Talk:.500 S&W Magnum

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the .500 S&W Magnum article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

WPMILHIST

The WPMILHIST tag has been removed due to this article not being military related.Oldwildbill 06:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rifles or Carbines?

Are there any rifles of carbines chambered for this cartridge?

Indeed. There is a .500 S&W single-shot break-open carbine made by New England Firearms. I am thinking about one, but I cannot decide between it or the .45-70. In fact, this article could use some more comparrison between the two, I think. 75.75.110.235 21:19, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Big Horn Armoury will custom build you a either an Ar-15 variant in 500 s&w or a lever action in 500 s&w

Recommend for deletion

The paragraph concerning "power" should be deleted it appears to be for the .50 AE (Action Express) as opposed to the .500 S&W which is the most powerful production handgun in the world according to energy. The peak energy calculated with the reloading data available on the Hodgdon's website (Taking the highest velocity at each given bullet weight) is 3122 ftlbs. (370 grain bullet propelled by 41.0 grains of Lil'Gun powder to a velocity of 1831 fps) Peak energy for the .460 S&W is 2847 ftlbs and for the .454 Cassull is 2205 ftlbs using identical methodologyBfjksig201 23:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)Bfjksig201 11/27/2006[reply]

Most powerful handgun title

I believe the claim of "most powerful" needs to be limited to commercial production ammunition rather than handloads. .500 S&W achieves 2659 ft-lbs with its 440 gr load at 2650 fps, the .460 S&W achieves 2410 ft-lbs with its 200 gr load at 2330 fps.

If you move into handloads, the claims will continually be out-doing each other. If you go to handloading, the .50 Beowulf cartridge has higher powder grain capacity.

Agreed...

Handloaders can push the cartridge performance envelope beyond what is reasonable. Very few handloaders have equipment which can verify that the pressure of a particular load is within safe pressure limits. While the load may be safe, the description of a cartridge does include SAAMI pressure limit. If it does exceed this limit it should not be 500 S&W Magnum load.

Friendly Criticism of the Argument

Problem here is that the 50 Beowulf is a rifle cartridge not a handgun cartridge. It is designed ground up as a rifle cartridge to replace the 5.56 NATO in a rebarreled AR-15 type rifle. The Beowulf's rebated rim has the same dimensions as a 5.56 NATO cartridge and fits inside a STANAG magazine. Clearly if the Beowulf is included, the argument that the 600 Nitro Express is the most powerful handgun cartridge just because Pfeifer Zeliska manufactures a revolver for this cartridge would be a winner.

NPOV Statement?

I added a NPOV Disputed tag after the following line. "Known as a "Vest Buster", in some leftist groups that think game wears vests." No cite for the nickname, nor for the deer wearing Dragon Skin.

i added the fact that the game wears vests, as it was as much true as the vestbuster comment.

Perhaps the VPC link should be deleted? The VPC has a history of being... not so truthful and deceptive, to say the least.

Subtle Hilarity

I absolutely love whoever added "Distal radius fracture" to the list of links. That's subtle comedy at its best. It also might be a useful link for anyone firing this cartridge without preparation! Wild T 12:38, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Handful

Only a handful of revolvers? Those are each a handful in their own right!

Comparison 500 S&W Magnum and 45-70

This is a bit irritating: "provides power similar to long established wildcat cartridges such as [...] pistol loadings of the .45-70 Government". Yet the S&W article claims 3.5 kJ of energy, while the 45-70 article states for pistols like the Contender (which probably works more efficient than revolver and uses a longer barrel) "Even the shortest barrel, 14 inches, is easily capable of producing well over 2,000 ft·lbf (2,700 J) of energy" Tierlieb (talk) 11:59, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Really a "handgun cartridge"?

The article describes this thing as a "handgun cartridge", and yes it was originally developed for use in a revolver, but based on size, shape, and performance, it appears for all the world like a nineteenth century rifle cartridge, and a pretty big one at that. Other than the fact that S&W built a pistol for it (and there are definitely other pistols that can fire rifle cartridges), is there anything that differentiates this round from a rifle cartridge? JDS2005 (talk) 07:58, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, first, you are right in that the .500 S&W is awfully close to the .50-70, ditto for the .460 S&W and the .45-70 (both are slightly shorter, to fit in the revolver cylinder). However, there is no way black powder could match the ballistics of the modern cartridges in a barrel as short as 8 to 14 inches; there is a reason that those old muskets and rifles had 4 foot long barrels, and that's because low pressure black powder needs a long time to push bullets up to high velocity. And this does answer the question about what differentiates this cartridge from a rifle cartridges--gunpowder. :Take for example the .3-30 Winchester. You can shoot that out of a 10" barrel T/C Contender, and it will work, but you'll get a huge muzzle blast as the large quantity of slow powder, intended for a 20" barrel, is still burning when the bullet exits the barrel. On the other hand, the wildcat .30 Herrett, which uses a shortened .30-30 case with much less powder capacity, can beat the velocity of the .30-30 with bullets in the 125 grain range. By using faster burning powder, it can even give you less muzzle blast in the process. Even if you were to handload the .30-30 for the short barrel, with the same faster burning powder, you'd need more powder to get the peak pressure in the larger chamber, and thus you'd end up with a less efficient load.

Now, you can also fire the .30 Herrett in a 14", 16" or even longer barrel, but at that point the .30-30 starts to beat it out. While the .30 Herrett will still be more efficient, due to the short, fat case, the .30-30 out of a carbine or rifle length barrel will meet or beat the .30 Herrett's ballistics, especially when you move to heavier bullets that require a slower powder to reach their peak. Similarly, while you can shoot the .500 S&W in a rifle (and H&R/NEF/Marlin/Remington do make a single shot break-open in .500 S&W) you won't really see as much performance out of it as you could get out of a bigger case, like a .50-90 Sharps or one of the .50 caliber express rifle cartridges, loaded with a slower powder. They can take advantage of the greater case capacity to hold a larger charge of slower burning powder, and produce more energy with the same peak pressure than the .500 S&W in the same barrel length. scot (talk) 17:04, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent explanation, thank you. So there is more than size and shape that defines whether a cartridge is a "pistol cartridge" or "rifle cartridge", it's also what barrel length the powder charge is optimized for, right? That makes sense. JDS2005 (talk) 06:18, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So strong as .308 Winchester

This revolver caliber is so strong as the .308 Winchester , a rifle caliber.Agre22 (talk) 12:37, 15 August 2009 (UTC)agre22[reply]

Maximum Cartridge Overall Length

Handloading manuals provide a range from 2.040 inches (Hornady) to 2.290 inches (Reloader Bench). The S&W revolvers will accept a 2.300 inch cartridge. Websites which provide reloading data provide many loads which have 2.290 as the M.C.O.L. Loading the 700 gr. bullets generally requires that the M.C.O.L. be 2.275 inches or greater.

Does anyone have any thoughts regarding this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.144.177.87 (talk) 06:02, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The issue has to do with the Taurus Raging Bull which manufactured with a shorter cylinder than the S&W. A 2.300" MOL Will lock-up the cylinder. So most manufacturers make ammunition that is usable in both - not that this matters as for anything under 500 gr. Reloading manuals do stipulate a shorter length because they would be receiving calls from Taurus owners complaining of cylinder lock-ups, bad loading data etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeusImperator (talk • contribs) 19:49, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Consolidate

Consolidate, merge, combine (or whatever Wiki speak is used) this article with Smith & Wesson Model 500.

As far as the maximum cartridge length goes, the cylinder is about 2.5 inches long. If you are into 700 grain compressed loads, then that is the limit. Most shooters use a 300 - 500 grain bullets (which produce higher muzzle velocities) and a shorter cartridge; some where around 2.1 - 2.2 inches. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.179.189.65 (talk) 07:04, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The effects

What would happen if you shoot JHP at someone's head? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.219.148.155 (talk) 19:39, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brains, brains everywhere. The exit wound would be tremendous, assuming the whole top half of the skull doesn't completely shatter open due to hydrostatic shock pushing outward on the inside of the skull. Even if that happened, the lower portion of the head would likely remain, so it wouldn't quite be the head-exploding critical headshot seen in video games and such. It would certainly be a messy, instant death, though. 64.6.121.115 (talk) 12:59, 12 July 2010 (UTC) Azukki[reply]

.50 caliber or .500 Caliber

The issue here is that the .500 S&W is not a true 50 caliber per se. In very general terms a .50 caliber is actually a .510 caliber (.50 Linebaugh cartridges). Due to Federal firearms regualtion (distructive device) it was safer to go with a .500 diameter bullet ( as was the case with Evan Whildin) and avoid potential paperwork. Any thoughts as how to add some clarity to the designation? DeusImperator (talk) 12:13, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like Federal regulations governing destructive devices is for those greater than .50 caliber. .50 does not count. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeusImperator (talk • contribs) 08:38, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re-write recoil section?

The recoil of this cartridge is very strong. All of the above features reduce the recoil which usually causes the muzzle to rise and produces a "straight back" effect. The .500 S&W Magnum is so powerful that the shock wave from the firing of a cartridge can cause eye[citation needed] and hearing damage; it is prudent to wear safety glasses and "ear muff" hearing protection when shooting this pistol.

A re-write of this might be in order. Recoil being very strong. Only taking an issue with the wording. Perhaps thre is a better way of saying it. The .500 S&W Magnum is so powerful that the shock wave from the firing of a cartridge can cause eye[citation needed] and hearing damage... Detaching retinae from concussive muzzle blast? and hearing damage; it is prudent to wear safety glasses and "ear muff" hearing protection when shooting this pistol. - True for all firearms for the most part... DeusImperator (talk) 12:36, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rimmed vs. Semi-rimmed

The .500 S&W Mag. is best treated as a semi-rimmed cartridge. Relative to the body diameter the rim extends only .015" over body diameter. The cartridge has a distinct usable extraction grove. If there is any disagreement this can be just changed back. DeusImperator (talk) 20:37, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The best thing would be to find a reliable source that says either one or the other and reference it. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 00:00, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Found a source but all other sources simply state that it is rimmed (which by definition and dimension it is not). According to the wiki article on ammunition rims, the .444 Marlin is a semi-rimmed. It was I who originally stated incorrectly in the article that it was rimmed. But I hate leaving in an error I originated just because of expediency or consensus. We cannot include forumns (several) to cite as anyone can have any opinion howeve crazy it might be and there will be always soemone to validate the craziness. It is a slippery slope to tread on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeusImperator (talk • contribs) 04:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cartridge overall Length

SAAMI specification calls for a COL of 2.250. I have made that change to the InfoBox and to the diagram to conform to SAAMI established standard.

Controversies

The section presents two opposing points of view in a seemingly balanced manner. Neither of the sides presented however is remotely neutral, and two wrongs do not make a right. — Robert Greer (talk) 18:47, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And...? Do you have anything constructive to say? 142.179.58.80 (talk) 16:35, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The congressman made the statement but refused to comment further. No evidence has been presented by the VPC or the congressman. DeusImperator (talk) 20:35, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I removed this section, mainly because it was just a little soapbox that served no other purpose. It was also written with the assumption that the US is the only country in the English-speaking world. There will always be some group in some country that is trying to get something outlawed. This is rarely noteworthy unless such campaigns are actually successful. HereticBleach (talk) 20:36, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

http://www.accuratepowder.com/data/PerCaliber2Guide/Handgun/Standarddata/375Cal(9.55mm)/375%20JDJ%20T_C%20pages%20112%20and%20113.pdf
- In .500 S&W Magnum on 2011-05-20 21:40:16, 404 Not Found
- In .500 S&W Magnum on 2011-05-31 13:08:56, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 13:09, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

V0/E0-table

With what barrel length has this been measured? --92.107.111.78 (talk) 17:50, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Knowing S&W, probably their standard 8⅜" test barrel. (No cylinder gap...) TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 19:29, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is it just me or do parts of the article sound like an advertisement?

Just want to see what others think and not be obnoxious with the improve tags. Stateofyolandia (talk) 05:44, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Considering what many obscure gun articles looks like on Wikipedia, be thankful the entire piece isn't advertizing; e.g., JTL-E .500 S&W Magnum 12".--Froglich (talk) 19:47, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It may have taken over a year, but I saw this note and fixed JTL-E .500 S&W Magnum 12". Good luck with this article. Rezin (talk) 00:33, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely nuke the advertisements here please. 84.209.187.221 (talk) 00:07, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

error

Compared to the next most powerful commercial sporting handgun cartridge, the .460 S&W Magnum, which can launch a 325 gr (21.1 g) at 1,650 ft/s (500 m/s) or a 395 gr (25.6 g) at 1,525 ft/s (465 m/s).

This isn't a complete sentence.