Coach,
I agree with you on that. When I fire a 3 inch in the Bond Derringer,I know that something took place for sure but the grip of the Bond allows the recoil to be in the palm and not the web of the hand so it is not really that bad.

As for a 45-70 in such a short barrel,I do not think that the ballistics would be very impressive. The recoil for sure but not worth the effort.

Wayne

Wayne--

Sounds like people are trending toward maybe a quarter stick of TNT going off in their hand. Good thing the barrel directs the blast away from the shooter!

Larry

Larry,
Sure,some folks like getting the largest caliber handgun but can they really shoot one accurately???

With my Ruger Alaskan and using my "moose loads" I can hit bowling pins at 50 yards frequently.

I never fired an S&W 500 but I can certainly say that no way would I be able to properly,accurately handle one.

Wayne

The recoil and recovery time on both my 44mag and 357mag, is the reason I went to a Glock 20SF 10mm, 15+1 as fast as I can pull the trigger and carry it in a Diamond D Guide Chest holster, for my woods(bear) pistol.

Pap

Pap,
Years ago,when the 10mm round first came out,I tested it in the Colt Delta Elite.

I found that the recoil was really not that bad at all and now figure that the Glock configuration is better than the 1911,that the recoil is even more manageable.

The FBI went to the 10mm but found that some of their agents (actually a lot) could not handle it so S&W developed the 40 S&W.

That round,in my opinion is totally useless. It has to go to bezerk pressures to launch a bullet that the 45acp does at modest pressures.

Why didn't the FBI go back to the 45acp?? Simple as some time earlier they had conducted tests and said that it was not effective.

Go figure.
Wayne