(Read Part 1 First)
I set out to test the Magnum Research BFR factory model 7.5″ 44 magnum from field shooting positions. To give the gun a go at distance I elected to use a 2x Leupold handgun scope. When mounting optics to handguns the goal must be to keep weight to a minimum. Excessive weight optics, rings, and base will work the scope loose or worse. Since a 44 magnum is not the heaviest recoiling round on the planet I elected to use three Leupold Rifleman vertical split rings. For inexpensive rings these are my go to.

The only other thing that has been changed since part 1 of this review is some minor trigger work. The trigger had a small amount of creep that was easily stoned away and I was able to reduce the trigger pull to 13 ounces which is where I like my single action triggers for precision work.
Now on to the field shooting…..
In the west hunting antelope, mule deer, white tail, and elk in both the woods and the grasslands I find two positions to be used the most often. Those are the prone and sitting/kneeling with shooting sticks. So to do this shooting test I found these to be the most practical. Shooting off of a bench may show absolute accuracy but I have found bench shooting and field shooting to show different zeros many times with wheel guns. I believe this is due to the hard bench and body position.

For my unscientific test I elected to do a prone 50 yard 3 shot group, 100 an 150 yards prone on steel, as well as 100 and 150 yards off shooting sticks on steel.
The ammo consisted of loads I have used in the past to take game in other handguns. Nothing was loaded specifically for the BFR. We have Sierra 240 JHC over 2400, Barnes 225 XPB over Accurate 11FS, Remington 240 JHP over Unique, and 240 LSWC over 2400.
The following groups were shot from the prone at 50 yards. I am resting the butt of the grip on a Holland Field Bag. I am also gripping the gun just like any other handgun. You use the same grip across all platforms or you may have a major issue when it comes to a split second decision. Anyone who tells you otherwise is lacking experience firing in high stress situations.
Remember this is field shooting and not bench rest work.

I then went on to shoot the steel at 100 and 150 yards in the prone and from the sitting with shooting sticks. The steel targets were a 8″ and 10″ gong made by Target Hanging Solutions. I was able to connect with the first round without problem with each load except the Remington 240. Past 100 yards the Remington 240 just didn’t show accuracy potential.


Follow through at distance is critical. Once we get past about 125 yards all of the little demons to shooting distance with a wheelgun start coming out. If we stretch it to 200 yards time of flight for the bullet becomes similar to shooting a 308 rifle at 800 yards. Failure to let the gun “track” the same way every time after the shot at these distances will result in misses.
This BFR is fitted with the bisley style grip. This grip lends itself well to recoil control. The grip allows the gun to track exactly the same through my hand with each shot.
Lets jump to the $1000 question……
The Magnum Research BFR sells for about a grand at retail for the production models. The barrel cylinder gap on this one was just under .002, it has a free spin paw, comes with a quality scope base, uniform cylinder throats, has the best factory rear sight available, and several other great features. The BFR in my eyes needed trigger work to take it to the field and that was it.
Now the closest comparable firearm to the BFR is one of the Ruger bisley models. The Ruger is $200-300 less than the BFR. Ruger uses the phrase “Rugged and Reliable” as a catch phrase and I agree with both words.
Rugged: many casting and tooling marks, I have seen barrel cylinder gaps as high as .015, a wobbly rear sight, massively oversized chambers, and the list goes on. Its not hard to make up that $300 gap in addressing those issues.
Reliable: Well of course with larger gaps around moving parts it will be super reliable. These will all need to be tightened up by a gunsmith to achieve what we handgun hunters want….accuracy!
There will be brand fan boys that will be offended by the above statement….sorry, facts are facts….I can provide tissues if needed.
My hunting generaly equates to me hunting alone miles from the vehicle and sometimes spiked out in the alpine for days. Generally I am doing all of the work to find my game, stalk my game, and every other field task. My handgun must be rifle accurate, reliable, and I must be confident in my handgun for me to take it to the field. The BFR meets these above statements and I will be taking it to the field.
**We have a custom shop model on order and when It arrives we will post a review of it to include production vs custom shop value**


One response to “BFR Review Part 2”
Again, great review…Having shot a F/A 44 mag in IHMSA competition for 4 years back in the 90’s, you are 100% correct about POI changes from bench to sticks and offhand…I look forward to launching a few with my new BFR, and I’m sure my old standards with H110/240 Horn XTP and 300 gr XTP, and my Montana Bullet Works 250 LFNGC at .429 or .430 and IMR 4227…All good stuff, especially MBW cast, great bullets…Adios and Thanks