44 magnum to 44 special length

[trapper9260]

I only cut the brass is when the mouth start to split. Otherwise I did buy some 44spl brass for the reason of instead of down load my mag to spl ,That way I will not have to think of what one is low charge in the mags .

[bmortell]

I don't know about you guys but I got more time than money, when I needed some 44spl cases I just made them and everything seems fine about them.

[JoeJames]

DougGuy - Yup, fair question.
I have a lot of 44 mag brass. The work involved in making them shorter is next to nothing for me and my home machine shop. Super fast and I wanted to use existing "stuff" rather that buy more stuff. I've made about 150 so far and have no plans to make more.

It was my assumption the little difference in volume if any, would be lost in the noise of the load variance.
I do not load 44 Special hot or Plus P level. No need to. I load to less than maximum, pleasant shooting level and let the big bullet do the work. I still have a 44 Magnum if I think I need more horse power, and these days that is almost never.

That is my story and I am sticking to it

I agree 100%. 44 Special with a 240 grain swc running at @890 fps is plenty of power around here. Can shoot a lot more, and more accurately in my opinion. No Alaskan Brown bears in the Arkansas.

[mickbr]

I guess I don't see the logic behind butchering 44 mag cases to make 44 special cases when you can buy 44 special cases. I don't know about some of you but my time is still worth a little. Taking time to cut the brass back and remove the inside and exterior burr would take more in time than simply buying some 44 special brass.

Logic explained in three posts above. Some of us like to recycle, some of us like to try something new. If I was worried about my time I wouldn't be into guns in the first place. Never saved time or made a cent out of this pursuit in 40 years

[6bg6ga]

Logic explained in three posts above. Some of us like to recycle, some of us like to try something new. If I was worried about my time I wouldn't be into guns in the first place. Never saved time or made a cent out of this pursuit in 40 years

I disagree. The case wall thickness is my concern. I maintain while it works it still doesn't make a lot of sense....my opinion. When the case wall is thicker what happens to the bullet? Generally the bullet shaved down a bit or smashed a bit which changes the diameter which will cause leading due to improper diameter. IF and I repeat the word IF the case wall was the same as the 44 special then I wouldn't have a problem with it. I dissection of a dozen cases being cut down and beburred and loaded with either 210gr SWC or 240SWC bullets and then taken apart shows clear signs of partial crush on the bullet and scrapping due to loading. Now, while I didn't fire these in my 629 the diameter of the bullet brings my expectations of leading to the questionable point.

Now maybe the 44 mag cases I cut back are different that yours in thickness but I question that simply because of the higher pressures of the 44magnum and the need to be able to endure those pressures. Having said that I would make the guess that jacketed bullets would probably work ok but will certainly show somewhat of a bulge in the case. I doubt that they would suffer from any deforming.

Now, the main reasons I disagree with the practice is the task of cleaning leading out of a barrel. I don't know about you but I dislike it very much.

One person cuts brass when it starts to split. When brass splits I generally throw it away because its starting to weaken. One person cuts them back because he has a lot of time and well they seem to work ok. I wouldn't call it logic by any means call it an opinion maybe.

I'll have to fess up a little here... I do cut .223's to make 300 blackouts when the neck splits on a .223 Generally I only get to use that cut back several times before it splits again. Unslpit 223 brass that I cut back gives me more life

[6bg6ga]

I just got a PM from a member here telling me basically I don't know anything.
I performed a controlled study which consisted of cutting back some 44 mag cases and relaoding them with #2 alloy properly sized and lubed bullets. Before I loaded them I checked the diameter with my micrometer and recorded the results. I like I mentioned cut back the cases and carefully deburred the cases loaded the bullets and expelled the bullets with my Dillon bullet puller and again measured the bullets. Diameter changed enough that I cannot shoot them in my 629S&W without leading. Been there and I'm somewhat of an expert when it comes to cleaning the bore on the 629. My comments were to advise you of my controlled tests and my results. Maybe your 44 will handle the slight diameter change but I know mine won't. Oh, before I forget the bullet hardness was checked on my hardness tester after verifying the OAL of each bullet.

And to the member that PM'd me... your absolutely right I don't know a thing and I have a lot to learn. Thank you for making me so aware of this.

[curiousgeorge]

Well put me in the know nothing category too. I readily admit that I cut 44 mag cases back to 44 specials when I get minor neck splits. I have shot both 240 gr lead and 200 gr jacketed through these cases for multiple firings until I throw away. When I first started this, 44 special cases were hard to come by and a lot of balloon head cases were still showing up around here. My Super Blackhawk gad tight throats and a tight spot in the barrel where it was screwed into the frame. Sizes all ny lead (straight wheel weights back then) to .429 and did not have any substantial leading from either full power mags or mid range specials. Worked very well and I liked being able to not have to wonder if the mags were full power or downloaded.

[Chill Wills]

Logic explained in three posts above. Some of us like to recycle, some of us like to try something new. If I was worried about my time I wouldn't be into guns in the first place. Never saved time or made a cent out of this pursuit in 40 years

Amen!

I do this for enjoyment. Not to conform to someones standard of what they think we all should be doing.
There are a lot of right ways to do something.
BTW-It's great to be an American and have choice. Thank a veteran!

[longbow]

While I haven't shortened any .44 mag. brass yet, I will one day. I shoot .44 mag. only in a Marlin 1894.

Like the other "cheap" guys here if I can salvage a .44 mag. cartridge with minor split in the neck by shortening to .44 special length and keep using it why wouldn't I? If a guy is loading to max. pressures then he better start with light loads and work up due to possible case volume issues as mentioned... but once done write the info down and reload accordingly. If loading light then I doubt there woul dbe any issues but I'd still start low and work up.

I'll agree with 6gb6ga on case taper and wall thickness possibly being an issue. I certainly don't know whether .44 special and .44 mag brass differ only in length or if the .44 mag. brass is in fact thicker at the web and thicker/more tapered side walls. If it is then 6gb6ga has a very valid point. I'll give an example of my experience.

I got a Lee Enfield a few years ago so picked up "fat" boolit moulds to suit the 0.315" throat and 0.314" groove diameters but got leading and mediocre accuracy. Long story short, it took me a bit of tinkering and pulling boolits to mic. before I discovered that the boolits were being swaged down under bore diameter during seating because the die was giving me 0.310"/0.311 inside neck diameter to suit SAAMI spec bullets of 0.311"/0.312" where my cast bullets were 0.315". Annealing the brass reduced the amount of swaging but it was still there so I made a new expander button to give 0.313" inside neck diameter and the problem went away. I now use a Lee Collet die set up to give me 0.313" inside neck diameter.

Point being that 6ga6gb is correct that if the case walls are thicker and more tapered this may or may not be an issue. If the brass is thicker and bulging it may be sizing boolits down or the bulge may prevent chambering. Annealing should help if boolits are being swaged down. As long as the loaded rounds will chamber easily I wouldn't worry about it. If the brass is more tapered/thicker and bulges a bit just back the die off a little and "neck" size that should solve it. And in worst case, since you have time, you could "neck" ream the brass if you had to so it would chamber.

Why did I weigh in with my basically worthless opinion? Because I am saving .303 British brass with split necks or other issues to be shortened and rims turned for use in my 1894 Marlin. Now that will be some thicker brass! Why? Why not if I have the brass and some time to play? It will either work or not and if it works I get more life out of the brass at the expense of some time. Will it be worth it? It's my time so... I'll decide. Is there any danger in doing it? Not if I work up loads carefully.

Let's get real here, there's guys cutting .308 brass down and reaming for .45 cal. bullets for 1911 platforms. Is that worth it? For them it is.

Longbow

[scattershot]

I just did it, because I was curious. I trimmed a FC .44 mag case to .44 Special length, (1.143”). After trimming, the case weighed 115.5 grains, and held 33.3 grains of water. Hope that helps.


P.S. In the interest of scientific discovery, I sized that case and loaded a dummy round with a Hornady .430 J-word, with no difficulty. I don’t own a .44 Special any more, but it chambered fine in a .44 Magnum. Whether or not it will distort a boolit remains to be seen.

[Tripplebeards]

I cut down 20 of them last year to run in my 329 night guard with some trail boss powder and some 180grain xtp’s to see how light of a recoil I would get. I flatten pretty good my bullets still seated crooked. I would assume it could’ve been because the casings were thicker? I ended up over flaring them and they eventually seated evenly.

[mickbr]

I disagree. The case wall thickness is my concern. I maintain while it works it still doesn't make a lot of sense....my opinion.

A lot of wildcatting, resurrecting old calibres or finding new ways to do old things, like making 45 acp brass out of 308win dont make sense to some folks either. But it gives some other folks enjoyment. Thanks for you input.

[mickbr]

I just did it, because I was curious. I trimmed a FC .44 mag case to .44 Special length, (1.143”). After trimming, the case weighed 115.5 grains, and held 33.3 grains of water. Hope that helps.


P.S. In the interest of scientific discovery, I sized that case and loaded a dummy round with a Hornady .430 J-word, with no difficulty. I don’t own a .44 Special any more, but it chambered fine in a .44 Magnum. Whether or not it will distort a boolit remains to be seen.

Thanks scattershot, that is only a grain or two less than 44 special brass, and could just be brass variation. I guess that settles the debate on whether shortened magnum brass causes pressure issues by reduced capacity alone. Had read about the possible capacity difference on a lot of different boards but looks like its not enough to worry about. Thanks again fellas for all the input.

[Chill Wills]

Last night I grabbed a few cases to measure - they were mixed case makers so the numbers are not super helpful but give an idea of the variance. Then too, if there is much of a variance in brass between makers, it may only show a small volume difference anyway. This factor has to be built into the loading handbook data for safe loads of the 44 Special kind, or so I would think.
Again, a little bit of apples to oranges going on here so take it for what it is worth to you.

I did not do any water volume testing.
Here is what I have so far....

Two uncut 44 Magnum cases, a Frontier and a FC weighed 111.4grs and 115.1 respectively. (weight of brass case)

PCM head-stamp 44 mag case cut to 44 special 107grains (weight of brass case)
RP head-stamp factory 44 Special case 93 grains "

This part is interesting. Measuring from the mouth of the case down to the web, the PMC 44 mag case is 0.965" and the factory RP case is 0.983" which could indicate that the deeper 44 special case has slightly more volume. However, that would assume identical case wall profile.

With a tube micrometer I can measure wall thickness down the case wall to 0.300" of an inch.
The PCM case wall thickness averaged 0.011" and the RP 0.012".

Because I could only confirm this down the mouth 3/10th of an inch with the tube micrometer as stated above, I continued measuring down into the case using a pin from a pin-gauge set and also a dial caliper, which we know is not the most reliable for this kind of work. But the pin is a good indicator of the start of the taper in. For what it is worth, the dial caliper did agree with the pin-gauge that the inside of the case did not start to constrict until about 0.430" down into the case from the mouth.

One last point to check on would be to seat bullets into the various cases and pull them to check for swaged base bands. If I have a chance later I will do that.
BTW- none of the bullets I shoot in the 44 Special seat that deep to 0.430" like the 250 RCBS (K) SWC or the Lee 210 gr WC or lately, the Lyman 44-40 bullet who's number escapes me just now - something like 42798 maybe? None of these bullets even come close to drafting that deep into the case, so in my opinion there is zero damage done to the bullet in seating because there isn't any inside taper to the case wall at that depth and beyond.

In the one case I have measured, the 44 Mag case is built heaver than the Special however the web would indicate that the special may have more depth and by extension very slightly more volume. Or NOT! not all factors are accounted for. That brass has to be somewhere. However, again, we are talking about the difference between two small amounts when compared to volume.

I think at this point, not finding any real drastic revelations, I am very happy to shoot my cut down 44 Magnum cases in the 44 Special with out any special alterations to the case.