Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
John Ross 500 S&W #135184 08/29/2013 12:23 AM
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 176
TOBY458 Offline OP
member
OP Offline
member
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 176
Does anyone own one of these? If so, do you like it? For those who have shot this gun and the FA 500WE or the BFR 500JRH, how do they compare?


Dyin' aint much of a livin'...is it boy?
Re: John Ross 500 S&W [Re: TOBY458] #135188 08/29/2013 12:45 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,642
BBwheelgunner Offline
Pooh-Bah
Offline
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,642
if you click on the interactive edition of Handgun Hunter Magazine (in the upper right corner in the portal Sidebar) Gary has a very good article on that exact topic that I think should help you out a bunch


"If you are going to go through all the trouble to put a hole in something, why not make it a big one?"
Re: John Ross 500 S&W [Re: BBwheelgunner] #135190 08/29/2013 1:05 AM
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 176
TOBY458 Offline OP
member
OP Offline
member
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 176
Yes I read that. Was just wanting some different opinions on the subject. As you probably know, the John Ross isn't ported and has a 5" barrel, and barrel nut to set the barrel cylinder gap. Overall a pretty cool looking gun.


Dyin' aint much of a livin'...is it boy?
Re: John Ross 500 S&W [Re: TOBY458] #135193 08/29/2013 1:39 AM
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 408
Seasons44 Offline
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 408
I really like the JRH was able to shoot my pig using the BFR with an ultra dot l/t, 400 grain Grizzly load poleaxed him at 50 yards between the eyes.

The BFR is probably the best bang for your buck and after a Huntington grip frame modification its a dream to shoot. There is nothing like grips custom fit to your hands, I have never heard of a BFR not being accurate and many will agree with that statement.

The JRH was the predecessor to the 500 WE, and was specifically designed for the 83 , they are ballistic clones except the belt,

Can't speak on the John Ross 500, but x frames are x frames, JMHO


Simple, Elegant, but always Approachable
Re: John Ross 500 S&W [Re: Seasons44] #135194 08/29/2013 1:49 AM
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 176
TOBY458 Offline OP
member
OP Offline
member
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 176
I really have no idea why I think I "need" a 500 of any sort. If it needs more killin than a 454 will give, I doubt I'll be killin it! But guns haven't been a matter of need for me since I was a kid. But I sure have wanted a bunch since then! A 50 is something I've never owned, so I suppose that's a pretty good excuse, right?


Dyin' aint much of a livin'...is it boy?
Re: John Ross 500 S&W [Re: TOBY458] #135198 08/29/2013 2:41 AM
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 408
Seasons44 Offline
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 408
I don't "need" a 50 but I want one, so thats what I am building, Some say there is no difference in killing some say there is, personally... well
\:\/


If you want a 50 go for it you won't be disappointed, load it how it was designed to load, and lay some game out.

If I had to pick one I go BFR, just great value, Whitworth has shot some groups rifles would be jealous of with both of his.

http://www.handgunhunt.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=5746&limit=recent
I had good luck shooting it!

Last edited by Seasons44; 08/29/2013 2:42 AM.

Simple, Elegant, but always Approachable
Re: John Ross 500 S&W [Re: Seasons44] #135199 08/29/2013 2:54 AM
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 408
Seasons44 Offline
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 408
Pick up a copy of this book, fantastic read and a must for any hand-gunner's library

http://www.amazon.com/Big-Bore-Revolvers-Max-Prasac/dp/1440228566

Last edited by Seasons44; 08/29/2013 2:55 AM.

Simple, Elegant, but always Approachable
Re: John Ross 500 S&W [Re: Seasons44] #135200 08/29/2013 3:19 AM
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 176
TOBY458 Offline OP
member
OP Offline
member
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 176
I wish I could find a BFR locally so I could see and feel before I buy. I've already read most of Max's book, and it is a great read! I also grew up with Ross Seyfried, so I've had a big bore interest for quite awhile. It started with big bore revolvers, then progressed to dangerous game rifles. Now I'm back to revolvers. I think I'll stay awhile....


Dyin' aint much of a livin'...is it boy?
Re: John Ross 500 S&W [Re: TOBY458] #135201 08/29/2013 11:34 AM
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 259
7P's Offline
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 259
I’ve got a JR 500SW and after two trips back to S&W (cylinder gap issues) and getting the cylinder throats reamed, I like it. I know another JR 500 owner and he never had the cylinder gap issues but had the same under-sized throats as I did (even more so) and he got his throats reamed as well. Both JR’s now shoot great with both jacketed and cast.

The muzzle blast is a non-issue compared to the compensated models under a canopy. As for the 500 SW compared to the 500 JRH – the SW will out-perform the JRH a bunch relative to speed and bullet weight – so, if you don’t mind the X-frame’s weight and want true unadulterated power but don’t want to step up to 50 Alaskan power – well, that JR will fill the bill.

I also have the BFR 500 JRH with a 6” barrel and I like that also but with over the top loads – I prefer shooting the SW, as the BFR knocks hell out of my trigger finger with every shot – so I have to wear shooting gloves to prevent blood loss. With the SW all you have is a “little” sting in your palm, with or without shooting gloves. With normal loads, they are both pussycats.

Re: John Ross 500 S&W [Re: 7P's] #135205 08/29/2013 1:51 PM
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,037
wtroper Offline
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,037
Toby,

I also do not need a 500. However, I have a 500 WE. Why? Because I want it. I personally significantly prefer the M83 to the X frame and the BFR.


It's more important where you hit 'em, than what you hit 'em with.
Re: John Ross 500 S&W [Re: wtroper] #135210 08/29/2013 6:36 PM
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,020
tradmark Offline
Shooting Expert
Offline
Shooting Expert
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,020
Well at the end of the day i dont feel ya gain much. In the end ya shoot 1000lb and up stuff and nonenof it is gonna go right down so 500 smith 400 gr vs 600 gr vs 500 we etc justdoesnt matter imho. Shoot what feels right

Re: John Ross 500 S&W [Re: tradmark] #135213 08/29/2013 11:59 PM
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 176
TOBY458 Offline OP
member
OP Offline
member
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 176
Thanks everybody! I feel like if they used to shoot Elephants with a 461 Gibbs Black Powder rifle, with a 300-350 grain pure lead bullet at around 1200-1500 fps, anything much over a 44 magnum should work fine on most anything you're likely to shoot with a revolver.


Dyin' aint much of a livin'...is it boy?
Re: John Ross 500 S&W [Re: TOBY458] #135214 08/30/2013 12:05 AM
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 176
TOBY458 Offline OP
member
OP Offline
member
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 176
Regarding the comment above about the tight throats on the S&W, it seems like that's a common thing these days. My newer 629 has very tight throats, but it does shoot well, so I haven't messed with it. I suspect it won't do well with cast bullets though. I shoot mostly jacketed bullets, so I don't mind that much.


Dyin' aint much of a livin'...is it boy?
Re: John Ross 500 S&W [Re: TOBY458] #135215 08/30/2013 1:39 AM
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,020
tradmark Offline
Shooting Expert
Offline
Shooting Expert
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,020
All our smiths shoot great i have no idea ehat the throats are but theyre very very accurate


Moderated by  Chance Weldon, Gary, Gregg Richter 

Newest Members
Redhawk41, Striker243, Sxviper, RobbieD, IRONMAN
9668 Registered Users
Top Posters(30 Days)
karl 1
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 82 guests, and 3 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3