Page 1 of 1
Re: 'Thunder Snub' BFR in .45-70
Posted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 11:20 am
by ELB
I’ll bet ankle carry is “problematic.”
Re: 'Thunder Snub' BFR in .45-70
Posted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 11:31 am
by The Annoyed Man
Nope.
NOOOOOOOO.
HECK NO!
Nope.
I just sold a .45-70 rifle because it was too much of a slobber-knocker for me. I not crazy enough for a handgun in that caliber.
Nope.
Re: 'Thunder Snub' BFR in .45-70
Posted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 11:56 am
by Pawpaw
I bet that thing makes TAM's scandium .357 seem like a pop gun.
Re: 'Thunder Snub' BFR in .45-70
Posted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 12:24 pm
by strogg
So tempting in .500 S&W...
I like the BFRs over the X frame for two reasons. One, the BFR is single action only, so there's no risk of accidentally pulling the trigger twice due to immense recoil. And two, the cylinder is 3 inches long, a whole 0.7in longer than the X frame cylinder. As a reloader, I can do some very interesting things with it that I can't do with the X frames. The same goes if you like to reload .45-70. The cylinder is .45" longer than the standard OAL of the .45-70. Think of the possibilities.
On an unrelated note, I can see wrist and hand reconstructive surgery in my future...
Re: 'Thunder Snub' BFR in .45-70
Posted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 12:39 pm
by The Annoyed Man
Pawpaw wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 11:56 am
I bet that thing makes TAM's scandium .357 seem like a pop gun.
Once burned, twice shy.
Re: 'Thunder Snub' BFR in .45-70
Posted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 3:06 pm
by K-Texas
As a handloader I can say that any handgun cartridge where the powder charge only occupies a small portion of the available powder space, is more novelty than anything else. With maybe the exceptions of 30,000 PSI .45 Colt loads and the .454 Casull, which I will never own personally, I just can't see any practical reason for owning or shooting anything larger. If I can't kill a game animal with a .41 or .44 Magnum, it's time for a rifle. Even then, the .45-70 case has a larger powder capacity than is usable. It was, after-all, created as a Black Powder cartridge. Then I wonder what the current going rate is for lighting off a round of .460 or .500 S&W Mag? But hey, I guess you can impress somebody by showing up to the range with one, firing once or twice, then set it aside for viewing? It's been some years since the last time I even saw someone at the range firing a large SA .454 Casull.
Then there's the old saying from P.T. Barnum!
Re: 'Thunder Snub' BFR in .45-70
Posted: Sat Feb 08, 2020 12:30 am
by joe817
That thing screams "WRIST BREAKER!!!" No thanks. I've had my wrist broken a long time ago. No thank you, I'll pass.
Re: 'Thunder Snub' BFR in .45-70
Posted: Sat Feb 08, 2020 8:05 am
by Jusme
There is a long tradition of carrying one ammo, for both rifle and pistol, but, as you may well know, that tradition maxed out at 45 L.C.
Ya'll have fun with that, and send videos, we would all love to see the before and after ER pictures,
Re: 'Thunder Snub' BFR in .45-70
Posted: Sun Feb 09, 2020 2:13 pm
by K-Texas
Jusme wrote: Sat Feb 08, 2020 8:05 am
There is a long tradition of carrying one ammo, for both rifle and pistol, but, as you may well know, that tradition maxed out at 45 L.C.
Ya'll have fun with that, and send videos, we would all love to see the before and after ER pictures,
Yep, and the .44-40 WCF. Still a great idea, and even better with modern cartridges like the .357, .41 and .44 Mags. Nothing wrong with the .45 Colt either! Back in the day of black powder cartridges, having a revolver and a carbine chambered for the same round was essential for many. And lots of rounds got loaded by the campfire with Lyman handtools.
After my last post I thought about a larger magnum that I would consider that seems practical to me, the .480 Ruger. There are a couple of Super Redhawk options with one being a 2.5" snub. It's a dealer exclusive, but there is a 6.5" stainless Bisley model:
https://www.ruger.com/products/newModel ... /0870.html They show a 4 5/8" model as well.
The 2.5" snub being a SR Alaskan is obviously meant for bear protection. Really a shame that the Dan Wesson 460 revolver didn't catch on for that. From a 4" barrel ballistics are better than the .44 Mag while it shoots all of the .45 caliber auto cartridges. IMO, it's kind of a shame that CZ bought Dan Wesson essentially for the 1911s. Only one revolver currently available and it's more expensive than some find practical with the 715. Now that the Python is back at around the same MSRP, the 715s days may be numbered.
Re: 'Thunder Snub' BFR in .45-70
Posted: Sun Feb 09, 2020 2:24 pm
by cirus
That'll fit nicely if the wife's purse.
Re: 'Thunder Snub' BFR in .45-70
Posted: Sun Feb 09, 2020 3:54 pm
by mrvmax
I saw that article the other day, if i could find one for cheap (6-700 range) I would try one but not for that custom price. I bought a Freedom Arms model 83 Field grade In 454 Casull off Gunbroker for what seemed like a decent price (around $1000 with a scope and mount which was much less that others for sale at the time). i checked the serial number and if I remember correctly it was made in the 90’s yet looked rarely used. The first time I shot it I found out why - it hurt to shoot. Now I own a S&W 500 with the 4” barrel (which is really 3” since 1” is the compensator) so recoil does not bother me. This model 83 hurt much worse and it was not fun to shoot, even with gloves. So, I sent it off to have it Magna-Ported along with an action job and tuning. After the Magna-Porting it was a different gun and was pleasant to shoot and I killed a feral hog at 93 yards with it.
I have another hand cannon that you would not think would hurt to shoot. It is a Double Tap in 45ACP with a ported barrel. It looks similar to a derringer with one barrel on top of another. Oh, it’s aluminum too so it is light weight. I would rather shoot my 500 that’s that one and when I take people out to the range I challenge them to try and shoot 6 rounds through it. On person did to but that is the most. Here is what it looked like:
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/gun-r ... et-pistol/
Looking at that BFR I cannot think of a purpose for it. I bear country I would prefer a double action like my 500 so follow up shots would be quicker and easily done one handed. Maybe in 10 years I will find a slightly used BFR in 45-70 cheap on Gubroker and I will pick one up.
Re: 'Thunder Snub' BFR in .45-70
Posted: Mon Feb 10, 2020 7:21 pm
by K-Texas
mrvmax wrote: Sun Feb 09, 2020 3:54 pm
I saw that article the other day, if i could find one for cheap (6-700 range) I would try one but not for that custom price. I bought a Freedom Arms model 83 Field grade In 454 Casull off Gunbroker for what seemed like a decent price (around $1000 with a scope and mount which was much less that others for sale at the time). i checked the serial number and if I remember correctly it was made in the 90’s yet looked rarely used. The first time I shot it I found out why - it hurt to shoot. Now I own a S&W 500 with the 4” barrel (which is really 3” since 1” is the compensator) so recoil does not bother me. This model 83 hurt much worse and it was not fun to shoot, even with gloves. So, I sent it off to have it Magna-Ported along with an action job and tuning. After the Magna-Porting it was a different gun and was pleasant to shoot and I killed a feral hog at 93 yards with it.
I have another hand cannon that you would not think would hurt to shoot. It is a Double Tap in 45ACP with a ported barrel. It looks similar to a derringer with one barrel on top of another. Oh, it’s aluminum too so it is light weight. I would rather shoot my 500 that’s that one and when I take people out to the range I challenge them to try and shoot 6 rounds through it. On person did to but that is the most. Here is what it looked like:
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/gun-r ... et-pistol/
Looking at that BFR I cannot think of a purpose for it. I bear country I would prefer a double action like my 500 so follow up shots would be quicker and easily done one handed. Maybe in 10 years I will find a slightly used BFR in 45-70 cheap on Gubroker and I will pick one up.
DA revolvers have a lower bore axis for sure. I agree that a revolver for bear country would be DA for me.