Dirty Harry was a pussy.....S&W .460 is the way to go.

The Backpack Cannon: Smith & Wesson unveil their new monster revolver

 

One word............why?

 

Gonna need big hands for that fat boy!

 

When .45 just won't do?

 

Thinking my .45 can handle business just fine! Also, look at the price for the gun itself and then factor in the price per shot for ammo.....

 

Right up there with the .500S&W, 454 Casull, and so forth. Novelty weapons and nothing more.

 

Yeah sorry, forgot the sarc smiley. Just a play on an old joke.

 

S&W finally catching up with Ruger... wonder how the .460 S&W stacks up to the .480 Ruger? Neither of them as suitable as a shotgun for serious bear country...

 

Don't get me wrong, I am not knocking it, but I have no practical need for it. If it suits you, go for it and enjoy. I will stick to the .45 as well as the 12 gauge. Wont get into the list of owned weapons, but I believe I am just fine w/o this one!

 

I am, like, soooo unimpressed.

Essentially, S&W reamed a .45 caliber pistol out another ten one-thousandths of an inch to make it into a .46 caliber weapon. Big deal. That's about the thickness of two human hairs--say, one on each side,

They obviously designed this "huge pistol" to look as large and heavy as possible. As if they had to use immense mass to tame a ferocious recoil. Yawn.

Surprise! It's not the size of the bullet that generates the recoil. It's the amount of powder behind it. If they loaded the .46 cartridges with the same amount of powder as a standard .45ACP, the pistol would kick about like a .45ACP. And the slightly heavier bullet would just trundle out the end of the barrel a little bit slower than a .45ACP.

Nothing impressive there.

What's really counter-impressive is how high the barrel sits on the frame. Even with "normal" recoil, that handgun looks like a real wrist-twister. Remind me not to leave my face behind the gun if I ever have to shoot it. Six-gun Spinout can leave an ugly mark on a previously pretty forehead.

What I would consider quite impressive would be a .45 caliber pistol with a longer case and three times as much powder stuffed in it. That would put the old & slow .45 down the road with the same kind of velocity we'd all expect in a decent rifle. The .45 out of a Thompson does about 950 ft/sec. A 30-06 does about 2,601 ft/sec.

A triple-loaded .45 should boogie out of the barrel at about 2850 ft/sec (MOLYMMV).

That would require a nice long Buntline barrel to hold the muzzle down and make sure all that powder burned, and an extra ten pounds of steel to tame the ungodly recoil. And you'd probably need a six-foot Swede to help lift the muzzle up. Sort of like a human bipod.

And, since they don't make triple-strength ear protection, you might as well have the doctor remove your eardrums before you try to shoot it.

Hmm. Long barrel. Heavy. Wood forestock to help hold up the barrel. Sounds like a rifle to me.

In fact, it sounds like a Soviet rifle to me.

And, of course, in the interest of simple amusement, you'd want that in full-auto with the big drum magazine, because in the final analysis a little fun is no fun at all!

 

Not quite my style, but if I were ever to buy another wheel gun I would most definitely go with a 454 Casull.

 

I used to carry one when I was a lumberjack in the Sahara Forest. We had all sorts of elephant problems before that....

 

.45-70 loads are available with a 405gr jacketed flat point bullet propelled at 2,000 feet per second for a tooth rattling 3,597 foot pounds of muzzle energy.

Tasty, what?

 

I get it, to have the biggest baddest toy on the block. Just not my style.

 

I believe I will have too pass on this Koolaid.....

 

I've seen that gun before!



and it had better bullets!

 

I posted this article, because I don't usually post in the firearms forum, and the subject of the post had a little novelty value to it, and I was curious about what you guys made of it. (No women seemed interested in throwing in an opinion, (but the size of the purse needed to carry it in might have been worth a comment, I would have thought.)

To @UncleMorgan....First Prize

For the number and quality of throw away lines and chuckle value.

To BTPost.....Second prize

For nice chuckle value from first quip, followed up by a logically fallacious 2nd quip. Had me laughing on both accounts, which I guess what was intended.

To @chimo
For going the rabbit gun (as opposed to elephant gun) route, and nice graphics.

Well done all repondents