460 or 44?

[Osmadey]

Greetings, I am an experienced rifle hunter, but am now looking for my first hunting handgun. My only handgun now is an inherited S&W 38 Spcl. A new gun will be multipurpose -- bear control (after bear spray), plinking, perhaps wild hogs, maybe whitetail, other quarry as the opportunity arises. I shoot a lot of deer in MN, with a variety of weapons. Semi-retired, so now going after the bucket list -- moose and caribou way up north, elk out west, maybe red deer in NZ, and an Africa trip in the early planning stages. I was looking at the new 429 Desert Eagle but a friend is a big S&W Perf. Center advocate and is steering me in that direction. Choices are down to the 460 XVR 7.5" or one of the hunting 44 Mags. I like the accuracy of the 460 and already own a 460 barrel for my TC rifle. Also, would prefer more energy for the unwanted, mean and nasty encounters. I can likely practice enough to handle recoil of the bigger gun, develop confidence and decent skill level, and am of a physique that can handle it. I have perused like questions on this and other forums, but wanted to present my specific needs. Thanks for sharing your opinions and wisdom.

[jetinteriorguy]

I’ve always thought the versatility of the .460 to be a really nice feature as far as handling other ammunition. My days of heavy recoiling magnums are far behind me now though, I’ve become a huge fan of the .357 with still some occasional bouts with my .41mags, but mostly shoot the heavy .41 loads in my lever actions and stick with more moderate loads in my model 57’s.

[GeauxTide]

I, also, have moved on from heavy recoiling handguns. My 45 Colt, throwing 285gr SWC at 1057 penetrates full length, leaving a fist sized exit. No big blast with 10gr of Unique, but the PERFORMANCE. I haven't shot my 41 and 44 mags in years.

[ligonierbill]

I had an opportunity to fire the big X-frame in 500 S&W. It's a big, heavy gun, and this one was ported on top. Not at all unpleasant to shoot. But it might be a chore to carry. Had a Redhawk in 44 Mag: easier to carry, and the grip does pretty well in handling recoil. But I sold that in favor of my current "big bores": Blackhawk 45 Colt and a Super Redhawk 480 Ruger. The Blackhawk is a joy to carry and a joy to shoot with "warm" loads. Agree with GeauxTide, those are usually plenty. I do load "Ruger only" rounds that are quite impressive and quite unpleasant to shoot. The Super Redhawk is what I'd take if I really meant to shoot something. It's big (think chest rig), but not as big as the X-frame, and pleasant to shoot.

Get a copy of Big Bore Revolvers by Max Prasac. And check the local regulations if you're leaving the lower 48. (Can't drive through Canada with a pistol.)

[44caliberkid]

Were I shopping for a new big bore hunting handgun I would look long and hard at a new BFR 44 Magnum, 6 shot cylinder, 7 1/2 inch barrel.

[DaleA]

Thanks for sharing your opinions and wisdom.

Opinions? Got 'em!!! (as the old saying goes, just like something else, we all got 'em and they all...well never mind)
Wisdom? Well, maybe give more weight to some of the other posters in this thread.

I've fired the S&W .460 XVR but it was the one with the 8 inch (well 8 inch and a fraction) barrel which was ported.
https://www.smith-wesson.com/product/x-frame-163460

Recoil was heavy (I was shooting factory ammo-Federal 260 grain) but not really objectionable and I'd shoot it again anytime as long as I didn't have to pay for the ammo.
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1001458112?pid=614317
We were shooting factory ammo. The owner had just got the gun. But he says he's going to be reloading for it. The .460 S&W magnum is ripe for reloading. It's a revolver so you don't have to chase your cases and the cases and bullets are large so even a fat fingered guy like myself could handle them without too much trouble. And unlike reloading for 9mm the monetary savings would be real and substantial.

The owner of the 460 XVR got a chest rig to carry it. It was kind of similar to this but I doubt he paid $240 for it.
https://www.cabelas.com/shop/en/galc...B&gclsrc=aw.ds

Back to the recoil. I said it was heavy but not objectionable. To put that in perspective I think I'm pretty average about recoil. A full size 1911 with 230 grain rounds doesn't bother me much but I've shot a cylinder of rounds (5 rounds) out of a Ruger LCR .357 magnum with 158 grain ammo and I just won't do that again. I consider it to be a vicious little thing and I won't do it again unless I have a shooting glove or my life depended on it or maybe 110 or 125 grain bullets, but I doubt the lighter bullets would really make much difference...I'd still want the glove before I shot them.

Good luck and please come back and let us know what you decided.

[RoyceP]

I've shot the X frame S&W and it is a huge revolver - stuck the front sight in the roof at my range and it came off necessitating a trip to S&W for repairs.

I like the N frame size a lot better so I would pick the Model 29 between those two. I hate the Hillary hole so I would have to find one that was used.

[stagpanther]

There is also the world of single-shot handguns to consider--that makes many rifle centerfire cartridges a possibility.

[1972RedNeck]

I have some big 45's, up to the 460 XVR with 8 3/8" barrel. It's fun, but pointless. My 7.5" Super Redhawk in 454 will do everything the 460 will from a more ergonomic and balanced package.

454 is also pointless in my opinion unless you want to use it for hunting with a scope and longer barrel.

I would love a rifle in 454 or 460. 460 can supposedly push a 200 grain bullet 3K FPS from a 26" barrel. 454 would be no slouch.

If I need to pack a handgun to tackle anything in North America with ease, it's my S&W 25 in 45 Colt with a 6.5" barrel loaded with some Linebaugh 325 gr hard cast handloads.

In short, go with the 44 Mag. (I don't have a 44, but it will be very similar to what I do with my 45 Colt).

If you want an 8 3/8" 460 XVR, I have one I would sell.

[44 AMP]

I can likely practice enough to handle recoil of the bigger gun, develop confidence and decent skill level, and am of a physique that can handle it.

Practice is the key, and its not just handling the recoil, its about making an accurate shot for hunting. The .44 Magnum has killed dead just about everything that walks, including some very large bears. It has sufficient power.

Putting the right bullet in the right place at range is what matters, do that it works, don't and you won't be happy.

From what you wrote, you're not an experienced pistol shot, so you'll need practice to become one. For that reason I would say the .44 Magnum is a better choice, as cost is lower than the .460, brass is common, load data is plentiful, and so are the choices of pistols.

And the choice of pistol will matter on how well, and how easily you will learn to use it well.

Size, weight, grip shape, sights, and fit for you all matter, some guns are more user friendly than others.

I've been shooting .44 & .45 caliber pistols since the 80s, Ruger SAs, S&W N frames, T/C Contender and Auto Mag, Desert Eagle, Wildey and LAR Grizzly semi autos. I don't shoot bullets heavier than 240/250gr, I see no use for them. Not going to argue their advantages, I just don't need them, and they do recoil more.

I would say get a Ruger Super Blackhawk, and learn to shoot it well. Then after you have some skill to base valid opinions on, move to something else if you think it would benefit you.

I don't have any personal experience with the big X frames or the .460, never found the need to go beyond .44 mag levels generally, though I do shoot .45-70 and even .30-30 from my Contender.

Pistol hunting big game is a different challenge than doing it with a rifle, different things apply in different degrees.

Good Luck, I hope you fill your bucket list!

[Drm50]

I’ve shot the 460 and owned a 500 S&W, neither one pleasant to shoot. I’ve only shot hogs and deer with handgun mostly with 44magnum. I have north of 50 Smith&Wessons including 5 model 29-2 and one new model. I’ve also got 45s, 45acp, 357s in the magnum cartridges. Recently purged all 41mags of S&W and Ruger. I load my own ammo and cast my bullets.
If I was buying big game handgun it would be a Ruger single action. Using full power mag
loads a S&W won’t take it. I’ve had Ruger SBH since 1964 and has become my serious deer gun since. It’s the only revolver I use full power magnum loads and jacketed bullets.
I also use to shoot a lot of groundhogs with it running a lot of rounds. The only trouble I’ve had was a sheared frame screw. The old 3 screws didn’t have nyloc screws and you had to check constantly.

[Marineblueline]

As someone who had a very similar debate recently I’ll give my thoughts, though it was 454 vs 44mag.

First, realistically I think you’ll likely be ok with either. There are certainly advantages and disadvantages to each, but that is also subjective to the end user. I ended up going with the 454, because I personally believe it gives a greater range in capabilities(beyond just the gun at hand, looking at lever guns too),I had a bunch of 45 bullets already, and I found a good deal on a particular gun.

Given your stated purposes, in particular the range of hunting scenarios you’re looking at, I would say go with the 460 because I think it gives you more options particularly when you look at the scope of hunting you are talking about doing. Which by the way I am very jealous of, good for you. For me I am rolling with 225gr 45 +p colt for my blue ridge whitetails.

My perspective is purely caliber I would recommend also looking at specific gun make/model issues as some have mentioned above.

[Rock Hammer]

I have two 460 XVR's I shoot them very little , I like the Casull better. Not that the 460 is bad. That said I shoot my 44's way more , I have 3" , 4" , 6", 7 1/2",
And 8 3/8" barrel lenghts S&W 629's The last two are performance center ,
I like my Super redhawk 7 1/2" better than any of them . I even have two super blackhawk hunters in 44 mag . If I had it to do over I would buy 3 super redhawks 2 in 44 and 1 in 454 casull and call it a day .
I hope it saves you some money . If you buy one in 44 and casull you can test drive em both and sell the one you dont like .. then I would get two bfr revolvers and decide if you like the single actions better..

[2damnold4this]

Maybe the OP would be better served with two different handguns. One dedicated to hunting and the other dedicated to close defense against large predators.

[Road_Clam]

seeing as how this looks like a "one and done" post, and the op never disclosed if a scope was going to be used. I'll just add some general opinions and experiences . I have a 12" XVR and a DE 44 mag. I've shot my 460 scoped out to 200 meters off a bipod and while it can be done it takes an extreme level of steadiness. Gets very difficult obtaining (and maintaining) a clean scope reticle view especially if you need beyond 4x. There's a lot more shooter induced holding variables shooting a handgun at longer 75+yd distances. I enjoy the challenge shooting handgun at longer distances in a static holding situation. The 460 also packs a serious recoil wallop and you better well understand how to manage the recoil so as to not seriously injure yourself from getting whacked in the face. Some handgun scopes offer longer eye relief and if your shooting a 460 you better dam well have your face as far away as possible. An inexperienced 460 mag shooter in a potentially difficult hunting environment could be bad as far as personal injury. My DE44 is actually a nice shooter and manageable recoil (much more so than the 460). If it were me and I had to choose I would scope my DE44 and go with that. The only last issue with a scoped DE44 is the weight. DE's are heavy and adding the special rail and the optic makes a heavy gun even heavier (and more muzzle heavy as would be the case with fitting a scope to a DE as it clamps to the barrel.

[buckhorn_cortez]

The .460 X Frame is a large, heavy gun. You'll need a cross-chest holster for it. You won't be doing "plinking" with the .460 unless you use .45 Colt ammunition. However, I have found the one I own to be very accurate and there is a wide variety of hunting ammunition available for it for all different types of game.

A .44 magnum would be far lighter to carry and heavy loads are available from companies like Underwood, HSM, and Buffalo Bore.

You can also go plinking with the .44 magnum using .44 Special.

Both calibers have a variety of loads available, it depends on how much weight you want to carry and the size of the gun you feel comfortable shooting.

For the .44 magnum I own both S&W Model 29s in various barrel lengths and the Ruger Super Redhawk in various barrel lengths. For heavy loads the Ruger is superior to the S&W.

You can (and I have) shoot a Model 29 until the cylinder and frame are loosened. I had it repaired by a gunsmith who cautioned me not to shoot a lot of heavy loads in a Model 29. I've never had that problem with any of the Super Redhawks.

[Name of One Who Uses]

Practice is the key, and its not just handling the recoil, its about making an accurate shot for hunting. The .44 Magnum has killed dead just about everything that walks, including some very large bears. It has sufficient power.

Putting the right bullet in the right place at range is what matters, do that it works, don't and you won't be happy.

From what you wrote, you're not an experienced pistol shot, so you'll need practice to become one. For that reason I would say the .44 Magnum is a better choice, as cost is lower than the .460, brass is common, load data is plentiful, and so are the choices of pistols.

And the choice of pistol will matter on how well, and how easily you will learn to use it well.

Size, weight, grip shape, sights, and fit for you all matter, some guns are more user friendly than others.

I've been shooting .44 & .45 caliber pistols since the 80s, Ruger SAs, S&W N frames, T/C Contender and Auto Mag, Desert Eagle, Wildey and LAR Grizzly semi autos. I don't shoot bullets heavier than 240/250gr, I see no use for them. Not going to argue their advantages, I just don't need them, and they do recoil more.

I would say get a Ruger Super Blackhawk, and learn to shoot it well. Then after you have some skill to base valid opinions on, move to something else if you think it would benefit you.

I don't have any personal experience with the big X frames or the .460, never found the need to go beyond .44 mag levels generally, though I do shoot .45-70 and even .30-30 from my Contender.

Pistol hunting big game is a different challenge than doing it with a rifle, different things apply in different degrees.

Good Luck, I hope you fill your bucket list!

There's a lot of wisdom in the above quoted post. Read and heed, and my 2¢-

In the last 50+ I have hunted with rifles, scoped and open-sighted, shotguns, archery and handguns. By far the most difficult to master and to maintain proficiency with is the handgun, which just happens to have been my favorite hunting arm for the last decade or so. To really be proficient with a handgun one must expend a LOT of ammunition. Even then realistic ranges for most hunter with a handgun will be well under 100 yds. with 50 being the outside maximum for most.
To that end, one doesn't need a cannon for most hunting because your average handgun hunter can't hit game at very far distances. My first hunting revolver was a 4 3/4" Uberti SA in .44 Special. I loaded a 260 gr. cast SWC to a bit under 950 fps and it easily completely penetrated deer on broadside shots. 50 yds. was as far as I could hope to hit at the time I carried that revolver. During that time I also used a 45 Colt with a 288 gr. cast SWC running just under 1000 fps and it killed much the same way and penetrated far more than necessary. My aging eyes now need good, heavy sights so I've switched to Ruger Blackhawks and killed a boar with my BH .44 Special a few weeks ago. But early this year I dipped my toe into the .41 Magnum water and have been enjoying shooting them (2x Blackhawks). They're really no more powerful nor better than my beloved .44 Special's but I find them extremely easy to shoot at long range and now 100 yds. has become my maximum. Already in the last couple of months I've taken a couple of boars with it.

Most of the larger caliber revolvers are quite heavy and not only difficult to carry, but almost impossible to shoot offhand with any accuracy. This is important because under field conditions offhand shots will likely be the most common.

So to answer your question, I would get a .44 Magnum and never look back. Then get a reloading set up so you can tailor ammunition for practicing and have fun!

[44 AMP]

Most of the larger caliber revolvers are quite heavy and not only difficult to carry, but almost impossible to shoot offhand with any accuracy.

The Super Blackhawk with a 7.5" barrel specs at 47 ounces, which is also what a 6.5" S&W model 29 weighs, approximately.

Bigger guns do weigh more and sometimes a LOT more! The Desert Eagle goes over 4lbs, empty and nearly 5lbs fully loaded up.

Packing them is a chore, but not all that bad, as long as you're not using a regular belt holster. A shoulder holster or a chest rig is the way to go. Remember that the big pistols are intended to be a replacement for, not an addition to, a rifle.

In my younger days, I had no trouble ringing the 100yd gong offhand, one handed with my Ruger SAs, 5 out of 6 or better. Not everyone can do that, but it can be done. As for a rest in the field, I would carry a "walking stick" (aka a staff) tall as you are, or a head height less. Makes for easier getting around, climbing, and a decent shooting stick when the time comes.

[rodfac]

Practice is the key, and its not just handling the recoil, its about making an accurate shot for hunting. The .44 Magnum has killed dead just about everything that walks, including some very large bears. It has sufficient power......Putting the right bullet in the right place at range is what matters, do that it works, don't and you won't be happy.

Pretty good advice from .44 AMP....especially that underlined part....Practice will get you there, over time...and do it from realistic hunting positions. Best regards, and welcome to the forum. Rod