Posted: December/26/2005 at 5:34pm | IP Logged

I found a new 7.5" BFR 45-70 for $1150.00 where the price is normally around $1650.00 to $1750.00 Canadian funds.

So before this handgun ban comes into effect (if it does?) I'm trying to decide if it is something that I should be buying.

I have a Marlin 1895GS 45-70 and a T/C Contender carbine with a 22" 45-70 barrel so it would be kind of cool to have a handgun shooting my 45-70 loads.

Has anyone here used or fired this handgun?

Cam

Posted: December/27/2005 at 12:22am | IP Logged

I've fired the 500 Smith BFR which is built on the same frame.  The one I fired had the longer 9 1/2 barrel or something like that.  It was HUGE!  Recoil with the stock grips absolutely sucked due to the poor shape, but that is probably an easy fix.  Your 45-70 would still be a little too large for my tastes, but then again, if it can shoot those 500 grain 45-70 loads, that could sway me into getting one!  

-Tutt

Posted: December/27/2005 at 12:10pm | IP Logged

Tutt

I know it's huge but it would be pretty cool to let loose 5 of my 550gr Jae-Bok Young Crater's out of it.

I wonder even if I can do it accurately or without ripping my wrist off?

OK if I do this I'll start with lighter loads.

Cam

Posted: December/27/2005 at 2:32pm | IP Logged

"I know it's huge but it would be pretty cool to let loose 5 of my 550gr Jae-Bok Young Crater's out of it."-Cam

I think that would be EXTREMELY COOL! 

-Tutt

Posted: January/05/2006 at 7:06pm | IP Logged

Holy Moly!  Tym actually POSTED something???    My world is shaken!  I now believe in the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny and Santa Clause!!!    LOL

-Tutt

Posted: January/05/2006 at 8:06pm | IP Logged

"Can you hear

me now?"

Posted: January/05/2006 at 8:37pm | IP Logged

Seriously Tym, don't feel too bad.  I'll probably be bleeding all over the place the first time I shoot your BFR with the stock grips!    And keep on postin! 

-Tutt

Posted: May/31/2006 at 11:53am | IP Logged

I have a BFR in .475 Linbaugh, and like it very much.

I have shot the .45-70 and the .500 S&W BFR's. That long action (cylinder) is just too much. The long action just does not balence well in my hand.

The BFR is a very fine, well made gun.

Deereman

Posted: May/31/2006 at 7:16pm | IP Logged

Thanks for the info....

I was as I stated earlier looking at one which has already sold but was still considering purchasing one someday.

Cam

Posted: May/31/2006 at 11:01pm | IP Logged

Deereman, I have to agree with you.  I, too, have shot the BFR in 500 Magnum with the extra long cylinder, and didn't like it.  I have also had the oppurtunity to spend quality time with Tym's BFR, and even with the stock grips, I liked it more than I thought I would.  It is shootable, even with the stock grips, but shooting gloves did help.  I still think they could improve their product by going to a more Bisley-like frame, but for the money, it is an outstanding gun!  Tym and I highly recommend one. 

-Tutt

Posted: June/02/2006 at 1:27pm | IP Logged

Hello Cam, Tym, Tutt;

Cam, -- You absolutely can not go wrong with a BFR. If you have not tried one, suggest you do. More and more of them are showing up on the range. If it is the 45-70 that turns your head, I can only offer this. Maybe an urban legend, but I'm told you need a barrel longer than what the BFR offers to burn all the powder in the 45-70, to gain the full potential of the round. A friend is looking to get a BFR in .50 Beowolf to go with his Alexander Arms .50 Beowolf AR. Sounds like you favor the .45-70 to compliment your Marlin and TC.

Tym, --  Fully agree with you. The BFR is indeed one of the finer SA revolvers out there, and they seem to get better. Examples I have looked at recently are even smoother and seen to have finer fit than the ones from 2 years ago. No, they are not quite a Freedom Arms. This might sound like heresey, but holding by BFR and FA side by side, there is not that much of a difference, even though I prefer the FA. You do have to weigh that $1200+ dollars in cost though.

Posted: June/02/2006 at 1:56pm | IP Logged

Tutt;

You hit the nail on the head about the grips and the grip frame on the BFR. The grips are horrible. My local gun guru replaced mine by fitting an oversized pair of custom grips intended for a Ruger BH. They fit my hand well, and are a lot more comfortable on my .475. As you said, a more Bisley-like grip frame would be ideal. Bisley-like, or more like a FA? Which has the better grip frame is hard to say.

I have a .454 stainless 5 1/2" worked Ruger BH with the Ruger Bisley grip frame and 5 shot cylinder. I also have a FA .454 with barrel shortened to 5 1/2". They are about as close as two guns can be. Hard to say which grip style is better, I think I'll have to give the nod to the FA, by only a very slight margin. I think the FA fits my hand better. Now, My 6" BFR in .475 and my 6" FA in .475, there is no argument, the FA grip wins hands down. The  only reason I bought the BFR, is because it has a longer cylinder than the FA.

As you say, the BFR is an outstanding gun, and there is no way you can beat it for the money. Many of the custom makers are now using the BFR instead of the Ruger as the basis for their guns as I understand.

I too, highly recommend the BFR.

Deereman

Posted: June/03/2006 at 12:16am | IP Logged

"Many of the custom makers are now using the BFR instead of the Ruger as the basis for their guns as I understand."

Deerman, I was not aware of this, but it certainly makes sense!  I appreciate hearing your experiences with both an FA and a Bisley.  I have long been tempted to convert my 5 1/2" Bisley (and so has Cam) into a 5 shot .454, but a couple of things have always stopped me:  1)  Mine is an Accusport SS Bisley, and while they made a lot of them, they are sort of limited production and I loath to change it too much.  They are supposed to be coming out with another run of them, so this may no longer be an issue.  2) I really like the scroll work on the stock cyclinder, and have tried to modify the gun, but retain its "stock" look overall.  3) With heavy .45 LC loads, it is still a handfull!  It is actually harder to shoot than my Raging Bull .454.  4)  There is still something to be said for having 6 chambers and not 5.  But to hear you talk about it, the conversion is still VERY tempting! 

I was really dreading shooting Tym's BFR in .454 from what he had told me, and my previous experiences with the .500 Mag version.  I was truly surprised how shootable the gun was.  It would still benefit from grips narrower in the waist and thicker on top so the gun doesn't jump down into your hand, but all in all it was not the monster I thought it would be.  It does take a firm grip, otherwise it will smack you in the head  when shot from a rest (just ask Tym!)   At least this time I didn't bleed! 

-Tutt

Posted: June/03/2006 at 5:45pm | IP Logged

Tym and Tutt, you guys kill me!   

It's timely that all this custom stuff comes up.  With a house purchase coming up, my wife and I have agreed that there needs to be adequate room for my expanded 'smithing needs.  Also, custom Rugers or the customizing of Rugers has been an ongoing conversation.  Blackhawks and Vaqueros, the foundation for custom greatness.  I know Lee Martin and his father have a ton of extra parts!

I've even considered some custom BH's for concealed carry.  A local shop is now doing custom holsters now; he'll make a holster for anything.  I'm thinking something like similar to the Hoffner holster where the barrel is inside the waistband, but the cylinder rides above the belt.  I've got one for the S&W K/L frames and it just rocks!

The 45-70 in a handgun is easy to fix.  I'm going through similar stuff in other calibers.  Handloading is the key.  The powder choice is more crucial than anything initially.  Once you get the right powder, then projectile choice is next.  There is a huge advantage in the 45-70 in that it is an old cartridge.  Everything has been tried with it at some point, and data is more than plentiful.

There's a lot of guns chambered for it too.  I've had a desire to get one for some time.  The Marlin leverguns are sweet, the NEF singles, particularly the Buffalo Classic is awesome, but my handgun tastes are in the 4" barrel category though.  Whew!  A 4" 45-70 handgun?! 

Posted: June/05/2006 at 12:05pm | IP Logged

TymShoot1stHurs wrote: Deereman, Did your gunsmith need to trim or otherwise work the BH grips to fit your BFR frame?  It looks about 1/16' or so larger.  I agree that the rubber ones suck, and I kind of knew that going in (thaks to Tutt) but the other mitigating qualities won the day.  I would love to change these some time soon. Magnum Research sells a set of Black Micarta Grips that I am interested in trying out.  They say they are good for smaller hands: http://www.magnumresearch.com/Expand.asp?ProductCode=BFR81 7

Tym,

I had seen a BFR at the Chicago Sports Show this year with factory black micarta grips, but didn't get to handle it. I know Hogue and I believe Eagle make grips for the BFR.

The grips I had done for mine, are micarta. He got a pair of oversized grip blanks for a Ruger BH. They were quite a bit larger, and he fitted them to the BFR frame, and reduced the width to fit my hand. they work out well for me, and made the gun a lot more comfortable to shoot.

Deereman

Posted: June/05/2006 at 12:52pm | IP Logged

Tutt,

Apparently Magnum Research makes their BFR frames available to custom gunsmiths, from what I was told.

I am aware of the accusport stainless Ruger Bisley, but have never seen one for sale. If they are making another run of them, I have to hunt one down. Would make a nice companion piece to my .454 Bisley. My 5 1/2" .454 Bisley, started life as a stainless BH. Ham Bowen fitted a custom 5 1/2"  band front sight barrel, a Ruger stainless Bisley Vaquero grip frame, the 5 shot cylinder and incorporated interchangable front sights and his rear sight. Not to mention a FANTASTIC action. It is a beautiful gun, accuracy wise it is no better than my FA which had it's 6" barrel shortened to 5 1/2" by FA.

As far as the Bisley cylinder, you and I differ. The scroll work is rolled onto the cylinder and never impressed me. I would imagine you could always have similar engraved on a smooth cylinder or any scene you wished. A shooting companion has a custom 7 1/2" blued Bisley, and had bears engraved on the smooth 5 shot cylinder.

I have never found much difference between having a 5 or 6 shot cylinder -- what are you referring to?

The Bisley's are really nice guns, shame Ruger does not make it in .454 and shame BFR doesn't make a Bisley!

Deereman

Posted: June/05/2006 at 1:00pm | IP Logged

2guntom,

Are you a gunsmith, specializing in reworking or building custom Ruger Blackhawks or Vaquero's?

TIA

Deereman

Posted: June/05/2006 at 4:23pm | IP Logged

Not yet.  I am a 'smith, but I would have to do several of my own Ruger's before I even considered touching somebody else's.  I'm just doing repairs at the moment.  My location and the fact that we will be moving has postponed the purchase of the necessary tooling and machines to do the work properly.

There are some goals that are pushing me.  I've got several S&W revolvers that need longer barrels.  I've priced getting the work done, but I probably wouldn't be able to get my money back if I ever sold the guns (the obvious alternative is to do it myself).  I've seen a lot of different customized Rugers and I freak out every time.  I'm going to do BH's with custom barrels from 2" - 3 1/2" to get started.  There will be variations with custom cylinders, calibers, and subframes.  What I like, I'll keep; what I don't will be sold.

My wife is also driving me to full-time 'smithing.  She likes seeing me happy, and she knows how happy I am working on guns.  I don't know that I have ever had a bad time or bad day working on guns.

Heading back to the original topic, I could see where the BFR's could use some 'smithing.  They've got some of the best selections in caliber, but the barrels are so freakin' long (by my standards).  Working with micarta and some of the other polymer/woven blends isn't too difficult, but would it be better to fit a Ruger subframe to it instead?  That would open up a lot more grip options, and the Bisley grip could be an option too.  And, a 3 1/2 - 4 1/2" 454 could be had for a whole lot less than an FA.

Posted: June/07/2006 at 9:27am | IP Logged

2guntom;

When you move your location, do you have to give up your FFL, and then reapply for another FFL for your new location?

Have you worked on many BFR's, repairs, etc. - shortening BFR barrels? I am seriously considering having the barrel on my .475 BFR shortened to 5 1/2", can you improve upon the BFR action?

Can a Bisley grip frame be fitted to the BFR, have you done any of these?

Just curious, why would you even consider sending your S&W's out to have barrels installed, instead of doing them yourself, or don't you work on S&W's and only specialize in single actions?

Last question -- do you have a web site or price list on your services?

TIA

Deereman

Posted: June/07/2006 at 5:55pm | IP Logged

No, I am simply doing repairs for a local shop.  Nothing fancy, nothing custom, just repairs.

If you are needing work done, you should inquire of David Clements.  He has a mini forum where you can ask questions and get prices.  He comes highly recommended for top notch work and a quick turnaround time.

I don't recommend making single action trigger pulls very light, but removing creep is always a good thing. A crisp break is the key.

To shorten a barrel, there are 2 different approaches.  The first is a new barrel.  Sometimes that is more plausable.  The other requires cutting the original barrel, recrowning, re-blueing (if necessary), and the installation of a new sight or modifying and re-installing the old one.  You could get into a situation where the rear sight needs to be replaced too.  So far, this requires a lathe and a precision drill press (some of the equipment I don't have yet).

On single actions, depending on the make/model of gun, and how short the final barrel will be, the ejector rod and housing will have to be modified.  A milling machine may come in handy (I don't have one of those either).  When the barrel length gets real short, it becomes a "sheriff's model" and the ejector rod and housing are eliminated.  Now there is a hole in the frame where the housing used to be; that has to be removed, then the gun has to be refinished.

With heavy mods like this the dynamics of the gun change immensely.  Before I could possibly return the gun to the owner, it would have to be test fired with the owner's preferred ammo.

Work like this runs from $250 - $500 depending on the variables.  This is why I probably will never do 'smithing full time.  I could easily be involved with a single gun for a week or more before I was completely satisfied.  I would starve to death spending the amount of time required to turn out perfect guns by my standards.

Speaking conceptually, a BFR shares similarities with a Ruger.  Rugers have what they call a "sub frame"; this is what the grips are attached to.  If you look at the various Ruger single action models you see 3 different subframes- standard, bird's head, and Bisley.  There are slightly different dimensions with the new Vaquero vs the old and the BH, and minor differences to that of a BFR.  So what brings all these together is a milling machine, possibly some shims, then some custom final fitting with hand files and a mototool.

I'm not adequately tooled or experienced to do any of this at the moment.  David Clements or possibly Steve at Steve's Gunz can help.

You'll know when I'm ready to do this for others.  There will be pictures on this forum of a bird's head gripped, 3" barrelled .357Mag Vaquero; something similar in .45Colt; a 4" barrelled BH with a properly bored 9mm barrel, with cylinders for 9mm and .357Sig.  I'll probably be typing like I just changed my drawers too!    A pack of smokes and couple cups of coffee, I'll be good to go.

For comparison, I think of dropping a big block V-8 in a Pinto.  Is it possible?  Yes, and it's pretty danged cool when you're done.  But, you have to do one to properly appreciate it.  The tools and experience to have reproducable results, well, you get what I'm saying.

The S&W revolvers aren't a huge deal.  To remove a 1 13/16" barrel from a 649 and replace it with a new 3" barrel made for a 60 isn't a major ordeal; it's like replacing a screw.  Swapping out and trying different sights to align with the notch rear, not a big deal.  But, a lathe is going to be needed to work the breach end of the barrel to properly set the cylinder gap.  Supposedly there is an alternative to the lathe; there are these infamous "shims" that you can use instead.  I have yet to find any of these shims.

No website on this.  I'm just doing this through a local shop for now.

Posted: June/07/2006 at 8:39pm | IP Logged

2guntom wrote: For comparison, I think of dropping a big block V-8 in a Pinto.  Is it possible?  Yes, and it's pretty danged cool when you're done.  But, you have to do one to properly appreciate it.  The tools and experience to have reproducable results, well, you get what I'm saying.

Ahhhh... yes those where the days.......

I guess we just totally dated ourselves......

My first car that I drove around in was a Pinto station wagon that I blacked out the back windows, always kept the back seat down, threw a ton of blankets and pillows in and installed my spare set of house speakers.

Those where the most fun carefree days of my life.  When I needed horse power I jumped into my buddies Trans Am with a 455 dual turbo's nitrous oxide injected engine.  Mine was the party car....

Cam

Posted: June/08/2006 at 6:38pm | IP Logged

Cam,

you kill me!

Mine was a 2-wheel drove Nissan pickup.  It had a fiberglass cap, tinted windows, carpet, a couch that folded out, a light... but it was jinxed!  Things finally started to, uh, "happen" when I sold the couch! 

I still have the truck

My buddy (who I got the truck from) had an early 70's Nova- small block to the max, auto trans with manual shift kit w/reverse shift pattern, line lock, stutter box, tubbed and channeled, roll cage, woooo mamma!  I still remember looking under the rear bumper- rubber, differential, and two 3 1/2" tail pipes.  It sat factory height, but had 39" rear tires.  Who needs viagra!

Posted: June/09/2006 at 11:19am | IP Logged

Sorry, I guess I misunderstood you when you said you were a gunsmith and talked of shortend BFR barrels and different grip frames. Guess you are a little handicapped without  a lath, mill, or even a drill press. Does the shop you work for have this equipment? What kind of repairs do you do, do you take work in from out of state?

I had asked, if you move your present location, do you have to give up your federal license and then have to reapply for a new FFL at your new or future location?

I'm fully aware of Dave Clements, he does beautiful work. I have also had work done by Bowen, Linbaugh, and Mag-Na-Port. Mag-Na-Port has shortwened barrels for me in the past, but I'm always looking for someone new. One of the guys at the club, is a machinest and tool and die maker. He has a mill, small and large lathe, surface grinder, etc. in his basement he is a hobbiest, amateur gunsmith and does nice work on his own guns. He is considering getting a FFL.

Thanks for your advice and input.

Deereman

Posted: June/10/2006 at 6:27pm | IP Logged

"I have never found much difference between having a 5 or 6 shot cylinder -- what are you referring to?"

Hi Deereman, sorry it took so long to respond.  It is the last few weeks of school, and I'm super busy trying to wind things up.  Anyhow, to answer your question, I guess it depends on the caliber, what you need the gun for, and how much security do you want while carrying it?  I sometimes like the total security of carrying an empty chamber under the hammer in my Bisley when I can, plus it is just the traditional methodology for a single action.  This still leaves me with 5 shots.  In my tent at night in bear country with the gun next to me, I feel comfortable having it fully loaded with six .45 Long Colt +P (with Punch Bullets) as snagging the hammer isn't an issue.  But if I were hiking through heavy brush with a holster that leaves the hammer exposed, I might prefer loading for 5 again.  This is based upon the experiences of a friend in Alaska who has a FA .454.  He was carrying it fully loaded at half-cock, but somehow snagged the hammer, and shot himself in the lower leg.  It destroyed his tibia bone (he now has a metal rod).  He is lucky he did not bleed-out before he and his friend found help.  Now the transfer bar system of a Ruger is different from the FA to be sure (so in fact, a modified Ruger or BFA might be the best way to go for a conversion!) but it still makes me want to be safe.  FA recommends NOT keeping all 5 loaded.  I now see why.  I have to wonder if the same could not have happened with a transfer bar system too?  If the transfer bar is struck hard enough, it will strike the hammer.  So, that is why.  The FA might in fact be a 4-shot carry gun, at least, without a holster that covers the hammer.  I don't find that appealing.  Anyhow, the traditional 6 shooter still has value to my mind.  

-Tutt   

Posted: June/12/2006 at 12:03am | IP Logged

I just came back from a weekend of prospecting and shooting with my son.

I carried one of my stainless steel Ruger Bisley Vaquero's chambered in 45 Colt everywhere with me in a Bob Mernickle's cross draw holster, 1 1/2" double layer belt and two 6 round ammo belt holders. I really like Bob's stuff.

Through all of my hiking, bending, sitting, panning, digging, etc I always kept the gun loaded with 6 330gr Jae-Bok Young WFNGC's with a top load of H110 powder.

Cam

Posted: June/12/2006 at 1:00pm | IP Logged

-Tutt

Appreciate your respose, and I think I know where your coming from.

Years ago, I saw a video where they took a Ruger Blackhawk with a round under the hammer, and beat on the hammer with a dead blow hammer and could not get it to fire. I feel safe carrying a loaded round under the hammer on my guns that have transfer bars. With my Colt SA's for CAS and my Freedom Arms, I keep an empty chamber under the hammer when carrying. Until you story, I never heard of anyone getting injured carrying a full five rounds in a FA's revolver. Is Freedom Arms aware of this story. I know they tell you to keep an empty chamber under the hammer.

As far as when I'm camping in the weeds, in a tent camp hunting or in a cabin in the sticks, I always keep my FA's fully loaded. Also, that pistol is reassuring in camp, but my rifle is more reassuring, and close at hand.

Years back, I think it was Outdoor Life, had an article where they set up a target on a track to simulate a bear attack. They ran the target at speeds associated with a bear attack and started it at the various distances that had been described in a number of actual attacks. The handguns used in the test, ran the gammut from .357 through .454. Long story shor, the average hunter could only get off 4 good aimed shots at the target with the .357 and and this was reduced to 2 with the .454 that hit target and 3 poorly aimed shots before the target reached the hunter. In a bear attack, I don't think the difference between 5 and 6 is going to be that big a difference. Reflex, skill, accuracy and stopping power will tell the tale.

Deereman

Posted: June/12/2006 at 7:18pm | IP Logged

Deerman and my old Canuck friend, Cam, I appreciate your experiences with carrying these guns fully loaded.  While I fully trust that they beat on the Ruger Blackhawk hammer with a hammer, did they ever pull it back a bit and let it go?  That is what happened to my friend.  His FA somehow snagged the hammer, pulled it up some, and then it discharged through his holster and into his leg.  The transfer bar system is a good one.  I wonder how far the hammer has to be pulled back to cause the t-bar to strike the firing pin?  I will have to load some brass with primers only and experiment!  Also, I can see how you wouldn't get too many accurate shots off with a .454.  The recoil recovery time is too long.  But my Bisley is only a "little" .45 LC, and I like having the extra round!  So, I guess its a toss up.  I was able to develope a formidable cartridge/load using Kelye's Belt Mountain Punch Bullett that penetrated pretty well in dry 10lb copy paper.  I think it would do the job in most cases.  The .454 did even better. 

-Tutt

Posted: June/12/2006 at 9:21pm | IP Logged

Tym, thanks for checking on that.  That sounds plausible.  Nice to know the transfer bar system is so reliable.  At times, I suspect I will still carry my Bisley with an empty one under the hammer just for traditions sake.  Probably foolish, I know, but I believe in traditions.  My RB will get the full 5 loads as usual, but with more confidence.  As to the FA, I think I will email Jim Taylor and see what he says.  He might have some valuable insights.  Tym, your memory is better than mine, and I didn't check my records regarding paper weight, so I'll defer to you on that one!

-Tutt 

Posted: June/12/2006 at 9:32pm | IP Logged

I also figure that Ruger would not have pushed the safety of the transfer bar system by stating that it is safe to load/carry 6 in thier handguns.

To much liability is involved if it wasn't a true statement.

Cam

Posted: June/14/2006 at 9:20am | IP Logged

TymShoot1stHurs wrote: Alrighty then!  I might weigh in my two-cents here!  As everyone knows, the transfer bar safety system is there precisely to prevent an accidental discharge, in that the trigger theoretically must be held to the rear while the hammer is falling in order for there to be any contact with the firing pin. In messing around with my BFR just now, the transfer bar does not even move until the hammer is about 1/2" back from rest.  You'll need to pull it about 3/4" to get it anywhere near the firing pin, but by then the cylinder has started it's rotation.  You will need to complete the hammer pull all the way before the cylinder locks into place.  Even if you let it go right before the sear catches, without the trigger held back, the transfer bar drops below the firing pin now allowing the hammer any contact.  I assume that if an accidental hammer snag does in fact catch the transfer bar, even near the end of it's pull, the cylinder still will not be aligned resulting in nothing more than a click sound. At least, let's all hope that's what happens.  At any rate, I'm inclined to agree with Deereman as I too like to have a rifle close at hand.  And Tutt, I do believe that was 20lb copy paper!

Tym,

After reading this, I took out one of my BH's and my BFR, and just as you say. Interesting to say the least, and very reassuring!!

What Tutt has said about the accident his friend had with a FA's, as time permits, I'll put a primed case under the hammer and play with pulling the hammer back to different degrees and letting it go.

Thanks for the research and information.

Deereman

Posted: June/14/2006 at 9:27am | IP Logged

Tutt;

"As to the FA, I think I will email Jim Taylor and see what he says.  He might have some valuable insights."

That would be great, as a FA's owner, I would really luv to hear the whole story.

TIA - Deereman

Posted: June/14/2006 at 12:13pm | IP Logged

Tutt,

Me too!! As Deereman, I would also like to hear the story. I'm one of the lucky ones. I carry my Freedom Arms with 5 in the cylinder with no mishap, but, your story now has me wondering,

If interested, at our local range a fellow was practicing fast draw with a Colt 3rd generation SAA, 4 3/4" in .45 Colt. As he pulled the gun from the holster, he was also cocking the hammer, finger off the trigger. The front sight snagged the holster, or his thumb slipped from the partially drawn back hammer. The gun discharged. The 255 grain lerad bullet entered his leg, followed the bone to his ankle and shattered the ankle from what I understand. He turned from the firing position, took a step and collapsed. The ambulance was just pulling out of the parking lot, when my friend and I were pulling in. So we got this story first hand from the witnesses.

Huff

Posted: June/14/2006 at 12:23pm | IP Logged

Ruger has to be the most legal minded, lawyer oriented firearms manufacturer in existence!

Stop and think who was the first US manufacturer with a lawyer statement on their barrels?

As Cam said, if Ruger says carrying six is safe, you can bet your life it is safe.

As this is a Magnum Research, BFR thread, are you aware that Ruger's casting facility, makes the castings for the BFR?

Off topic, Smith and Wesson's casting facility makes the castings for Kimber.

Huff

Posted: June/14/2006 at 1:47pm | IP Logged

454ophile wrote: As Cam said, if Ruger says carrying six is safe, you can bet your life it is safe. As this is a Magnum Research, BFR thread, are you aware that Ruger's casting facility, makes the castings for the BFR? Off topic, Smith and Wesson's casting facility makes the castings for Kimber. Huff

Actually I do bet my life on having 6 in the cylinder even though I do prefer to carry a double action revolver.  I carry speed loaders for the double actions so that "if I had a chance/time to reload that I could possibly do it".  A single action would be almost impossible to reload quickly if at all.

I have been thinking of selling my 629 for another SRH 454 Casull.  I would get the 9.5" barreled length and have my 7.5" barrel shortened to 4.25". 

Interesting on who is casting for BFR & S&W I had heard these rumors before from a fellow that used to post here but I wasn't sure if the info was correct because he was banned due to attacks against fellow posters and other problems.  In the end I was doubting anything/everything that he had posted. 

Cam