I though about the S&W 500 for almost a year and finally took the plunge. After reading many posts here (and other places) I went with the 6.5 inch half lug. The 8 inch was just too big for me. I liked the 4” but the compensator takes up something like 11/2 inches, making the barrel only approximately 21/2 inches long. In the high muzzle velocity handguns (357, 44, 500 etc), you lose so power much in very short barrels. The 8 3/8” barrel is the best for that, but as I said, it is just too big for me.

The 6.5 inch has an internal compensator, which consists of a series of holes in the inside the the barrel. The gasses exhaust in the top at the front sight. I found it is very difficult the move a tight fitting cleaning patch in the area of these holes. The revolver was fired once by S&W, with what appeared to be a lead cast bullet. When purchasing the revolver at the gun show, I forgot to look for a .50 bronze cleaning brush. Unfortunately I could not find one in Miami and have ordered some from Brownell’s. Using a 44/45 brush was kind of like brushing your teeth. I could rub the brush along different sides of the barrel, nothing like using a correct size brush. For having only been fired once, it seemed extraordinarily difficult to remove the lead fouling with a brass brush that was too small.

I could not wait for the proper size brass brush and made a trip to an outdoor range. Looking back, it probably was not a good idea to “warm up” by shooting 50 rds of 44 Mag from my 629. I have always enjoyed shooting the 629, even with its strong recoil.
When starting to shoot the 6.5 .500 (for the first time), the noise did not bother me at all. The recoil is incredible. Here is some rough math, 50 - 44 = 6, roughly 12% larger diameter. My perceived recoil was not 12% more, it was much more than that.

Shooting Magtech (Brazilian) 325 grain bullets there was a great amount of recoil. I lasted for 20 rounds. These are jacketed, but who knows it the bases had copper gas checks or what ever. For only 20 rounds, the amount of lead fouling was very high. It was not possible to get it all out, even after 50 very tight patches, I will finish it when the correct size brass brush arrives.

It may seem like I have a lead hang up - well that is true. I really take care to clean the guns proper. That is why I can brag about my 40 year old Python, fired thousands of times, has a perfect barrel.

I liked shooting the .500, not enjoyed like other handguns. But with some more practice, I believe that will happen. It is surprisingly accurate, the long sight plane helps.

IHO, the 500 is for someone that shoots quite a bit (not necessarily the 500). I shoot 150 - 300 rounds a month mostly my “duty” H&K USP Compact .40.

The 500 is incredible, and am happy I got it.

I've shot several, a special purpose hunting gun IMO. Very accurate but not on my list. As far as the recoil I found it's bark worse than it's bite. Standing next to one is worse than pulling the trigger. Hard to imagine Smith coming out with anything more but the same was thought when the 44 mag came out.

I have a 6.5 and it's an ideal compromise to the ballistics of the longer barrels and the handiness of the shorter.

My 6.5" 500 is a hunting gun and it is a superb replacement for the somewhat marginal 57's and 29's I've used in the past for elk and bear. Their flat trajectory and delivered energy put this caliber in a class by itself..

I completely agree these guns are not fun to "plink" with. They press the very limits of handgun recoil and noise. I hand-load and cast my own bullets so I can regulate the intensity of these factors quite a bit.

But even so those issues should always be considered by anyone planning a purchase, as well as the cost of factory ammo if hand-loading is not an option.

JMHO

__________________
Terry

I have a couple of the beasts: a 6 ½” PC Hunter, a 5” JRS and a regular 4”. The 5” is my favorite. If you don’t reload, feeding the beast will get very expensive very quickly. If you do reload, you can dial in the loads any way you want. I usually spend most of my time with my .500s shooting substantially below max loads. They are a lot more fun for me that way and I don’t tend to drive all the other shooters on the line away.

Attached Images

IMG_4247.jpg (59.4 KB, 213 views)

__________________
Tom

I picked up a P.C. Hunter with a 6.5" barrel and a full lug. I have all my reloading supplies finally, and I'm going to load some 'warm' loads using L'il Gun and Barnes 375s. Can't wait to see if I can hit any thing with this beast. Here's a photo of it over Ruger .41 Magnum and a Ruger 357 Magnum.

__________________
Ralph J.

If you can't hit anything, it may not be the gun. Mine is super accurate. I put a 2x Weaver scope on it in Warne QD mounts. It runs the weight to about 85 oz. A little too heavy to shoot freehand, but works great from any kind of rest. And the scope pops off to quickly access the iron sights.

I did find the front sights on both the JRS and PC Hunter to be too low. I replaced them with Bachman serrated ramp rifle sights.

__________________
Tom

Tom-
How do you like the JR compared to the 6.5. I agonized over the JR but ended up with the 6.5 because it was $300+ less and I did not have to deal with the transfer.
Jim

If you are referring to the 6.5" with the integral comp, it looks very nice. It came along after I got my guns, so it wasn't available as a choice. I do like the length of the 5" JRS, but that is merely my personal opinion. I also like the fact that the JRS doesn't have a comp. I actually prefer the rotation of the gun, rather than the more linear push of the comped guns, but that is also a personal opinion not shared by many. It doesn't hurt that the JRS is 57 oz., essentially the same weight as the 4", compared to the 6.5" at 61 oz. and my PC Hunter at 70 oz. All my .500s seem to be very accurate, so I would assume the 6.5 is very accurate as well.

If I were getting only one .500 and planning to hunt with it where I live, the 6.5" would be the choice because where I like 6" is necessary for a handgun.

__________________
Tom