Is this a practical sidearm in case of an up close Bigfoot encounter?

[langfordbc]

Not the Bearcat of course, it's just there for size comparison. I'm talking about the worlds most powerful production handgun, the Smith & Wesson 500. (Yes I know the .460 can be faster but the .500 carries substantially more energy). Also pictured are 22LR, 45ACP, and 308WIN cartridges alongside the S&W500, 500 grain.

 

I'm not really asking a serious question,  it's just a lead-in to seeing if anybody has experience with this gun? I wasn't looking for one (though I have always wanted one), but it came up for sale BNIB for half-price. A guy can't afford to not buy it at that price! It's my first magnum handgun. I didn't own anything bigger than a 1911 in .45ACP previously, but have shot a 629 before. I know that it will be significantly more "beastly" than either of those. Picked up 120 rounds of 300, 325, and 500 grain Hornady and Federal for it - which may be enough for 3 lifetime's supply, lol.

 

Anybody here own or shot this gun? What are your thoughts? Could it take down the big guy? haha

 

It should be noted that as a Canadian, my chances of being authorized to even bring this gun to the bush are basically none.

 

 

 

 

[norseman]

I do not understand the common wealth. The basic premise of a hand gun is self preservation. It’s a very defensive orientated firearm. So by denying their citizens the right to carry a sidearm is to deny them of the fundamental right for self preservation. Anyhoo....

 

Ive owned a DE .50 AE. Very powerful, and very heavy. I found it defeating of the idea of a handgun. It rode on my hip on day one. Day two it hung off the saddle horn and by day three it was in a saddle bag. So what was the difference between it and a rifle riding in a scabbard? Zero.

 

A pistol should be small, light and a constant comfortable companion. Like your wallet, watch or car keys. If it’s not? Your gonna find a excuse to leave it behind. If it’s not skookum enough for the job? Bring a long gun.

 

The hot ticket item now is a Glock 10mm. I converted my 1911 to 460 Rowland. I find striker fired plastic pistols to have squishy yucky triggers. My 1911 is crisp and I shoot it better.

 

 

[BC witness]

@langfordbc

PM me for details on how to get a woods only carry permit in BC. I had one for my S&W 629 44mag for years.

[langfordbc]

2 hours ago, norseman said:

I do not understand the common wealth. The basic premise of a hand gun is self preservation. It’s a very defensive orientated firearm. So by denying their citizens the right to carry a sidearm is to deny them of the fundamental right for self preservation. Anyhoo....

 

Preaching to the choir, sir. Although our attachment to a monarchy is almost entirely symbolic, we are ultimately more subject than citizen.

 

2 hours ago, norseman said:

 

Ive owned a DE .50 AE. Very powerful, and very heavy. I found it defeating of the idea of a handgun. It rode on my hip on day one. Day two it hung off the saddle horn and by day three it was in a saddle bag. So what was the difference between it and a rifle riding in a scabbard? Zero.

 

A pistol should be small, light and a constant comfortable companion. Like your wallet, watch or car keys. If it’s not? Your gonna find a excuse to leave it behind. If it’s not skookum enough for the job? Bring a long gun.

 

I believe your assessment to be bang on. However, as I have no right in Canada, or even the privilege to carry a pistol, it matters not. Unfortunately.

 

I have plenty of practical guns but sometimes it's fun to own something ridiculous and obnoxious, like a Smith & Wesson 500! 

 

2 hours ago, norseman said:

 

The hot ticket item now is a Glock 10mm. I converted my 1911 to 460 Rowland. I find striker fired plastic pistols to have squishy yucky triggers. My 1911 is crisp and I shoot it better.

 

 

 

If I could carry in the bush I suppose I would probably give the G20SF a try. The hype on the 10mm seems reasonably sound.

 

I also much prefer shooting my 1911 to my G19. The stock trigger is way better but even the overall feel and balance is vastly superior. I only have one "shooter" 1911, the rest are USGI's in varying condition. Some pretty cool and rare ones in the safe. Admittedly I am a fan of the safety "system" of striker fired pistols, despite the massive compromise made to trigger pull.

 

What condition do you tend to carry your 1911 in?

1 hour ago, BC witness said:

@langfordbc

PM me for details on how to get a woods only carry permit in BC. I had one for my S&W 629 44mag for years.

 

Will do. Although I'm fairly familiar with the requirements to get the permit, I'd be glad to get your insight on the process. PM incoming. Thank you.

[norseman]

Cocked and locked in a chest recon bag.

[MIB]

9 hours ago, langfordbc said:

the Smith & Wesson 500.

 

I like big bore revolvers.    I've owned 35-ish .44 magnums since college, couple .41s, half a dozen .45 Colts, a .454, and a .480.    I've put at least 50,000 rounds through my .44 magnums.

 

I have fired the .500 **once**.    I didn't like it.   It's one I don't think I need.   Understand conservation of momentum.   When you fire that 500 grain bullet, the rifling rotates it one direction.    That means the gun rotates the other.   This is true of all rifled barrels, any sort of gun, but the .500 S&W is the only one where I could actually see and feel the gun rotate around the axis of the bore.    The porting of the barrel is quite effective in controlling muzzle rise but has no noticeable effect on the "backwards" component of recoil.   When I fired, it felt like my wrist, like for a split second, my wrist bones and the hand-ward end of my arm bones were slightly fluid.    The gun came back, **hard**, while rotating, and while the porting did its stuff, so the muzzle did a crazy, incredibly fast figure 8 in the air.    Like I said, I didn't like it.   I handed it back to the owner, said "thanks", and went back to whatever else I was doing.    Might be the only handgun I've shot / handled that I have no desire to own.

 

10 hours ago, langfordbc said:

What are your thoughts? Could it take down the big guy?

 

My thought, honestly, is that's a foolish line of thinking: I don't think they are going to do anything that gives you a need to kill them defensively and if you are going on offense, looking to kill one, take a rifle.  

 

MIB

 

[wiiawiwb]

In order to become proficient with a particular handgun, you have to practice using it. A S&W 500 is not fun to shoot and is a one-horse show. Contrast that with a 454 Casull or .460 S&W from which you can shoot 45 Colt.  That allows you to practice a lot without having to constantly handle the recoil. Go ahead and try shooting 50 rounds from the S&W 500 at the range. You won't be happy. You could shoot 200 rounds of 45 Colt from either of the above without batting an eye.

 

My opinion might change if you reload and and could make soft loads.  Otherwise, I'd go with one of the two mentioned above and I'm confident that with the correct ammo both would drop a BF in its tracks.

[Incorrigible1]

7 hours ago, langfordbc said:

What condition do you tend to carry your 1911 in?

 

The way John Browning intended, sir!

 

Condition one.

 

Condition two involves pulling the trigger to lower hammer upon a loaded cartridge. Then pulling back hammer in order to fire. Madness.

[hiflier]

https://www.historynet.com/western-movies-created-myth-fanning.htm 

 

"November 1, 1930, Saturday Evening Post, Wyatt Earp biographer Stuart Lake quoted Wyatt’s blunt views about gun handling: 'In all my life as a frontier peace officer, I did not know a really proficient gunfighter who had anything but contempt for the gun fanner, or the man who literally shot from the hip.…From my experience…I can only support the opinion advanced by the men who gave me my most valuable instruction in fast and accurate shooting—which was that the gun fanner and the hip shooter stood small chance to live against a man who…took his time and pulled the trigger once.'"

 

Growing up as a kid I always thought the good guy was the fanner and the hip shooter all rolled into one: As in fanning from the hip. It looked soooo cool. Ah yes, Hollywood spins yet another tale. 

[BlackRockBigfoot]

3 hours ago, norseman said:

Cocked and locked in a chest recon bag.

Recon chest rig for the win.

 

I carry my Glock 20 with a rounding the chamber.  Got a kydex trigger guard cover lashed to the attachment point at the bottom of the bag.  Pops off as you draw the pistol.

 

I am adding some additional paracord to the zipper that opens it to assist with a quicker open and draw.

 

 

[BlackRockBigfoot]

3 hours ago, MIB said:

 

My thought, honestly, is that's a foolish line of thinking: I don't THINK they are going to do anything that gives you a need to kill them defensively and if you are going on offense, looking to kill one, take a rifle.  

 

MIB

 

With all due respect, I think the key word there is....'think'.

 

I don't THINK that I am going to have a house fire, but I still have fire extinguishers. Is that foolish?  

 

I am on the opposite side of the spectrum from you on this.  I think that people who go out looking for these things without the ability to defend themselves are the foolish ones.  Or, that deep down inside they don't believe that they could exist and are just LARPing in the woods.

 

To each his own, but I don't think that his thread and questions are foolish.  I used to hike with a 9mm until I began actively looking for these creatures, then I upgraded to a 10mm.  Better to have and not need it...

1 hour ago, Incorrigible1 said:

 

The way John Browning intended, sir!

 

Condition one.

 

Condition two involves pulling the trigger to lower hammer upon a loaded cartridge. Then pulling back hammer in order to fire. Madness.

I don't know why, but I am more uncomfortable carrying a 1911 hammer down on a live round than carrying condition one.  

[Incorrigible1]

22 minutes ago, BlackRockBigfoot said:

I don't know why, but I am more uncomfortable carrying a 1911 hammer down on a live round than carrying condition one.  

Aye, because it requires unsafe acts to lower the hammer and then recock the hammer.

[MIB]

9 minutes ago, BlackRockBigfoot said:

With all due respect, I think the key word there is....'think'.

 

I don't THINK that I am going to have a house fire, but I still have fire extinguishers. Is that foolish?  

 

I am on the opposite side of the spectrum from you on this.  I think that people who go out looking for these things without the ability to defend themselves are the foolish ones.  Or, that deep down inside they don't believe that they could exist and are just LARPing in the woods.

 

To each his own, but I don't think that his thread and questions are foolish.  I used to hike with a 9mm until I began actively looking for these creatures, then I upgraded to a 10mm.  Better to have and not need it...

 

You missed my points.      Lets try again.  

 

1) We are not on opposite sides.   I absolutely don't go into the woods unarmed.  

 

2) If you are going in after bigfoot, hunting to kill one, rather than focusing on self-protection, a rifle is preferable to any handgun. 

 

3) The .500 is a poor choice of handgun for defensive use.    The gun is heavy, almost 3 (25 oz vs 69 oz) times the weight of my S&W .44 (329PD).    This requires a lot of extra consideration regarding holsters.   Even with a good bandolier holster, I find that much weight fatiguing after a half day.   It is not particularly shootable.  The recoil makes quick follow up shots nearly impossible to deliver accurately.  

 

I absolutely agree, better to have it and not need it than the other way around.    True for seat belts, PFDs, condoms, and handguns.   Probably other things as well.   Probability of a problem may be low but the consequences of having one are extreme.

 

FWIW, I like the 10mm but mine is a single action revolver, not semi-auto.   When I go to the woods, I generally pick one of a pair of .44 revolvers.    One is around 25 ounces but is un-fun to shoot, the other is 45 ounces and, while "peppy", is shootable.    The only time I don't take them is when I grab my .454.   It's a beast to shoot, not as painful as the light .44, but it makes bigger holes through things.   

 

MIB

 

 

[BlackRockBigfoot]

28 minutes ago, MIB said:

 

You missed my points.      Lets try again.  

 

1) We are not on opposite sides.   I absolutely don't go into the woods unarmed.  

 

2) If you are going in after bigfoot, hunting to kill one, rather than focusing on self-protection, a rifle is preferable to any handgun. 

 

3) The .500 is a poor choice of handgun for defensive use.    The gun is heavy, almost 3 (25 oz vs 69 oz) times the weight of my S&W .44 (329PD).    This requires a lot of extra consideration regarding holsters.   Even with a good bandolier holster, I find that much weight fatiguing after a half day.   It is not particularly shootable.  The recoil makes quick follow up shots nearly impossible to deliver accurately.  

 

I absolutely agree, better to have it and not need it than the other way around.    True for seat belts, PFDs, condoms, and handguns.   Probably other things as well.   Probability of a problem may be low but the consequences of having one are extreme.

 

FWIW, I like the 10mm but mine is a single action revolver, not semi-auto.   When I go to the woods, I generally pick one of a pair of .44 revolvers.    One is around 25 ounces but is un-fun to shoot, the other is 45 ounces and, while "peppy", is shootable.    The only time I don't take them is when I grab my .454.   It's a beast to shoot, not as painful as the light .44, but it makes bigger holes through things.   

 

MIB

 

 

Thank you for taking the time to clarify your points.

31 minutes ago, Incorrigible1 said:

Aye, because it requires unsafe acts to lower the hammer and then recock the hammer.

Some people seem to have no issue with it, but it makes me uncomfortable.

 

I just trust the safety measures that JMB built into the 1911 and carry it as intended.  

 

My Colt 1911 Lightweight Officer's Model doesn't get carried into the woods anymore, but I do concealed carry it from time to time.  

 

To quote, it's "a more elegant weapon for a more civilized age".

Edited January 2, 2020 by BlackRockBigfoot

[norseman]

4 hours ago, BlackRockBigfoot said:

Recon chest rig for the win.

 

I carry my Glock 20 with a rounding the chamber.  Got a kydex trigger guard cover lashed to the attachment point at the bottom of the bag.  Pops off as you draw the pistol.

 

I am adding some additional paracord to the zipper that opens it to assist with a quicker open and draw.

 

 

 

Mine has a flap that comes out of the zipper. You just pull the flap and it unzips.

4 hours ago, hiflier said:

https://www.historynet.com/western-movies-created-myth-fanning.htm 

 

"November 1, 1930, Saturday Evening Post, Wyatt Earp biographer Stuart Lake quoted Wyatt’s blunt views about gun handling: 'In all my life as a frontier peace officer, I did not know a really proficient gunfighter who had anything but contempt for the gun fanner, or the man who literally shot from the hip.…From my experience…I can only support the opinion advanced by the men who gave me my most valuable instruction in fast and accurate shooting—which was that the gun fanner and the hip shooter stood small chance to live against a man who…took his time and pulled the trigger once.'"

 

Growing up as a kid I always thought the good guy was the fanner and the hip shooter all rolled into one: As in fanning from the hip. It looked soooo cool. Ah yes, Hollywood spins yet another tale. 

 

I respect Wyatt Earp immensely and accuracy is final. But I dont think most gun slingers of old were in the same caliber as people like Cisco here or Bob Munden or competitors in the Cowboy Fast Draw Assoc. or SASS, etc.

 

Its true that targets dont shoot back but its all about muscle memory. 

 

I think the take away from Earp’s wisdom is that its great to be fast but you better not miss. In modern times a miss = no score. In those times it probably meant you were dead.

 

Hickok and Hardin were both.