I'm savin' my nickels and dimes, selling a couple old shotguns that I don't use/need anymore, and buying myself a new handgun. Here's the choices and aarguments for each caliber.

New gun will be a plinker, as well as a deer gun, and probably a Ruger (currently hunt deer w. .357, I'd like longer reach and more knockdown power).

.44 Mag-Classic, no question as to it's performance for deer.

.45LC-Old, also sufficient for deer. A friend has a 45 Redhawk, if I had my own, I could reload for the two of us and make my own rounds a little cheaper.

.454-I have a set of reloading dies for .454, so that expense is met. I could also shoot .45 from it, satisfying the friends need for cheap 45LC ammo. I have some concerns about sticky 454 cases in this gun. I confess that I am somewhat enamored by the 454 load (is it wrong to like big guns simply for the sake of their being big? ). If I buy the Ruger, it'll likely be in the 9.5" barrel. I know FA is very good, but my budget simply does not allow for a FA gun. I've read very good things about the Raging Bull from Taurus, but it's only a 5 shot, and I just don't like the way it looks (not a big fan of the SRH's looks either, but it's better looking than the Taurus). Of course, looks are secondary to performance.

.480-Big, less punishing recoil than the .454, looks the same as the .454. Less flexible (in terms of ammo avail.) than the 454, but since I reload, not a huge issue.

T/C The other option is to forget revolvers and look into a T/C Contender or Encore.

What's everyone's opinion on the various calibers listed for what I want to do?

All Right my friend, here are my humble opinions:

I think it's a matter of what kind of power you need....if it is for hunting or target silhouettes:
the 44 mag was the first magnum caliber and it's good enough for hunting, simply to reload and shoot target. It's not so powerful like 480 or 454 but no one is perfect.......
I've got a ruger srh in 454: only sometimes i notice sticking brass in the cylinder but you in the States can test many different kind of factory amno, not that i can do here in Italy.
I like the taurus raging bull: i heard it's excellent for absorb recoil.................

IMHO :D The Smith Mountain gun in 45colt!!!

Well...some folks are fans of the big single shot T/C's and otheres (myself) aren't. Liked the old short barrled 10" Oct. T/C Contender, the large ones don't do "it" for me. But in comparison to the 9.5" .454...the T/C just doesn't seem all that big anymore.

If you want a big revolver, I'd look into the .480 since you handload. I don't feel, when handloaded, that it really gives anything away to any other commercially available cartridges unless it's to it's longer companion cartridge. I've now had the chance to fire a SRH in .480, in addition to the RB, and there really is no comparison as to which has the better sights, grips, and trigger. I can't speak to longevity, or what you consider looks better, but if you shoot both I'd have a real hard time seeing you choose the Ruger, especially when 400gr bullets at 1200+fps come into play.

If you want a TC, and don't foresee adding a bunch of barrels in the future that require the encore frame, I'd go with a .357 Max or .44 Mag in a 10" contender. The .357 Max is an excellent cartridge for deer sized game with moderate recoil and the .44 Mag in a 10" TC has more power, and recoil, than is conceivable in a revolver when handloaded. The real beauty of the .357 Max, since you mentioned plinking, is that you can load it with 180gr Hornady SSP's for deer and plink with light .357 bullets in excess of 2000fps that are accurate and EXPLOSIVE on vermin or popcans.

I'd let it boil down to if you are going to scope it or not. If you want to shoot open sights, buy a revolver. If you want to scope it, buy a TC. A 10" contender is a featherweight compared to a Ruger SRH with similar barrel length, with a much better trigger and accuracy to boot.

Since the biggest game you intend to hunt is deer, the .454 and .480 are seriously overpowered. That leaves the .44 Magnum and .45LC. They will do the job equally. I've used both for years and find no difference once lead meets venison. My personal choice in Rugers would be the 5-1/2" Bisley Blackhawk. The .44 Mag version is a regularly cataloged item, while the .45LC was a limited production model.

How about a Special Edition 5.5" Stainless Steel .44 Magnum Bisley? Dennis

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/FAProdView?model=861&return=Y

Everybody else has hit on most bases. The only thing I want to add is don't let one gun being a 5 shot vs. another being a 6 shot have any influence on your decision. I've been hunting with handguns for 22 years and in the last 15 I have mostly been using single shot Contenders (.45-70 and .309 JDJ) and an Encore .50 AK. You place your shot like it should be placed and you will not need more than one shot, and if you do, you certainly won't need more than one more, two tops. There have been times when I hunted with a Redhawk .44 that I put extra rounds in a deer because they did not go down quick enough to suit me, but we are talking no more than one or two shots to finish it off once and for all. In fact, the lack of impact some deer seemed to show from heart lung shots with the .44 is what prompted me to switch to the .45-70. Since switching to it, hear/lung shots are one shot, done deal. Anyway I digress. The point is, even if the deer does not drop at the first shot, one or two more will certainly do if you are putting them in the right place. If you have to pump 5 or 6 shots into a deer to bring it down, you aren't shooting well enough to be hunting with a handgun in the first place IMO. In 22 years with over two dozen deer taken with handguns, I have yet to use more than three shots in any deer, and they have ranged from 90 to 200 pounds and all shot within 50 yards.