# why no .480



## bstall (Mar 7, 2010)

why doesnt ruger sell a pistol chambered for there own .480 cartridge


----------



## DanP_from_AZ (May 8, 2009)

bstall said:


> why doesnt ruger sell a pistol chambered for there own .480 cartridge


Just compare some sample ballistics of the Ruger .480 versus the "other big boys" in 7.5 inch barrels.

.45 Long Colt__ 225 grain_____920 fps_____423 lb-ft energy ( Silvertip HP in a 4.75 in. barrel )
.44 Magnum___300 grain____1150 fps_____881 lb-ft
.45 LC +P_____300 grain____1300 fps____1126 lb-ft ( Blackhawks, etc. - no cowboy clones allowed "up here" )

.480 Ruger____325 grain____1350 fps____1313 lb-ft

.475 Linbaugh__400 grain____1300 fps____1501 lb-ft
.454 Casull____300 grain____1650 fps_____1813 lb-ft

If you want less recoil and less go-power than the real big boys, buy a .44 Mag. You can shoot .44 Special "mild stuff" too.

Or, if you want more versatility than.44 Mag, shoot .45 Long Colt or .45 LC +P in your .454 Casull gun.
You now have a choice of heavy but mild, or about .44 Mag & .480 Ruger power, or "real big .454" go-power in the same gun.

You are stuck in limbo with a .480 Ruger "orphan". .480 Ruger is all it does. An idea whose time never came.
It was a cartridge nobody wanted. Or needed. Ruger dropped "a dud".

I'll bet Ruger marketing types foisted this off on "their engineers".

And, we haven't even got to the .500 S&W or the .460 S&W real big boys yet. :mrgreen:

Edit:
I forgot to disclose I'm just one voice in the wilderness expressing my ideas.
And, I own several ".45 Long Colt" firearms.
And, a Ruger Alaskan 2 1/2 inch barrel "super snubby" in .454 Casull.
As always, "your mileage may vary".


----------



## bstall (Mar 7, 2010)

thanks for the reply,thats exactly what i was looking for.i guess my next question would be,does anybody know if Ruger plans on chambering the .500 or.460?Again thanks for the reply,very informative.


----------



## DanP_from_AZ (May 8, 2009)

bstall said:


> . . . does anybody know if Ruger plans on chambering the .500 or.460?Again thanks for the reply,very informative.


I don't have any insight into Ruger's future plans, even though they have a "rather nice" factory here in Prescott.

You seem to have an interest in "big bore" revolvers, just like I do. You might look for the Guns & Ammo April 2010 issue. I bought it last week off the Safeway rack.
Its cover touts an article titled
".454 Casull to .500 S&W"
"Take a Spin with the Mega-Magnum Revolvers".

It's not the source for the ballistics info in my previous post, but it sure is a real good read with a lot of info about the history of various big bore revolver cartridge development.

Again, the following is just my impressions. I'm not privy to "insider data".

I think S&W was after the "most powerful handgun cartridge in the world" with the S&W .500 that came out around 2002.
And, magazines awarded them "the title". With under 50,000 psi, unlike the .454 Casull which can run up to a 60,000 psi SAMMI limit. Doing that with "low pressures" is a really neat engineering trick.
Can't argue too much with a revolver thats taken our bison, African Cape Buffalo, elephants, etc. with one-shot stops.

The S&W .460 Magnum was developed so S&W could claim "the fastest production revolver cartridge in the world". Came out around 2005 ?
Which it is. I think it did require running more pressure ( quite a bit more, actually ) than their .500 S&W.

If you get the impression that someone at S&W wanted own the "world standard" title in these two categories, you would be correct.
To paraphase someone in the area I used to work in, "it is good to be the king of product management in our company, and watch you engineers hop". Yes it is.
Even better if your CEO is on board supporting your goals with money. He apparenty was at S&W.

Finally, if you are not handloading, factory ammo up in this "rarefied atmosphere" is expensive.
Feeding my .454 Casull factory stuff is $2 "a pop". But, the boom is rather satisfying. 
And between my dog Sally, and the "boomer", I don't worry too much about black bears and lions on my six during my wilderness hikes. :mrgreen:


----------



## Blkhawk73 (Sep 2, 2006)

bstall said:


> thanks for the reply,thats exactly what i was looking for.i guess my next question would be,does anybody know if Ruger plans on chambering the .500 or.460?Again thanks for the reply,very informative.


 Chambering these two would require a whole new platform as neither will fit in any current cylinder frames Ruger makes. For what's a fairly small niche in the market, i don't see them investing the time, money and resources to go that route. 
Regarding the .480 Ruger...It died. It was a great idea that just came at the wrong time and didn't have time to grow a following strong enough to support it's production and growth. It was overshadowed by the .460 and .500 cartridges. many wish for a .480 SA Ruger but having discussed the cartridge and it's future with some factory reps...it's dead.


----------



## jaybirdjtski (Apr 15, 2010)

I noticed the same thing just the other day. I'm in the market for a big bore handgun and have been doing tons of research on the subject. Apparently, the 480 Ruger is a great cartridge with alot of stopping power and operates at less pressure than the 454, 460 or 500. Big bullet, big caliber and considerably less felt recoil than the other three. Supposedly more of a "push" than a jolt. From all the 480s for sale on Gunbroker I'd suspect something is up. Even though I handload and own a 29-2, I decided to pass on the 480 as I didn't want to take a hit if I tried to resell a gun chambered for a round that became an orphan.
So, now it's down to which Ruger to buy and in what caliber now that the 480 has been eliminated, for me anyway. I may just get another 44 mag, a Ruger, and load heavier than I feel comfortable running in the 29-2. Add to the mix, a 45 Colt in the Ruger frame can be loaded to 44 mag numbers but pushes a bigger, fatter bullet with supposedly more stopping power. Even the 44 mag has "Ruger-only" loads that seem pretty eye-popping.
I like the idea that, with the 44 mag, if I drove 500 miles to hunt and forgot my ammo, I could always find factory loads that would work.


----------



## Sully2 (Mar 9, 2010)

I figure that if a S&W #29 with a 6" barrel doesnt drop it.....Im in the wrong game!


----------



## DanP_from_AZ (May 8, 2009)

*One more time "around the horn"*



jaybirdjtski said:


> . . . Add to the mix, a 45 Colt in the Ruger frame can be loaded to 44 mag numbers but pushes a bigger, fatter bullet with supposedly more stopping power. . .


For some reason, which I can't remember, I came back to look at this thread again, and this caught my eye.

I'm pretty sure the "standard" .45 Long Colt case is NOT good to shove up the power scale. I seem to recall folks had problems with the case staying together when pushed. Not that it exploded when "loaded up", but that the cases exhibited stuff you really don't want to happen with reloads. Bulging, and cracking. Getting a Ruger in .45 LC solves the "gun strength" deal. But, you are still stuck with "the case". If you want this "+P" power, just get a .44 Mag.

And, that's why the .454 Casull was developed. It is longer than the .45 LC, so can't fit in the shorter cylinder. That solves the "really, how good is a Colt SAA clone" problem. I shoot normal .45 LC factory stuff in my Italian Pietta via EMF clone all the time. But, I'm not willing to try anything with "more power". For a while it was my "wilderness hiking companion" with Win Silvertips.

I don't even know if "factories" produce .45 LC +P stuff. I would think they would not want to do this with all the "modern clones" and "old metal" .45 LC revolvers out in the world. They've been made for 130 plus years. Liability is a powerful "market modifier", you know.

Even more important, the Casull case is "beefed up" to take the higher pressures, as well as just "more powder" with no problem. And, it uses a stronger rifle primer.

If you want, there are factory loads that are "reduced power" from full-bore Casulls. These fit in between the full power loads, and the "normal" .45 LC loads. In other words, sort of a ".45 LC +P" (or, .44 Mag) level. All done safely in a revolver chambered for .454 Casull.

My Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan in .454 is one beefy mother to handle a big boy cartridge and load variations. And, I think the Freedom Arms .454 SA obviously is in the same "more than beefy enough" category.

All this is from memory. Remember, I'm a 67 year old dude, and your mileage may vary. :mrgreen:


----------



## Mdnitedrftr (Aug 10, 2006)

DanP_from_AZ said:


> I don't even know if "factories" produce .45 LC +P stuff.


Cor-Bon make a +p defensive load. And Buffalo Bore makes a helluva +p round, 325gr./1325fps/1267ft. lbs. Thats what I carry in my 4" Redhawk when Im playing in the woods.

Im sure more manufacturers make them too...


----------



## Blkhawk73 (Sep 2, 2006)

Sully2 said:


> I figure that if a S&W #29 with a 6" barrel doesnt drop it.....Im in the wrong game!


 My thoughts exactly! Seems everyone has been jumping on the "I need more power" wagontrain the last few years. When did the game animals get tougher hides so that these underpowered factory loads were too meek? I think for many it's simply a testosterone thing. "Look at my super-ultra hot-loaded maxi-magnum".  For others it's probably wanting, maybe needing, the extra oomph to compensate for poor shooting ability.


----------



## DanP_from_AZ (May 8, 2009)

Mdnitedrftr said:


> Cor-Bon make a +p defensive load. And Buffalo Bore makes a helluva +p round, 325gr./1325fps/1267ft. lbs.


Thanks for the info. Cor-Bon has always been in the
"we've got the hottest stuff" business. More power to them. :mrgreen:

As far as "bigger and probably no better" for hunting, my .454 Alaskan is just for fun.
I haven't hunted since I was a child tasked with bringing things home to eat.
I would think a .44 Magnum "is plenty" for any of our North American four-legged friends.
We all know that shot placement is a lot more important than .44 Mag vs. .454 Casull.

Fun: fill plastic milk-jugs totally full of water. 
My Alaskan has noticeably "more effect" on them
than my .38 Spl. or my 9 mm. That's not much of a surprise.

And, please, no comments that .454 Casull was developed
to compensate for "inadequate length" of "that certain portion of the male anatomy". :anim_lol:


----------



## Blkhawk73 (Sep 2, 2006)

DanP_from_AZ said:


> And, please, no comments that .454 Casull was developed
> to compensate for "inadequate length" of "that certain portion of the male anatomy". :anim_lol:


 Can't say that was the reason for it's development, but I DO think it's the reason many of the hand-cannon cartridges are purchased. When one tool is too small, ya gotta compensate on another tool. :anim_lol:


----------

