I hate 4chan so damn much after this stupid captcha stupid lag bs. Idk how many times I had to do a stupid post form only for it not to work.>Questionpetite small wrist 50kg wants 45magnum chrome with long barrel. am I compatible? I know the picture has a 44 anaconda which I wouldn’t mind… but bigger is better in terms of how I want it. Anyhow, will it snap my wrists? Hurt? Can I maybe just use some type of brace to help? Will it make a difference if it wasn’t magnum? Or special? I never even fired a 45acp to be able to judge that desu.
>>65092930Don't be a little pussy ass bitch, get a 500 S&W snubnose revolver.
Test
>>65092937but it looks like a space gun, i dont want a snub nose and want the most inconvenient hunk of metal anon. Snub nose will be my second choice tbqh. My curiosity is piqued by the 500 not gonna lie.
>>65092930You're all over the place in terms of caliber and lacking in research or knowledge so I suggest doing a loooot more reading before any purchase or decision on what you want this gun for. CCW? A big frame magnum is not what you want, a .357 will work great. Range toy? How much do you plan to shoot it? Conversation piece? Get a .500 with the longest or shortest barrel and have a laugh. No, a magnum of any handgun caliber isn't "snapping" your wrist but depending on firearm weight, grip and experience will be various amounts of uncomfortable. Luckily most magnum revolvers are compatible with multiple different rounds ie .357 to .38, .44 magnum to .44 special and .460 to .454 and .45LC. If you're just looking for a range toy handcannon I'd go rent one, there is no shortage in big bore revolvers returned because they weren't fun to shoot and expensivd to feed. If you just want to own one, get a S&W .44, probably a model 29 or one of its derivatives and go from there. You can have fun with the magnum and use the special to get in the practice. I love my x-frame .460, the magnums are great for spectacle and when I want to get some trigger time in I use .45lc.
shoot his BBC like a gun.. IN YOUR MOUTH! hahaha lol heheh
I refuse to believe this shit is "ironic" anymore, and if it is, pic related.
>>65092930To answer your question in brief, don't.There isn't really such a thing as ".45 Magnum". There is .454 Casull which is a lengthened .45LC, effectively doing that job in the same way that .44 Magnum is a stretched .44 Special and .357 Magnum is a longer .38 Special.If you are an inexperienced shooter anything in the realm of .44 or .454 is going to suck to shoot. The gun is expensive, ammunition is expensive, recoil is understandably very severe. These are guns that people frequently buy, shoot once and put away.You can shoot the less powerful 44 Special in a 44 Magnum or 45 LC in a 454, but at that rate it is kind of a waste. Both of those weaker loads are also still very expensive to buy.My recommendation is a .357 Magnum. You can get one in stainless or chrome, it's plenty powerful, but a novice shooter can still handle it with some guidance and practice. To that end, 38 Special is downright easy to shoot and significantly more affordable. .357 Magnum revolvers are also as a rule much more common, readily available and affordable.
>>65093053.45 Magnum is a thing. Not really for revolvers though.
>>65093060Oh yeah 45 Win Mag like for the LAR Grizzly pistol? Forgot all about that thing.
>>65092964anon i dont want ccw or even open carry ;~: I just want a range toy I only ever had one firearm (shotgun, 12g). And nothing then after, no experience whatsoever in the matter of hand held devices. Maybe I can just rent one at the range and see if I like it or not or if it is just a fantasy of mine. The model 29 looks nice though. but to answer:>CCW?no, but maybe someday..>big frame magnum is not what you want.you are right... I have not been too rational about this.>Range toy?absolutely.>How much do you plan to shoot it?maybe... Copiously every 3-4 months.>Converstion piece?no thank you, but that would be an okay outcome. I might just go with a s&w .44, but if it is about practicality I would just go for a 38 snub. Which I might desu.
>>65092930The captcha is only egregious when you're posting from your phoneOP confirmed phone poster
>>65093089i had to move to pc when something something browser security.
>>65093081Seriously look into a 4" or 6" 357. Particularly a Ruger GP-100. You don't even need to take my word for it. Rent a snub 38 and a 44 at a range alongside the 357, you'll see why it's a clear winner right away.
>>65093098oh wow that is good looking, i must watch/ read stuff on this right away. and that is a good idea, just rent them all and test fire. I shouldn't be in such a hurry i guess.
>>65093107A snub 38 is going to be difficult to shoot because of how lightweight it is plus the minimal grip surface available to hold onto it, being DAO your trigger control needs to be on point. It is not a beginner gun and it really whallops a lot of newbies who underestimate it. I have one and I do carry it sometimes, but it's only good for a carry gun. I can shoot it adequately after years of experience, but not nearly as well as my other revolvers. It is extremely unpleasant to shoot, so as a range gun it is terrible.A 44 is showy, but as I mentioned above recoil will hurt almost as much as ammunition cost. Ruger does make a pretty solid 44 in the form of a Super Redhawk if you want a DA swing out cylinder or Super Blackhawk if you want a single action gate loader. You can sometimes find used Super Blackhawks relatively cheap because someone else bought it, shot it once and injured themselves. Don't be that person.A 357 full size revolver splits the difference. Big enough to have some mass and adequate grip size so you can hold onto it, but not so much recoil that it's going to try to rip itself out of your hands. EZ to shoot, but gives you the magnum revolver experience.
>>65093081Here's some size comparisons to give an idea of bigger bore cartridges. You do you but I'd recommend against a big fuckoff cartridge, be it revolver or auto, until you've shot some more.>3-4 times a monthGet a .22, I don't say that as a jab or anything. A .22 pistol is some of the most fun you can have shooting, it's dirt cheap to shoot a lot, it allows you to learn the fundamentals, and you can do some really cool things to them. My MK4 is racegunned to shit and I love it.
>>65093120Tbf I was only thinking of the 38 as a daily carry of course I’d likely take it to the range often to get a feel for it. But you are convincing me more and more about 357. All the concerns I had you had mentioned in the above. Frankly I would’ve never guessed a 38 would be that unpleasant, goes to show I know nothing. But yeah, I want that magnum revolver experience. What do you think about the following in comparison/contrast; Taurus, Colt, Ruger, S&W, etc.>because someone else bought it, shot it once and injured themselves. Don't be that person.Yeah... It is a big concern of mine, that is ever present when I see those used mavericks and shockwaves at the store lol.
>>65093129actually i don't take it as a jab, a buddy of mine used to have a 22lr cattleman/cowboy style revolver that was really fun to shoot. I might just get one of those first since usually they have
*usually they have a good deal on 22lr
If you go and rent the biggest fuck off magnum you can find at the range, only load a single round until you understand what you're getting into; its possible to accidentally double tap and shoot yourself in the head.
>>65093182>RugerUsually my top recommendation. They are rough and ready. Not the nicest or cheapest, but extremely durable above all else. I can recommend one in confidence because they can tolerate some degree of abuse that both cheaper and more expensive revolvers typically can't.>S&WIt used to be the gold standard for revolvers worldwide and widely copied/imitated for that reason. S&W today just doesn't have the quality it used to because all of their skilled workers retired and they have since pursued a race to the bottom for everything other than price. Their automatic pistols haven't suffered as much, but their revolvers have gotten genuinely awful.Classic S&W revolvers from the 90s/80s/70s etc are still very good but you have to know how to tell a good used revolver from one that's really abused and worn out. It's hard to recommend that route for a beginner.>Taurus This is the budget option. The cheapest one should go, and even then with realistic expectations. These tend to be copies of older S&W designs but made in Brazil with cheaper labor costs. Results are very mixed with people swearing by and at them, but at least they are cheaper than S&W and have a great warranty program. That makes them less of a bad deal in my opinion.>ColtThey didn't make revolvers for a few years and only re-entered the market recently. Reviews are mixed, but from my experience they do feel very nice. I don't know if they have the resilience of a Ruger, but they definitely don't have the price tag since they cost significantly more money.Other brands.>RIAThe M200/M206 are Colt copies from old tooling. They are cheap in both senses. I'd avoid them.>EAA WindicatorIt's made in Germany but that doesn't mean good.>Charter ArmsVaries from mediocre to terrible. Mostly snubbies.>RossiSimilar to and owned by Taurus. No idea if they are better or worse. I had a 1980s example which was superb.
>>65092930>45magnumCurious.>>65092948>curiosity is piqued by the 500Literally, the .460 is superior in every way.>>65093053>There isn't really such a thing as ".45 Magnum". There is .454 Casull which is a lengthened .45LC, effectively doing that job in the same way that .44 Magnum is a stretched .44 Special and .357 Magnum is a longer .38 Special.This is a true statement. >>65093066>Forgot all about that thing.We all do.>>65093107You should start at the beginning.>>65093120Smith 317 in .22WRM. It'll put your eye out!>>65093229>If you go and rent the biggest fuck off magnum you can find at the range, only load a single round until you understand what you're getting intoI am anon, and I approve of this message.
>>65093053Eh, I generally agree with Wumbo's advice but IMHO it's worth splitting some hairs here.There's a big difference between .44 Magnum and .454 Casull..44 Is not for new shooters, but most people can manage it. .454 and up is a whole different category that few people shoot for fun. If op is a noob then I totally agree with the .357 rec. Start shooting .38's, but even full power 357's aren't too bad in a large frame revolver with a full underlug barrel. If anon's been shooting handguns before and really wants a .44 I don't see a big deal with that, just avoid the hot-rod ammo and he's probably fine. Buying larger than that is stupid unless you know what you are getting into.Avoid snubs/airweights, those are no fun at all to shoot.>>65093229It's also possible to smack yourself in the face with the gun because you held it like a retard. IMHO you can learn a lot from this video. Watch these fools shoot a super-hard-recoiling revolver. Eric and Chad are really bearing down on the grip, but they can still barely control the damn thing and it nearly gets out of their hands multiple times. Then watch Barry shoot. He has wimpy noodle arms by comparison but he is clearly a lot more experienced. Watch how he keeps his elbows slightly bent and then lets the gun rise up under recoil. The gun moves but he's in control of it and gets back on target quickly. Eric and Chad are trying to hold the gun rock solid like a vise, which they clearly cannot do, and as a result they very nearly lose it, and take a lot longer to get back on target.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XEsamEcJn0
I'll just leave this here.
>>65093246>windicator mentionedUnder no circumstances should you purchase one. It's absolute trash and you will actively dislike shooting it. It also doesn't have a transfer bar so it's not drop safe on a loaded chamber. Just don't. Spend the money on something else. Weirhauch (the company that makes it) is an airgun company that dabbled in revolvers. EAA is an importer that has brought some truly garbage products to the US market.>but it goes bangSo does a Hi point, but nobody said they're good. In fact I'd trust one of those over a windicator.
>>65093271I worked for a company that imported Rossi lever actions (Winchester 1892 copies) and we only ever got a single batch of 454s, barely a hundred guns and almost all of them came back for warranty/repair because the recoil energy of 454 would break them. Sights would fly off, handguards would come loose, bolts would break. Everything broke on them, and I mean EVERYTHING.Rossi even took a stupid long time getting them to us and made dozens of unapproved design changes just to try and make a product that wasn't absolutely hopeless and it didn't work. I'd be surprised if there are more than a half dozen still in the wild being shot on a regular basis.The 44s meanwhile had some QC problems but overall held up fine, even with Bubba's pissin' hot reloads.There is no overlap in 44 and 454 performance. 454 cold loads start well beyond what 44 can do.
>>65092970whats the sharty up to
>>65093053>> If you are an inexperienced shooter anything in the realm of .44 or .454 is going to suck to shoot.You misspelled “going to be fun”
>>65093260To be fair the 500 beats the 460 in one extremely important metric…. It’s bigger… the whole point of 500 was to be the biggest revolver cartridge you could get.. then the 460 was meant to be the fastest.. for all practical applications I’d agree that the 460 is more versatile and more practical.. but it’s not the biggest… which is the real reason people buy a 500 in the first place..
>>65093066If you want to get real obscure 445 Supermag was a thing…
>>65093271Great video. Goddamn I’d trade a kidney for a nice freedom arms…
>>65093476Well fun if you can handle it. I've shot a .500 with a mild load. The muzzle brake helps a lot too. That was a good experience.I shoot a Desert Eagle in 44 as well because it's actually very manageable. I can even shoot it with decent accuracy one handed.
>>65093586NTA, but the .500 is surprisingly accessible, at least in terms of recoil. Most of the ammo is nowhere near max spec, in fact a lot of it is honestly pretty light--not compared to other rounds, but compared to what it is capable of. On top of that the guns tend to be very heavy and they very often have brakes or compensators. A big X-frame with modest ammo is honestly more controllable than some .44'sIMHO the biggest problem with it is really economics. The ammo is expensive and there's no cheap equivalent like there is with shooting .38's in .357's or .45 Colts in .454's and .460's. As with any magnum handgun round you can save a lot of money handloading, but you have fewer bullet options than you do with a .45 cal and those options are more expensive.
>>65093246Good writeup but a few notes for things that have changed in recent days>Taurus warranty excellent Less so these days, gone is the lifetime no questions asked warranty, replaced with a bog standard 1 year one. This goes for their daughter companies too. I have no idea why people still buy heritage RRs now.>RIAThey've introduced a line notched above their pig iron colts by acting as the new importer of Czech alfa proj revolvers into the US. They're still something of an unknown quantity as far as I know but they're something to watch. Currently one of these is one of the few affordable DA .22 revolvers available new
if you want to 'try out' revolvers just get a taurus.
>>65094666The flip side to the expensive bullets is that most people rarely shoot a lot of them…. I’m a bit of a nut for big bore stuff and I still haven’t shot more than maybe 50-60 rounds of 500mag/500 bushwacker in one sitting and that was load testing 4 different powders with ladders…
>>65093246>Charter armsI would really like to know more about them. All I know is quality over the years has been all over the place because they've passed through different owners and moved shop multiple times.They also have some weird proprietary system with their rimless caliber revolvers that allows them to be used without moonclips somehow and that is interesting
>>65096015They made the gun that John Lennon was shot with, and they seem to have some 44 special and 45 acp models… they are a revolver company…. This is the sum total of common knowledge about them for the average gun spurge…
>>65093484>500 was to be the biggest revolver cartridge you could get.. then the 460 was meant to be the fastest>Velocity > massOver simplified, but yeah.
>>65092930>petite small wrist 50kgIf you're a twink I've got a magnum for you to handle
>>65096015>All I know is quality over the years has been all over the placethat seems to be the problem with so many revolver makers.S&W have been cutting costs since 1955 when they deleted the top sideplate screw. In 1961 they got rid of the triggerguard screw. In the 1980's they stopped pinning barrels and recessing chambers. Then came the Hillary Hole and everybody knows about their current QC issues.Manurhin MR73's are known to be among the best revolvers ever made--well, the original Mulhouse production, anyway. The later MR88's were just Ruger Redhawks, not bad guns at all but nothing special. The Chaupis-produced MR73s have at least some MIM parts inside instead of forgings. USFA used to make top tier Colt SAA repros but they went bankrupt thanks to the Zip22. Dan Wesson made some amazing revolvers at their Monson facility while QC at their later Palmer and Norwich plants was more hit-and-miss. It was the same with Korth: those guns they made at Ratzeburg while Willi Korth was still running the show were amazing, nu-Korths are still nice but they are focused more on bling than on function.Colt has had loads of ups and downs given the age of the company, most recently the issue being that they laid off all their expert gunsmiths when they stopped making the Python for several years, only to have teething problems when they started production up again. The modern Python is more reliable than the old one because it uses different lockwork that is more durable. However they don't have the same super crisp trigger of the original, and the fit-and-finish isn't as good either.
>>65096015There's no secret to a revolver for a rimless cartridge without a moon clip, just counterbore the cylinder to the desired case length. That's what Ruger does on the convertible Blackhawks. Extraction is a bit more difficult for a swing out cylinder but it's not impossible.
>>65097076>The later MR88's were just Ruger Redhawks, not bad guns at all but nothing specialSecurity Six actually, and Manurhin manufactured the cylinder and barrel themselves, as well as modifying other parts including the frame to make the lockup more robust.>The Chaupis-produced MR73s have at least some MIM parts inside instead of forgingsYou have a source for that right ? I'm not saying the Beretta acquisition couldn't make them cut corners for more profit, but I find that a bit hard to believe.
>>65097582>You have a source for that right ?I have seen the proof with my own eyes, though google image search is now being retarded and is not bringing it up.A guy on a forum had one of the new MR73's and needed a new safety lever. Chaupis sent him one under warranty and he photographed the two parts side-by-side complaining about how the new one was shit. In reality most of the objections from the poster were a bit of nonsense. The two pieces were visibly different, and the poster was bitching that the part he was sent was "not right". What he didn't realize was that the new part they sent him was unfitted, with the expectation that the gunsmith installing it would do the final finishing. That is, after all, part of the point with a revolver like this. It's not just random parts grabbed out of a bin and slapped together, there's a lot of careful hand-fitting involved and the poster didn't realize that. He thought the new piece would drop right in. However, you could also see that the new piece was not a forging. IIRC the part in question was #136 which Manurhin calls the "internal safety".
