biscuit jake

Anyone have ballistics figures on the 500 Smith from a rifle barrel? Maybe I am using the wrong search engines but I can't find any. Looks like a good little biscuit to shoot.

James B

Most of the guys on the NEF site that have chronograph ed them, claim they don't get much velocity increase with the 22 Inch Handi Rifle. I think they are pretty much loaded to their potential in the 10 inch revolvers.

A friend of mine has one in a custom built Encore and took a very large Alaskan Brown Bear with it. I believe he used the 375 Grain X bullet. One Shot.

In a rifle, I don't see it offering anything that you can't achieve with the 450 Marlin or hand loaded 45-70.

bigmatty65

well the 500 smith would make a little bigger hole on the way in.

[email protected]

Yep but I doubt that penetration would be near equal.

James B

I think that would depend on the bullet used. A hard cast bullet from the 50 cal should have good penetration as long as the velocity was kept down a bit. More bullets come out all the time and the 50 has potentail. However I still don't think it will do anything that the handloaded 45-70 won't do as well.( In a Rifle that is )

pricedo

Opinions & conjecture are great but has anyone actually chronographed a .500 S&W from a rifle?

I know the .454 Casull ballistics from my Rossi Puma with a 20" barrel are head over heels superior to the same ammo shot from my Ruger Super Redhawk revolver with a 7.5" vented barrel.

I can't believe that .500 S&W ballistics from a 22" closed system wouldn't be superior to those from a 6-7" vented revolver.

It doesn't make sense.

bojangles

New England Firearms/H&R has there Handi-Rifle available in .500S&W
I had mine cut to 16". What a kick! Literally.

Nomercy448

Hornady claims you should expect 250-300fps more out of a closed breech rifle barrel than their published handgun data. The tech I spoke with suggested that getting that bump seems to happen better for the slower burning powders for the 500 (makes sense at least).

So we'd be talking a 350grn bullet in the 2000fps ballpark, or a 500grn bullet somewhere in the 1600's. Comparatively, a strong action .45-70 will push into the 2100's with a 350grn pill, and can reach 1750fps+ with a 500grner.

Big difference? Nope. You're talking splitting hairs with 350grn pills, and not a huge difference between the two at 500grn pills.

Then again, you're talking a lot higher brass price on the 500 (although all of the brass out there seems to be high quality stuff), lower bullet selection, a pinch less powder, but a little less brass life (.45-70 brass seems to last forever with moderate loads!). I'd venture you'll see a bump in reloading cost (let alone factory ammo cost) between the 500 and the ol' Gov't, but neither of these are really high volume shooting cartridges anyway.

The only real difference is in the heavy pills. The shorter case of the .500S&W just can't make up for powder capacity loss when jumping up to heavy bullets. The .45-70 was designed for a lot lower energy density powder, so it has plenty of room left to fit big fat bullets down into the case. About a 20% energy difference between the two with 500grn pills. Not a lot, but nothing to sneeze at.

I personally wouldn't see the .500S&W as an advantage over a .45-70, but no harm in having more than one cartridge that offer the same performance (frankly sad I don't still have a .22-250 in the safe right now!!!).

Stick one in the boiler room of anything on the planet and whatever you hit with either of these rifles won't be telling a story about it tomorrow.

Nomercy448

Just to clarify I'm also assuming here that nobody is really talking about "long range" shooting with either cartridge, so the ballistic coefficient of either is really irrelevant. The .45-70 would have better ballistic coefficients, but at the ranges we're talking about, and the paltry BC's for either, the difference really isn't worth considering.

Personally, I'd say if you can dope the .45-70 effectively to 300yrds, than you could equally dope the .500 S&W to 300yrds, because in either case, practice and accurate range estimation is critical, much moreso than flatter shooting rounds. Neither of these are a good choice for long range hunting application, I'd personally be looking at a 250-300yrd max for either, regardless of their impact energy at 400yrds+.

Blackelk

My 41 rem mag rifle gains 17.85 fps per inch of barrel past 6". The 45 Lc rifle gains 16.74 fps per inch of barrel past 6" So I'm saying Nomercy is close it will be 200 plus fps depending on powder and barrel length. I do think the 500 S&W will the advantage of system shock beings it has a larger surface bearing on impact. But the ballistics will never show that as much if the bullets are of the same weight. I'd love to have one in a Marlin lever action. Would make a very neat bear/hog gun.