On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 19:40:35 -0400, Alex wrote:

wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:52:49 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 8/25/15 3:41 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 14:17:04 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsOJr9RHlh8


Actually this fellow is a terrific shot who has posted some amazing
firearm vids, if you are into that sort of thing.

He did get a snack out of this shoot.
It was interesting how fast it shed the energy on the watermelons

I'd be reluctant to shoot and waste a tasty watermelon!

I'm not sure what the hell you'd want a revolver that size for, other
than shooting watermelons. It sure isn't something you'd be able to
handle quickly and properly if you were in Alaska and were about to be
eaten by a huge bear.
I am not sure why you couldn't handle it quickly. The follow up shot
may be a bit slower but you should be able to get on target pretty
quickly if you handle the gun enough to be comfortable with it.

This is the kind of gun that almost demands that you reload.
You could load up some stuff at .45 ACP ballistics to get used to
pointing the gun, then load full power to get used to the recoil, if
that is possible.


It's not that bad and there are YouTube videos of women shooting it with
one hand!

It is still not something I would like to shoot a lot with full power
loads. That is particularly true if I was just doing point and shoot
drills.
I agree you should do some training with the full power load but a lot
is just as effective with a reduced charge. Cheaper too since you
could shoot cast bullets at subsonic speeds.

I have shot one several times. Its angry. Especially at $3. A pull

I think I'd be more suitable for a rifle cartridge myself

Tim wrote:
I think I'd be more suitable for a rifle cartridge myself

Problem with rifle round in a pistol, is the designed burn length. You get
lots of noise and a huge fireball out of a pistol. Would need to reload to
get better performance. Only pistol I sold was a Ruger .30 Carbine
revolver. As my dad said, you can cook the game at the same time you shoot
it. Was like the 3rd loudest pistol at the time. 70's.

On 8/26/15 8:22 AM, Tim wrote:
I have shot one several times. Its angry. Especially at $3. A pull



I suppose if you are a "collector" of S&W revolvers, it is one you might
like to have. I've watched a handful of videos of "professional"
shooters firing it off at various targets, and it doesn't seem as if it
were much fun to shoot...really heavy revolver, lots of recoil and
muzzle flip, loud, expensive ammo. We don't have much "grizz" around
here, and if I really needed a revolver for "defense," I think my .357
MAG is more than sufficient.

$3 a pop for ammo? Now *that* is a giggle.

Keyser Söze
On 8/26/15 8:22 AM, Tim wrote:
I have shot one several times. Its angry. Especially at $3. A pull



"I suppose if you are a "collector" of S&W revolvers, it is one you might
like to have. I've watched a handful of videos of "professional"
shooters firing it off at various targets, and it doesn't seem as if it
were much fun to shoot...really heavy revolver, lots of recoil and
muzzle flip, loud, expensive ammo. We don't have much "grizz" around
here, and if I really needed a revolver for "defense," I think my .357
MAG is more than sufficient.

$3 a pop for ammo? Now *that* is a giggle."




You would need a bloated 'Uncle Sam' pension to afford that ammo.

3 bucks a pop sounds reasonable considering there's probably 1 .500 to a few mil of 9mm

On 8/26/15 8:43 AM, Tim wrote:
3 bucks a pop sounds reasonable considering there's probably 1 .500 to a few mil of 9mm


Reasonable in terms of what? $3 a shot for ammo...??? If it is .500 S&W
Magnum, it is $1.50 to $2.00 a round for "ordinary" name brand ammo.
That's still about five times what I pay for good ammo for my AR 15 or
..357 MAG revolver.

I think it is more of a bragging rights firearm than anything really
useful for either target shooting or defense against grizz.

3 bucks a whack was when it was introduced. Don't know what it is now. I don't have one and don't want one. That is unless it's a bolt action long gun. And yes it's not a production for the masses so the expense justifies for the product.

On 8/26/15 8:38 AM, True North wrote:
Keyser Söze
On 8/26/15 8:22 AM, Tim wrote:
I have shot one several times. Its angry. Especially at $3. A pull



"I suppose if you are a "collector" of S&W revolvers, it is one you might
like to have. I've watched a handful of videos of "professional"
shooters firing it off at various targets, and it doesn't seem as if it
were much fun to shoot...really heavy revolver, lots of recoil and
muzzle flip, loud, expensive ammo. We don't have much "grizz" around
here, and if I really needed a revolver for "defense," I think my .357
MAG is more than sufficient.

$3 a pop for ammo? Now *that* is a giggle."




You would need a bloated 'Uncle Sam' pension to afford that ammo.


Well, reloading might be cheaper, but you'd have to have the reloading
equipment and the consumables. I don't reload at all, so I have no idea
what it might cost.