Talk:.500 S&W Magnum

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

message: 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)
thread_title:  Rifles or Carbines? 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Recommend for deletion 

message: 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)
thread_title: Subtle Hilarity

message: 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)
thread_title:  Comparison 500 S&W Magnum and 45-70 

message: This revolver caliber is so strong as the .308 Winchester ,  a rifle caliber.Agre22 (talk) 12:37, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: So strong as .308 Winchester

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:   Maximum Cartridge Overall Length  

message: 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)
thread_title:  Consolidate 

message: 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)
thread_title:  The effects 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  .50 caliber or .500 Caliber 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Re-write recoil section? 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text:  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)
thread_title:  Rimmed vs. Semi-rimmed 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Controversies 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Dead link 

message: With what barrel length has this been measured? --92.107.111.78 (talk) 17:50, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  V0/E0-table 

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

text: Definitely nuke the advertisements here please. 84.209.187.221 (talk) 00:07, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it just me or do parts of the article sound like an advertisement?