Try some 500 yard or farther shooting with both the light weights and the slow heavy weights and it should soon be apparent which one is best out of the revolvers.

Hint it will not be the light weight

You're kidding. Right?

Nope

I don't know about the 460 but in the 44mag jwp475 is right.I have only played out to 200yards though.But from my experience a 320gr cast over 20.5gr of H110 is easier to get on target farther than a 200gr XTP over 29gr of H110 or a 250gr nosler over 23,24,and25gr of H110.Doesn't make sense but it works.

Seeing is believing. The farther out you go the greater the edge of the heaver bullets. It is the same with rifles as well as revolvers.

Science test!! Go buy a sleeve of golf balls (GB), pingpong balls (PPB) and a sling shot.

The PPB and GB are roughly the same size but their weights are substantially different.

Shoot them from a slingshot...the PPB will start out much faster and fly rather flat initially but looses speed quickly since it does not have the mass to carry against the air. Do this in a cross wind and it will also drift terribly.

The GB will start slower since it had more initial mass the accelerate but go further (drop less at longer range) since it has the mass to push through the air. Do this also in a cross wind and it will drift much less than the PPB.

Wow, quit the thread drift we have going on. The orginal question was about sticking with a 460 or trying a 45 colt Blackhawk. The orginal poster was concerned with recoil thus my recommendation of the light loads.

As for the raging debate I have used all manner of sixguns (357 max, 41 mag, 44 mag, 45 colt, 45 win mag, 454 casull, 460 S&W, and 500 S&W) to kill hogs with all manner of loads from light for caliber to heavy and have anchored them all with one shot, the one exception was the 45 win mag FMJ load it punched completely through and the hog ran about 300 yards in heavy brush finally tracked it down and the second shot did it in). I personnaly believe the 460 S&W was designed from the ground up for high velocity (relatively speaking) thus I use it that way; I have the long barreled PC version with a scope. I have had success with the Hornady load I also personnaly believe the Barnes 200 gr bullet is better but for just a recoil comparison to answer the original poster's question why spend the extra money? In the end all the ballistics tests are just a test, to see how a bullet performs on a particular animal you need to use it on that animal, which I have and as I stated I have taken 3 hogs (weights ranged from 80 lbs to 300 lbs) and three deer all with complete penetration (pictures of a couple of those hogs are in the bragging board). So while we can debate the statstically validity of three animals fact is in my gun with me shooting the load is 100% and that is as good as it gets.

Wow...you are right...I was only watching for nastiness. Unless anyone has something to add that pertains to the original post...let this one go.

I suppose because I've never considered shooting an animal with a .45 caliber bullet out of a revolver at 500 yards, 400 yards, even 300 yards, I've never considered what the bullet was doing beyond 200 yards. Dan, I appreciate the "Science test" lesson but with all due respect, I've understood basic ballistics since I was 6 years old.

The conversation I started out having with jwp was regarding .45 cal bullets (both light jacketed and heavy cast) and how they worked upon impact, killing an animal. I was not talking about rifles, ballistic coefficients, long range shooting, wind doping, etc. Those diehard cast bullet lovers, please, continue to use what works for you. I will continue to use what works for me. I don't bitch, piss and moan and give you every reason in the world why cast bullets suck and jacketed is all you should use because that would not only be immature and arrogant but just dead wrong . As I said before, both have their niches and I feel both should be used for certain applications. I use light jacketed bullets because for the ranges I hunt, and the animals I pursue, they are flatter shooting, accurate, very lethal and are no more affected by the wind than a 335 gr cast bullet at 1200 fps. I realize that at 500 yards, a big heavy cast bullet at 1200 fps is less affected by wind than a light jacketed bullet. I also realize that the drop of the same bullet and velocity at 500 yards is about 35 feet (according to JBM Trajectory tables), roughly three times as much as a 200gr XPB at 2400fps. STill, these values do not matter to me because I do not shoot deer or anyother big game animal at more than 200 yards with a revolver. Thats just me though. Others may feel confident shooting a revolver at an animal at 500 yards, but not me.

This thread's original topic was regarding the .460 S&W magnum. If we want to start a thread regarding long range rifle shooting, I would love to join in. This is not the spot for it. And out of respect for lance, lets stick to the topic. I would bet a dollar that he does not care which bullet out of his .460 will shoot better at 500 yards.

The added barrel time of the heavy bullet will allow more barrel rise before the bullets exits the barrel and not need as much sight correction as the ballistics program indicates. Case in point, shooting at an Antelope sillehoute at 500 yards with a 5" barreled 454 shooting 260 grain jacketed bullets at 1800 + FPS neede more elevation correct than did my 475 shooting a 420 grain LFN at 1380 FPS in order to be on target. My longest kill on a game animal is 218 yards shooting a 325 grain LFN at 1400 FPS. The heavy weights work and work well.

To the opening post get the 45 Colt with heavy hard cast IMHO and experience

Are we done now?