Ruger 480 SRH or Bisley?

Ruger .480's ? Super Redhawk or the Bisley?
I was ruminating on this issue a bit. What model would you prefer to have for say back country large animal protection? I like the SRH but it is a rather large DA revolver. I like the Bisley as it defines what you can call a packable and portable sixgun. Something you could carry all day on a good holster. On the other hand, the SRH has the DA ability so if something big and ugly is on top of you, just a pull of the trigger can solve the problem. Plus it has the scallops on the barrel if you want to pop an optical sight on it for some long range shots. So. Chances are that I will not do a solo hike into the Bob Marshall Wilderness nor take a 4x4 trip to the Arctic Circle in Alaska but I do like to daydream a tad. So any replies would be welcomed.

I don't shy away from single-action revolvers for backup duty. Yeah, they are harder to manipulate one handed than a DA revolver, but I don't think it's a deal breaker. I think it boils down to preference. All of the SRHs I have owned have been accurate revolvers. My .480 Bisley is also very accurate, but it's much more pleasurable to carry in stock form. Cut and SRH's barrel back to 5-inches and it becomes pretty packable. Six of one, half a dozen of another...

Nice choice to have to make. If you want a packable gun that's used for general purpose (hunting, defense) I wouldn't hesitate getting the Bisley in 6.5". But I wouldn't want to add the weight of a scope. Also the scope makes it more awkward to pack around.
I use a Bisley Super Hunter w/ 7 1/2" barrel in .44 mag. with a scope. It's great for hunting from a tree-stand or blind. Not as packable because of the scope also hurts the defensive use. All the same goes for the SRH!!! Then again if you want an easy carry gun for defense first and occasional hunting, maybe a .480 Alaskan!

If you aren't stuck on the 480, you might want to take a look at the 4.2" Redhawk in 45 Colt. A 452" diameter slug doesn't lack much to a 475"er, and the size of the gun would make for easier packing than either of those 480 options.

At 13" overall length and 53oz for the SRH vs 12.4" and 49.2oz for the Bisley, I don't see a huge difference. Really personal preference, trigger reach and fit will be far more important.

I know I don't have the experience of many on this site, but a 5" barrel strikes me as ideal for a packable woods gun. Now if they made the Toklat in 480 you'd have the perfect solution. Alternatively, buy your choice and get a custom smith to trim it down to size.

I prefer double action revolvers. A Super Redhawk cut down to 5" like this 44 is an easy packing gun.

I like that old junky thing. lol

Exactly! Contrary to popular perception, that the Super Redhawk is a massive monstrosity many pounds heavier than a good single action, it really isn't. Its weight is on par with a standard Redhawk and only an ounce or two heavier than a comparable Bisley. I haven't weighed my .44 SRH but my .480 SRH is only 1oz heavier than a 7?" Bisley .44Mag.

That said, I would choose a 4 5/8" Bisley and it wouldn't have to be a .480. The .44Mag and .45Colt will do nicely, with the right bullet. When you spend as much time as some of us do running single actions, there is little advantage to a double action.

To support that observation, this a pic of my GP100 siting on top of my SRH and as can be seen there really isn't much difference other than the width. Nobody refers to the GeeP as a monstrousity.

Though not in the .480, I have a Bisley Hunter in .44 Mag and the grip just doesn't work for my hands. Actually, I'm looking to sell it. Even though the SRH is a bit larger, its grip fits me better and I upgraded the original grip to the latest from Ruger which are a bit wider to help spread the recoil and increase conrol.

My SRH with UltraDot is about to get some range time as I need to come up with some loads for an upcoming cape buffalo hunt.

I know I'll be in the minority regarding this but I simply can not stand the Bisley grip frame. No way, no how would I ever have one. Did I mention I just don't like it?? That would make my choice very simple, I would take my SRH Toklat, it's already a 5" barrel. A bit heavy, but chambered in .454 Casull, which should be more than I will ever need.

What about the Bisley do you not like, if you don't mind me asking?

The grip frame in general, despise it everything about it, the feel, the looks, everything. I know it is better suited to heavy recoiling guns but I don't care for it.

Funny, I feel the same way about the "plowhandle" grip. To each their own as they say.

We are I the same boat. I grew up shooting my daddy's plow handle 44, and the bisley just doesn't feel right, no matter how much I try. I'm a single action fan, and a Ruger fan, and am considering having a 480 converted to a super blackhawk hunter frame so it would feel better to my hand, and not have the dang square back trigger guard.

Have you guys tried custom grips? If I judged the Bisley by the atrocious factory grips, I probably wouldn't like it either.

You are so right. The one-size-fits-all Bisley grips suck, but a custom Bisley made for your hand is hard to beat when recoil levels start to soar.

+1 in fact i'll go even further and say that the RX3 is the way to go.

For all of you denouncing the Bisley, I have to ask one question. Have any of you shot anything with meaningful recoil like a .475 or any of the .500s (not loaded with light bullets) with a plow handle grip (dragoon, XR3, XR3-RED, etc.)? It's one miserable cuss under heavy recoil. There is a very good reason Ruger didn't even consider one of the plow handle-style grips for their new .454 and .480 Super Blackhawks.

No, I haven't shot a Bisley framed gun. I have handled them enough to know I don't care for them, even one tiny bit. My .454 is double action. I'll probably never need anything bigger than the .454 so the double action will, and does suit me fine.

Ive often thought angrip was more pleasing until i shot i big recoiling load thru it. Case in point a 500jrh bfr iwth the plow handle felt great and pointed well. That all changed rapidly when i shot it

Absolutely. The first BFR I really put through the wringer testing was a .500 JRH with a 6 1/2-inch barrel. One cylinder full of the old Buffalo Bore 425 grain loads (I think they were running about 1,465 fps through my gun) was enough to convince even the most hardened big-bore revolver shooter that the plow handle is the wrong grip when recoil levels soar. That thing beat the crap out of my hands.

I thought fa grips originally felt awkward till i shot em but i too really like the grips on my xframes and srh.

This is the level of recoil I am talking about. The BFR in .500 JRH with the Buffalo Bore 425s at more than 1,450 fps. This is the configuration that altered my hands considerably.

Max, I see that you are wearing a glove in the photo of you shooting the .500 JRH, and that the gun isn't rolling back in your hand much. Does the glove help or hurt by preventing the gun from rolling and absorbing recoil? I'm thinking of using a glove with my FA .454 and am interested in pros/cons to shooting with a glove. Thanks.

It's the grip tension that is keeping it from rolling in my hand. I don't apply a death grip, so to speak, but I do grip a revolver firmly, to keep it from moving around in my hand. Also, a consistent grip tension will prevent any variation between the points of impact for shooting off of the bench and shooting offhand. The glove helps mitigate damage more than anything else. I try to use one every time I shoot these cannons.

IMHO, the gun shouldn't move 'in' the hand but rather the hand should move 'with' the gun. Recoil should be absorbed through the wrists, elbows and shoulders. Not by the sixgun sliding through your grasp.

I also think, having shot just about everything imaginable, the Bisley is the most comfortable platform for hard kickers. Much preferred to the SBH or any DA configuration. The FA is also promising, though I'm awaiting proper custom grips before rendering final judgement.

X2

Why would you want the gun rolling in your hand? A firm consistant grip is critical to shooting heavy kickers.

Thanks. I've got some work to do on my grip.

We find common ground. I think I love you.

Everything after this was, "Wa, Wa.............Wa, Wa,.............Wa, Wa."

Whitworth, i'm not denouncing the Bisley. i just dont like the way it handles/feels in my hand. love the looks though especially Colts. as for shooting the 475 and 500, no thank you. after shooting a F.A. 454 a dozen times or so i learned the the 44 mag. was my threshold. thats fine the 44 mag.dose all i need doing. Hats off to you guys with the big boomers. i'll stay in the kiddy pool. so a 480 for me would have to be in the S.R.H.

Of course i'm dumber than a bag of cat food. if someone handed me a handgun and said do you want to shoot this .505 moose masher? I'd smile and go SURE WOULD!

I can now die happy.

I had a 45 Colt SBH Bisley Hunter. I never did warm up to it either. I have always shot double action revolvers.
I hunt from a tree stand with a 9.5 SRH in 480.
I also have a 480 Alaskan. The Alaskan packs just fine in a Rocky Hill Pancake. It makes a great bumming around revolver. I just took it off this evening when I got home. It is loaded with 3 shot shells and 3 of my 375's with 10 grains of Unique under them.

Now if I were going to seriously hunt deer or larger game with the revolver, and also use it for woods protection, I believe the 5" barrel would be a winning combination. The Alaskan would be way to hard to shoot at distance with open sights. A 7.5 or 9.5 inch Super RedHawk would be a little much in a belt holster for non-hunting woods carry. The 5 Inch 480 would be a great compromise between Packability, and Shootability.
Just My Two Cents.

Bob