoyment of firing a ridiculously large powerful handgun, what are you getting from these guns that cannot be better delivered by a long slide Glock 20 using 15rds of hot 10mm?

first off, you have to purchase a separate barrel and slide to add to your Glock 20 to make it how your are describing. Plus, against actual large game the 10mm cannot hold a candle to large bore revolvers, regardless of having 15 rounds of "Hot" 10mm. I'd rather stop it on the 1st shot, or even the 2nd than do my best to attempt to wound it with an underpowered handgun.

[Coal Dragger]

Not to mention that most animals after being shot poorly or with a marginal round then magically turn into top fuel dragsters and run away at roughly twice the speed of light, making anymore than 1-2 rounds almost a moot point. If you really think you're going to shoot an animal 15 times; well let's just say I have doubts that you have ever been hunting.

[Wildcat]

One of the targets was about a 12" steel square with a couple of rebar "hooks" welded to it hanging from a cross bar. So I load up the gun with some .45 LC and try it out. Ding, ding, ding. Nice satisfying ring and all's good to go. Switch to the .454 Casull. Now we're talking. Clang, clang, clang and the steel's swinging in the wind. So time for the .460. KA-BOOM and the steel target blows right off the cross-bar and lands in the dirt.

I couldn't wipe the grin off my face.

If silly shit like this makes you smile, I'd get the .460 for all the reasons you listed.

Then you may enjoy this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGtt-wCqvUE

[Vash1023]

45-70

[anachronism]

Honestly, I wouldn't buy either one. You say you've fired them, but have you ever fired a 460 without hearing protection? I mean the way you would if you were in a defensive situation. A friend of mine has a 460, we took it deer hunting. He had fired the gun a bit, and was pretty well acclimated to it... as long as he had muffs on. He didn't have them hunting, and dropped the gun when he fired. Quite a reaction, huh? Also, the whole idea of the "45 Swift" is laughable. Yes, they do get high velocity from it, and yes, they do it by using light weight for caliber bullets, 200 grainers. I use better bullet in my 1911. The guns are terribly heavy, and you'll soon make excuses not to carry it when hiking. The X frame is a gimmick, and I personally don't see it's merit. A Redhawk in 44 mag or 45 Colt, loaded stiffly, will do anything the S&W will do. Add in the extra cost of ammo, and I see an ingenious solution without a problem to justify it. Toys are toys, and if that's what you really want, party on. But the two X frame S&W calibers have no reason to live.

[Krull]

I've had the snub nose .460 (kinda useless) and now a 8 3/8 inch .500,of the two calibers I actually think the five hundred is the most sensible and the one that has the most ease in use,the .460 is rather terrible with blast since it's so high velocity the five hundred is not.

The main thing these super revolvers give to a hunter is the fact that with good ammo and a careful shot there just isn't much you can't shoot with one,and that only because of whatever skill level you may have-if you're a good handgun hunter? then even the big five can be got with a .500 revolver.

Do like me and get the .500 and then get a .375 H&H rifle,then you can literally hunt anything!

[Coal Dragger]

Honestly, I wouldn't buy either one. You say you've fired them, but have you ever fired a 460 without hearing protection? I mean the way you would if you were in a defensive situation. A friend of mine has a 460, we took it deer hunting. He had fired the gun a bit, and was pretty well acclimated to it... as long as he had muffs on. He didn't have them hunting, and dropped the gun when he fired. Quite a reaction, huh? Also, the whole idea of the "45 Swift" is laughable. Yes, they do get high velocity from it, and yes, they do it by using light weight for caliber bullets, 200 grainers. I use better bullet in my 1911. The guns are terribly heavy, and you'll soon make excuses not to carry it when hiking. The X frame is a gimmick, and I personally don't see it's merit. A Redhawk in 44 mag or 45 Colt, loaded stiffly, will do anything the S&W will do. Add in the extra cost of ammo, and I see an ingenious solution without a problem to justify it. Toys are toys, and if that's what you really want, party on. But the two X frame S&W calibers have no reason to live.

I agree. Which is why I bought a Freedom Arms M83 in .454 Casull with no porting and a 6" bbl. I later sent it in to have a .45 ACP cylinder made for it as well. This revolver is physically no larger than the very good Ruger you mention, but is more precisely fitted and is stronger (5 shot cylinder). At any rate holstering a gun that size is no problem and I frequently take it with me when I venture into the hills. The S&W X frame weighs as much as some carbines but doesn't have the advantage of a butt stock. Silly.

Buy a Freedom Arms if you can afford it, a Magnum Research BFR short frame, or a Ruger.

[brown3345]

This.

Coal Dragger said it best. I know we have a lot of Glock Fan Boys (I like my Glock too) here on this forum but sometimes an auto loader just wont do what you want it to do. When you get to those limits, nothing really beats a revolver or even a single shot pistol like a Contender XP100 or Encore.

Well if you plan on hunting with a handgun where the goal is to cleanly take large game animals a 10mm Glock is frankly a piss poor to marginal choice compared to a big bore revolver. There is a very large difference in effectiveness on game between a 200gr bullet at 1150fps from a 10mm and a 240gr bullet at 1900-2000fps from a .454 Casull or .460 S&W. Plus that "little" 240gr bullet is at the bottom end of what you can use, for example in my .454 I can load up to a 395gr bullet and run it up to about 1200-1250fps.

Additionally a big bore revolver will often qualify as a legal weapon to hunt with for certain species of game. In South Dakota we have a minimum energy requirement to hunt elk with. If memory serves it is 1700lb-ft, which the .454 Casull delivers, a 10mm though is not even close. Plus in most states you are not allowed to hunt with autoloading firearms with magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds and many states allow for even fewer rounds in the magazine.