44 Mag or 45 Colt for hunting?

[huntersdog]

Which handgun do you use the most for hunting 44 mag or 45 colt.

[Tatume]

Both, equally. However, I recommend the 44 Rem Mag to others. There are no concerns about magnum loads, as that's what it was made to do. Not everyone is savvy enough to work with the 45 Colt; anyone can buy a box of 44 Mag factory ammo.

Take care, Tom

[Jupiter7]

For the sake of utility, I went 45colt. Can use the same molds with my 1911's. Also, with Ruger Blackhawks/SBH or red hawk/SRH you're not giving anything up to the 44mag. Oh, not to mention the commonality up the food chain to .454 and 460s&w if desired.

[CastingFool]

Easy choice for me, 45LC. Don't own a 44 mag.

[C. Latch]

I went with the .45 Colt. If someone was starting out with handgun hunting and asked me for advice, I'd probably steer them towards not the .45 Colt, and not the .44 Magnum, but a 6.5" Blackhawk in .41 Magnum.

With the .41, it seems like you can give up a tiny bit of meplat size in exchange for a bullet that has good SD without being so heavy as to be uncomfortable when loaded hot; a hollowpoint in the .41 that weighed between 220 and 240 grains can be driven downright quickly, at relatively mild pressures, and I personally think that the 6.5" barrel length is the ideal single-action barrel length, and neither the .44 or .45 is commonly found in that length.

[subsonic]

I have never hunted with a .44 mag.

I think the .44 is an easier choice and if I knew what I know now may have started with a .44 and never looked back.

But I also think that the .45 Colt (in a strong gun) is a better killer with all other things equal - which they seldom are.

[35 Whelen]

I've been using a 44 Special but have recently done a lot of work with a 45 Colt. This fall I'm going to use it instead of my .44's. On one hand I think the 45 is far more versatile, but it certainly takes a heavier bullet, and therefore more recoil, to get the same penetration with the 45 as with the 44.

Neither of them have to be loaded to magnum levels in order to kill deer. You can read here (http://www.customsixguns.com/writings.htm) the preferences of a man who builds hunting handguns for a living.

35W

[Larry Gibson]

If one is going to use an "off the shelf" revolver such as S&W or Ruger then the .44 Magnum is the obvious choice if one wants full power, especially if only factory ammunition will be used.

Yes the 45 Colt can be loaded to very effective levels. The revolver must be capable and the reloader must be capable of producing such loads for the revolver used. A lot of wiggle room there for something to go wrong.

With the 44 Magnum cartridge the revolver will be made for that level of loads and safe load data abounds.

Larry Gibson

[35 Whelen]

I think with the 45 Colt people just presume that it must be loaded to 44 Magnum levels to be effective and therefore any handloader who buys one is going to automatically start pouring 45 Colt cases full of powder in an attempt to duplicate 44 Magnum levels. I don't think either presumption is correct.

35W

[LUCKYDAWG13]

out of the two i would get the 44 magnum its the 30/06 in pistols can do it all.

[Hickok]

I use .44 mag more, but .45 Colt has always put deer down for me when I used it, and I prefer my .45 Colt ammo loaded with a good SWC to 900 fps.

[USSR]

I'm using a .45 Colt with 265gr SWC HP's at 1000 - 1100fps. REALLY does a number on whitetails.

Don

[butch2570]

This is another 06' vs 308 debate, One would be hard pressed to prove the worth of the better round, personally the factor of the compatability of the shooter/gun /confidence would be the larger issue. Both are excellent.

[TXGunNut]

45 Colt because I can handload it to do anything the 43 Mag can do, probably more. I've loaded it with smokeless from 45acp velocities up to speeds I'd rather not admit to with a 300 gr J-word. What I enjoy best is BP loads in a SAA, someday I'll even take some hunting. Nothing wrong with the 43, at times I'll even admit to having one. ;-) There's no right or wrong answer here, they're both awesome hunting rounds. There are no finer BP revolver rounds than the 45 Colt and the 43 Spl but loading BP in a 43 Mag just doesn't sound right. Yes, I'm a bit biased, I love my 45's. :-)

[500MAG]

Got my 44 Redhawk scoped and ready to Hog hunt 2 years ago. I can't wait to go. Lol!

[TXGunNut]

45 Colt because I can handload it to duplicate the 45 acp or anything the 43 Mag can do. On top of that I can load it with BP and shoot it like it was designed to be shot. I'm not at all biased, some days I'll even admit to having a 43. Somedays I forget about having a 43 but just thinking about my 45's makes me smile. ;-)

[RED333]

Loaded correct, ether 45 Colt or 44 will get the job done.
We have both, I have not hunted with them.

[6bg6ga]

What are you comfortable with? Either will do the job. Someone mentioned there is a lot of wiggle room for things to go wrong with the 45 but isn't this true when reloading for any caliber? I have two 45's and no 44 mags and its a matter of choice.

[patrick_ford]

Whether .44 special, .44 magnum or .45 colt, they all are very capable of getting the job done with certain factory loads or judicious hand loading. The real question depends on the launch platform. The gun determines what you can really get out of the cartridge. I've been a diehard 45 colt fan for over ten years, especially in a late framed ruger blackhawk, but since I got my hands on a medium framed 44 special blackhawk, it's starting to get my attention for general outdoor work and my personal comfort.

YMMV. Happy hunting!

Patrick

[str8wal]

They are equally effective for the most part, but I prefer the 45 Colt. You can run heavier slugs at lower pressures than a 44.

[725]

.44 mag. A good .44 mag will handle all the sane ammo loaded for it. .45 colts come in a myriad of vintages. An older one may be weaker than a good current one. The rim on a .44 mag is substantial as where the rim on the .45 colt is rather slim. If a reload event is required, I would feel better with the more positive mag case than the colt case. That's just me, YMMV, no I don't know everything, yes, other have their own opinion and wealth of experience, but that's just my opinion.

[DougGuy]

When you get to handloads and 300+ gr boolits, they are about equal really. It is VERY hard to find decent hunting ammo in .45 Colt and when you do find it, it's for the +P Ruger/TC loads only. Factory ammo for the .44 magnum is abundant and plenty robust to hunt with.

[RobS]

http://www.customsixguns.com/writings/dissolving_the_myth.htm

as to the case being weak as well as some good information about the ole 45 Colt...........

Things to consider for the original posters would be if you plan to reload and what firearm you are looking at purchasing?

[35 Whelen]

I wouldn't think the availability of factory ammunition would matter in the least on this board because if you're here it's a safe assumption you're a bullet caster and if you're bullet caster its an even safer assumption you're a handloader.

[sixshot]

I've loaded both for many, many years & never really seen any difference in the field. If you go to the real heavyweight slugs the 45 does better with less pressure but I can't tell a difference on big game. I've taken 5 elk with the 44 maggies & 4 with my 45 Colt Rugers, just didn't see any difference. Load both with a 250 gr. slug & 20-21 grs of 2400 & they will handle about anything I've ever seen, including African game. Go up to 280-325 grs & you really have a winner! Playing the "what if" game, I'd probably go with a good 44 but only slightly.

Dick

Dick

[Jimmy10mm]

I'm not a hunter but reading this thread with interest. I shoot both calibers though I'm more familiar with the 44. Just wanted to mention that the daddy of the 44, Elmer Keith, wrote that he began experimenting with the 44, rather than the 45, because at that time, there were no revolvers made with cylinder walls thick enough to stand up to the full potential of the 45 LC. Had Ruger been around then history might have been different.

[warboar_21]

I own three 45 Colt Revolvers and one lever action so the choice is easy for me. It's my all time favorite handgun cartridge. If I were not a reloader then maybe the 44 Mag would be my choice for a large bore simply for the fact that there are so many factory offerings. When I take a shooter out who is looking for a big bore and let them shoot my 45s they always like them until I tell them the price of factory ammo. Even cheap cowboy loads are higher than standard jacketed 44 Mag in many stores. If they are reloaders then it's pretty much a moot point.

[rintinglen]

I hunt with a .44 Mag. Those who say that a .45 can be reloaded to equal a .44 mag are right, but I've had better luck getting good accuracy from a 44 mag than from the 45 Colt, In fact, it is my experience that you are much less likely to get an accurate 45 Colt Revolver out of the box than you are with a .44 mag. Now, if you are talking Freedom Arms, all bets are off, but those run nigh on to two grand.

[6bg6ga]

I find accuracy is a lot of the time a result of the shooter and not the firearm. I have taken many of the so called inaccurate pistols and shot them and achieved very good results. To say that one caliber may be more accurate than other is a bit too much for me to swallow. I have two accurate 45LC's that have never been modified so I consider them out of the box. As you very well know sometimes it takes a little but to obtain an accurate load and that accuracy is different with different loads.

[subsonic]

I hunt with a .44 Mag. Those who say that a .45 can be reloaded to equal a .44 mag are right, but I've had better luck getting good accuracy from a 44 mag than from the 45 Colt, In fact, it is my experience that you are much less likely to get an accurate 45 Colt Revolver out of the box than you are with a .44 mag. Now, if you are talking Freedom Arms, all bets are off, but those run nigh on to two grand.

I have had the same experience. My Ruger .45 Colts only shoot stuff over 300gr well. Whereas my .44s are reasonably happy with stuff as light as 240gr - maybe lighter as that' the lightest I have wrung out for accuracy. Twist rate would make sense.

if you are one of those folks who thinks 2.5" at 25yds is good accuracy, you will never know the difference.

[6bg6ga]

I think each gun shoots differently. I have a Great Western that my father put together as a kit and it performs flawlessly. With 250gr SWC bullets I can easily obtain 1" groups at 30 yards. As a matter of fact this gun shoots just about everything you put thru it with good accuracy. There are a lot of factors in obtaining good accuracy one being the shooter. Never shot anything smaller than 250 gr so I cannot comment on accuracy of lighter bullets.

[StrawHat]

I hunted with the 44 Magnum and Elmer's load for it. It killed deer but my friend used a 45 long Colt and black powder loads. With similar hits, he seemed to put the deer down quicker. It took me a few years but I finally made the switch to the 45 long Colt and black powder. 260 grains of lead at +/- 900 fps is all that is really needed to harvest Ohio whitetailed deer. The faster magnum round did not seem to impact them as much as the larger slower boolit.

Sure, you can load it up to magnum levels but it is not necessary.

[lbaize3]

I have killed deer with both a 44mag and a 45 Colt. Each does a wonderful job in the Southeast Texas thickets that I hunted in. However, there is no replacement for bullet placement. I have also killed deer and hogs with the 357mag and sundry other pistol calibers. Pistol hunting is a joy and taking your game with a handgun gives a great feeling of accomplishment. The power of the load is not as important as where the bullet is placed....

[sixshot]

Many years ago world champion Ross Seyfried put together a 5 shot 45 Colt & shot several 1" groups at 100 yds. Handgun accuracy isn't caliber specific, any gun can be accurate if put together right, along with the right loads & the guy doing the shooting. Forgot, I've also taken 2 elk with the 41 maggie, one with a 230 gr cast & the other with a 250 gr cast & I couldn't tell the difference between it & the 44 or 45. Placement & penetration always works.

Dick

[John Allen]

I like the 45 colt more than the 44mag. Saying this I do own quite a few of both. The 44mag is better if you do not want to get heavy into reloading for it. There are plenty off the shelf ammo. The gun selection for the 44 mag is better to, IN MY OPINION. They are easier to be had used in different varieties.

[dh2]

I hunted deer for years with a S&W model 29 in .44 Rem. Mag. it did preform very well to about 75 yards. because of the weak factory ammo I would not hunt with a .45 LC , hand loaded to the Ruger data it will keep up with the .44 Mag. and give more bullet choices.
now both have stayed in my safe for a while in favor of the .454 Cassull .

[5.7 MAN]

if I or somone I was advising were resricted to factory ammo it would be 44 mag. For an experienced handloader with a strong modern handgun, 45 Colt all the way!

[catboat]

I'm not much of a handgun hunter (would like to be, but I'm not), so take my comments with a grain of salt. I'm a shooter, plinker, bullseye competitor, and reloading bench experimenter.

I prefer the 44 mag and 44 special over the 45 Colt.

I had a Ruger Redhawk (5.5"bbl) in 45 Colt. I got into a romance with the 45 Colt 5+ years ago. Picked up the Ruger Redhawk, 1000 Starline 45 Colt cases, a RCBS 45-270 Scovill mould, and shot it. It shot well enough. I had a few case splits, and a half dozen 45 Colt case rims slip off the extractor. I didn't like that, so I sold the whole outfit. Part of the basis for this "extreme" response was that I was (still am) thinning out my "calibers". I will always have a .452 mold and 1911 45 acp. I don't need a .454" 45 colt.

I didn't like the DESIGN of the 45 Colt. It's "old." Look at case dimensions closely. It is slightly tapered. Causes resizing issues, and leads to case splitting. Part of the "problem" was the 45 Colt case design. Part of the problem was likely the larger chamber size of the Ruger Redhawk. Put them together, and it created enough of an issue to make it "for sale."

I like the 44 mag and special case, because they are much less tapered (essentially parallel-walled), and respond better to carbide ring resizing. I have a nice S&W 629-3 Classic Hunter in 44 mag (6" bbl) and Ruger Bisley flat top in 44 special. You can load up "heavies" in the 44 mag (300+ grains), for that "big punch" appeal. I like shooting NOE's 44-265 grain bullet in the 44 mag/special. It has enough mass to be "big", but can be loaded to 1000 fps to be comfortable to shoot.


So, while I can't say one is a better hunting cartridge-because I'm not approaching it from a hunting rationale, I can say I think the 44 special/mag platform makes more sense from a case design standpoint. The 44 special and 45 colt aren't that far apart in birthdate, but the 44 special (and 44 mag decendant) is much more "modern" and better designed than the 45 Colt. The 44 spec/mag has a larger rim, and straight case (less taper) for long case life.

I'm not trying to start a war. Both are classic cases. I just like the 44 spec/mag platform compared to the 45 Colt.

I like the 44 spec/mag so much, I will be likely selling off my 357 mag stuff. I'll keep my S&W model 14 /"K-38" just beacuse it's accurate and fun to shoot. The 357 stuff will likely go at some point.

Long live the 44 spec/mag case. It meets my needs. Maybe not yours, but that's my story-and I'm sticking to it.

[Cornbread]

I prefer the 454 Casull to every handgun caliber I have ever shot. The 45 colt is a close second. But I reload....a lot. It's a rare evening I don't put 50 - 100 rounds through at least one of my guns. It pays off during hunting season, I have taken many a buck with open sites out past 80 yards. All that said, if you don't reload, go with the 44mag. For the same reason I tell people to buy a .30-06 as their primary hunting rifle if they don't reload. You have the most options available to you for out of the box ammo and the more you shoot, the better chance you have of getting the game you desire with a clean well placed shot and the more fun you will have with your weapon. So if you reload go 45 colt in a Ruger strength weapon so you can shoot from mild to wild. If you don't reload, go with the 44mag. Whichever you chose, shoot a lot and enjoy yourself.

[Lonegun1894]

In have and use both. I started with the .45 Colt, and have a preference for it due to longer experience, but the .44 Mag works too. I have also taken deer and hogs with .357 Mag, and had good results with it, and hogs with .22LR handguns, so you better believe that I am a believer in placement over everything else. Wanna fire up more discussion? Try this. I have done the above with handguns, and have faith in them, but have a strong preference in .30 caliber rifles over .22 CF rifles, even though I know rounds like the .223 are perfectly adequate for most things. I see the .44 vs .45 thing the same, except that we all know that .30 is better than .22 and .45 is better than .44. :takinWiz:

[Geraldo]

In spite of all the rational reasons offered here, you're either a John Wayne guy or a Clint Eastwood guy. Figure that out and pick appropriately knowing that +/- .025" won't be an issue on game.

[Pereira]

I own both and have hunted with them both, just never had the opportunity to use the 45. Have taken deer with a 44 Mag. & a 41 Mag. and they do the job. Maybe this year will be the 45's turn, guess if I carry it til it does, then it will. The last one I took with the 44 was in the neigborhood of 60yds. drop right where it was. Its a scoped 7 1/2" barrel Ruger SBH. The only one I got with the BH 6 1/2" 41 was like 20, 25 yds. right through the neck feel right in its tracks, that was with a 215gr LSWC.

[warboar_21]

I am bigger Eastwood fan than Wayne and I still choose a 45 Colt. Ha!