Questions for first big bore revolver?

[scrappletaco]

Hello everyone I'm getting ready to buy a new wheel gun and have it narrowed down to a new Ruger Super Redhawk with 4in. barrel. The problem I have is deciding between a 45 Colt and the 44 magnum model. Just not sure which will be the best fit and most versatile. The 45 Colt is 50 bucks more and was thinking if I go 44 mag that's the reloading dies right there but I'm looking for the best option.

It will be mostly used for general plinking, truck gun, and maybe one day a hunting backup in the mountains. Mainly it will be plinking and riding as a farm gun on person or in the truck (never know when something bigger than 9mm is useful).

I plan to reload either caliber so I'm able to shoot a good amount so factory ammo cost isn't a factor. I know powders for the 44 magnum are hard to come by up my way but I already have trailboss to load 44 specials if needed. All other components will have to be bought but are easily accessible when funds permit( G.I. Bill college student buying tools for heavy equipment tech)


So any help or experiences would be greatly appreciated. Once I get this decided and bought on to getting my Ruger no.1

[Outpost75]

The 44 Mag. can be loaded down or used with .44 Specials. There is less versatility in. 45 Colt factory loads, though with reloads you can do most anything. But I feel the. 44 Mag is more versatile. A charge of 7 grains of Bullseye and 240-grain Cowboy bullet approximates. 45 Colt recoil and energy and is cheap to shoot, 1000 rounds to a pound of powder!

[Petrol & Powder]

I think the 44 is not only more versatile but generally a bit more accurate. I'm not saying that the 45 Colt is an inaccurate round but when I was shooting both, the 44 Special was far easier to fine tune. Ultimately I gave up on the 45 Colt. When I returned to big bore revolver I didn't even consider the 45 Colt.
I think a 44 mag downloaded to 44 Special velocity is an outstanding round and you can always load the casing up to magnum pressures if you desire. While the same is true for 45 Colt on the high end in a strong enough gun, I don't think the 45 Colt is as forgiving on the low end, YMMV.
It's not an issue in the SRH but in some revolvers the cylinder walls are getting very thin when chambered for 45 Colt. The 44 magnum allows a little more steel in the same size cylinder. The SRH can certainly handle both with no problems but I would prefer the 44 in some platforms. You're not talking huge differences in bullet diameter - .429" vs. .451"; but for some reason (maybe case capacity) the 44 magnum seems work better over a larger spread of pressures. At least it did for me back when I was playing with both.

That is merely my opinion and none of the above is carved in stone.

[Nocturnal Stumblebutt]

I have to agree with what has been said above and add that while there are many similarities when loading either for the redhawk, I would always go with the 44 magnum (in fact, I was shooting my 44 redhawk today). Both can be load down for target loads and, in the redhawk, both can be hot rodded for full power to +p magnums (if that is your style, it is not mine).
For what it's worth I like that boolits of the same weight will be longer and have more bearing surface and sectional density in the 44 than in the 45.

[Nocturnal Stumblebutt]

Also, if you go with the 44, I have had excellent luck using green dot in magnum cases for 900ish fps with several boolit designs and highly recommend it for plinking, target, and any other non hunting load.

[ejcrist]

Just my two cents - I really love both and think you'd be extremely happy with either one. You said it'll be mostly a plinking and truck gun and maybe for hunting. I think the other fella's are right in that the 44 is more versatile and I know for a fact it's generally cheaper to shoot with most loads. I shoot a 44 Special and 45 Colt and the Colt w/heavier boolits and charges is relatively expensive compared to a lot of other calibers like the 44 Special, 38 Spl, and 32 H&R. For hunting I far prefer the Colt though. It's a real hammer when loaded on the high end. It can be loaded down for plinking as well but I think it really shines for hunting. Even if you get the 44 you might want to think about the Colt later down the road if hunting is a possibility. You really can't go wrong with either one though.

[DougGuy]

When you get above factory loadings, they are about six of one thing, half dozen of another. The .45 in the Ruger has a slight edge in that you can load heavier boolits for it, but not much heavier. The .44 has a longer bearing surface for the same weight boolit, as was mentioned above has different sectional density, when you load either to the Ruger only pressures listed at 30,000psi, there really isn't enough difference to worry over. I think there are more boolit styles available for the .45 but again, this is the castboolits forum where you can get about any design, weight, or caliber you could want.

I have not known anyone to 'give up' on the .45 Colt, it is one of if not THE most satisfying cartridges to load for. It does it all, from BP in the original 1873 loadings, to taking the most dangerous game on the planet, and every power level or pocketbook in between. This old gal is the Grand Dame of metallic cartridges, and will be with us long after our grandkids have inherited our prized sixguns.

Of course, if a fella had a .45 Colt revolver with tight cylinder throats, or a thread choke, maybe a stiff trigger pull that throws the sights off when firing, I could see how that could get frustrating to some, but it's usually an easy fix.

[blackpowder man]

I've owned quite a few of each and I agree with what the others have said about the .44 being a little more friendly and versatile. I like the .45, but the .44 is a better do all tool in a revolver. I think the differences become less when talking lever guns though. A ruger super redhawk is one awesome revolver.

[EDK]

IF you're just starting out in reloading, I'd recommend the 44 for available brass, etc. It took awhile to find some 45 Colt brass for a S&W Schofield copy that I bought last fall. Factory ammo isn't stocked at Wal Mart either. AND if you decide to have a lever gun to go with your revolver, there's a lot less problems with 44 magnum leverguns than 45 Colts.
I'll admit to preferring my 44 magnums to 45 Colts, or 357s for that matter. BUT doing some research has reinforced my decision.

[shoot-n-lead]

I have to concur with the 44 suggestions...it is just a very hard caliber to beat. I have many 45's, but if I could only have one...it would be a 44...just works better for me, all the way around.

[Oreo]

I did research on this subject a couple years ago and was recommended to think about a 41mag. Reason being most revolver manufacturers seem to machine the dimensions and tolerances in a way that is reliably friendly to cast boolits in that cartridge. Whereas 44mag revolvers are usually cut for jacketed bullets and often need some tweaking to shoot cast well. YMMV.

I bought the s&w 44. Haven't shot it yet but the cylinder throats are .4286", and the bore .4300".

[kenyerian]

You can't go wrong with either one. I have both and I do shoot the 44 more so I have to give it the edge.

[Petrol & Powder]

"I have not known anyone to 'give up' on the .45 Colt"

I did.

[waco]

I have both as well. 44 gets more use. Both are great!!

[DougGuy]

44mag revolvers were usually cut for jacketed bullets and often needed some tweaking to shoot cast well. YMMV.

I bought the s&w 44. Haven't shot it yet but the cylinder throats are .4286", and the bore .4300".

Oreo I can help you out with those, not a problem..

[Thumbcocker]

I fought the .45 colt cartridge for several years in two Rugers. One a convertible stainless Bisley that I really wanted to shoot well. After cylinder reaming, mutipel sizer dies, trips back to Ruger for tight barrels, different boolit molds, and lots of different loads I was never able to get the same accuracy as I got from several garden variety .44 magnums and specials. Both would shoot .45 acp's reasonably to very well but the Colt was a different critter. I really loved the idea of the .45 Colt big boolit at sedate velocity taking care of business and the ability to come near or exceed (depending on which enthusiast you listened to) the .44 magnum. I finally decided that the .44 special with 429421's over 8 grains of power pistol will fill the standard load colt .45 niche and the .44 magnum will do all I need in a hunting revolver.

I have found .44 magnums to be forgiving, accurate at any range I can shoot at with different boolits over a very wide range of velocities and able to make big holes in any critter I needed to perforate. I have not looked back.

[newton]

My big bore introduction was with a 45colt, but only because it was a convertible and on sale. I have toyed around with getting a 44, but cannot see why. One thing I would say is nice about the 45 vs 44 is the ability to load the same boolits for it and other 45 calibers(45acp). With a 44, you would only shoot the boolits in that one gun.

This is really all a moot point though if your only getting one gun. 44 brass will be easier to come by than 45.

[scrappletaco]

Thanks for the input guys very much appreciated. I will take another look before I take the leap. I've had very good luck with the 38spl and 357 magnum hand loading I've done.

This is more of a want project and as usual everyone has been very helpful and friendly. If I decide this endevor will be too costly to enjoy I may just get a nice 357 to hold me over until I'm out of college.

After some research last night I've come to the conclusion most of the experience you shared about the 44 makes this seem like the best option for my intended use for a big bore.

If this doesn't work out you can bet ill be picking you brains for info on the 38spl/357 if I can't find what I'm looking for.

Feel free to share any other idea or experiences I'm hear to learn as much as I can

[Lloyd Smale]

44 mag would be my choice. Even though I have a few of each the 44s usually get the nod when I head out hunting. better chance of out of the box accuracy. Loading components are easier to find and theres more of them. More variety of factory ammo if that matters. In a super redhawk theres really no power advantage to the 45. Either can be loaded up near 454 ballistics. Only thing is ive never seen a super redhawk 4 inch gun. didn't know they made them. Ive seen the Alaskans but there 2.5 inch guns.

[44man]

4" barrel? Both are big guns not for hip carry. for hunting I would not have less then 7-1/2" longer better.
Both calibers in that short are not going to much better between each other.

[BruceB]

44 mag would be my choice.

As usual, I find myself in agreement with Lloyd.

My experience with heavy handguns OTHER THAN the .44 Magnum is very limited, because I started with the Super Blackhawks in .44 for bush carry back in the late '60s..... and never found a need to change. The cartridge simply does everything --- EVERYTHING---- I need , and for all those years it did everything with my own cast bullets.

It's a wonderful creation.

[onegunred]

I am a fan of the 44 mag as well, since the mid 70's and use it for hunting. The Ruger SBHs are my choice, have owned S&W 29s but really like the SBH the best. Never owned anything bigger. If all else fails I have a Marlin 1895 45-70.

[Fergie]

My first big bore handgun was a .44 magnum Redhawk with the 5.5" barrel...traded a guy a BPC rifle for it.

I've shot everything from lightweight 200 grain RNs to some big +300gr Nosler and hardcast boolits. Every time I head out to shoot, the RH comes with, and spent a week strapped to my chest during elk season.

I have recently been looking a 45 Colts in the RH frame, and even a 454 Casull, but can't bring myself to buy one just yet. I've got a TON of .45 Colt already loaded for my levergun, and would very much like to have one in a DA revolver, but with how versatile the ,44 mag is, they fill the same role for me.

So, between the .44 RH and the Winchester Trapper in .44, I'm pretty happy.

[scrappletaco]

The 4in seems to balance very well for me but this is the first time I've ever seen one in hand.

I did some looking last night. Every where I go for supplies seems to carry about the same in components. If I go big bore I think I'm going to go 44 magnum. All the experience here seems to lean that way and the money saved can go toward getting reloading setup

[paralaska]

I've got a 5" Ruger SBH in .44 mag, and a 5" Ruger SRH Toklat in .454 casull. I like the .454 best, and here is why:
* The full house .454 with a 300 to 360 gr bullet will kill just about anything.
* I can download it to approximate .44 mag levels.
* I can download it to .45 colt levels or just shoot .45 colt in it.
* I can download .45 colt to cowboy loads for plinking or small game.
* The 5" is a good size because it is long enough to reach out there fairly accurately, but not too long for hip carry.
For me . . . it is just a little more versatile than my .44 mag.

[sixshot]

Just about everyone of us here have multiple sixguns & we all have our favorites. I started buying them back in my Air Force days in the 60's & I've enjoyed everyone I've ever bought or traded for but its just un American to not have a 44 magnum. I use the 357, 41, 44, 45 & 480 a great deal on game but if it came down to only one it would have to be the 44 maggie. Give me a 250-280 gr. cast slug, a can of 2400 or H110 & I'm a happy man. All I do to mine is narrow the front sight to 1/10", have my son do a trigger job..... a real trigger job, not the one spring removal BS, yes that lightens a trigger, it does not make a bad trigger into a good one & there are 2 springs for a reason & I'm ready to go.

Dick

[DrDogwood]

I got a nice Raging Bull 44 mag for Xmas (by the way My girlfriend is awesome) It shoot's jacketed and cast equally well I love it. From 44 specials to full mag loads it shoot's nice little groups.

[Lonegun1894]

I went the other way and bought the 4" .45 Colt. Now, I have both .44Mags and .45 Colts, and almost all Rugers, but I've always had a soft spot for the .45. Now all that aside, I have used and continue to use both for hunting, and there really isn't that much difference in performance, and NO difference in accuracy. The only difference seems to be that the full power (Ruger only) loads recoil less in the .45 Colt than the full power .44 Mags do. Or maybe the .44 Mag recoil seems more snappy, if that makes sense. In the end, if at all possible, I would handle them both side by side and see if maybe one feels better that the other, which is a possibility due to the .44 having slightly more weight which can affect balance, and buy whichever feels better. Performance wise, if one doesn't make you happy, the other won't either because they really are that close when both are loaded with full power loads.

So, do you want the MANLY .45 Colt, as God intended us to carry and use, or the mere runner up, the .43 Magnum? :takinWiz::kidding:

[Lloyd Smale]

you know we differ there pal. Ive put a fairly good amount of meat in the freezer with 4 inch guns. Even animals as big as 1200 buffalo and as small as a grey squirrel and never once to I remember thinking to myself "boy I wish I had a longer barrel" I will say this though a 4 inch redhawk is no doubt the heaviest gun ive carried in a hip holster for a days hunting. It worked ok but id might have been heard mumbling "boy I wish I had an N frame instead":2gunsfiring_v1:
4" barrel? Both are big guns not for hip carry. for hunting I would not have less then 7-1/2" longer better.
Both calibers in that short are not going to much better between each other.

[Lefty Red]

I went with the 44. I had both and I found the 44 to be more acurate and I could find bullets and brass easy.
I would go with a 6" barrel at least. The recoil isn't the problem with the big bores, its the blast. The longer barrel helps. And you can carry the 6" just as easy as a 4".
Jerry

[EDK]

The OP wants a carrying gun. IF you go with longer than a 5 inch (DA) or 5.5 (SA) it will probably be in the safe when you want/need it. I like 7.5 SA guns, but they don't get carried near as much as the 5.5 inch. I bought a 10.5 inch SUPER BLACK HAWK and it got traded after a lot of time in the back of the safe.

[RJM52]

I did research on this subject a couple years ago and was recommended to think about a 41mag. Reason being most revolver manufacturers seem to machine the dimensions and tolerances in a way that is reliably friendly to cast boolits in that cartridge. Whereas 44mag revolvers are usually cut for jacketed bullets and often need some tweaking to shoot cast well. YMMV.

I bought the s&w 44. Haven't shot it yet but the cylinder throats are .4286", and the bore .4300".



...and after shooting .44s Mags from 1973 to 1993 this is how I went... .41 Mag. Same punch, less recoil and never a problem with tight throats, loose throats or out of spec bore. Ruger, S&W, Taurus all the same.

It is a shame that Ruger doesn't bring back the Redhawk in .41...I had a 5.5" and it was good as it gets...should have never sold it.

Bob

[Lefty Red]

The OP wants a carrying gun. IF you go with longer than a 5 inch (DA) or 5.5 (SA) it will probably be in the safe when you want/need it. I like 7.5 SA guns, but they don't get carried near as much as the 5.5 inch. I bought a 10.5 inch SUPER BLACK HAWK and it got traded after a lot of time in the back of the safe.

If the handgun is accurate, the owner will carry it. I carried a 7.5" SBH in a cross draw rig with no problem. To think someone would leave a 6" handgun at home because of one inch over the "carry limit" is just weird. If its my most accurate pistol, I am taking it hunting!

[Lloyd Smale]

ya but theres no reason a 4 inch gun is going to be bit less accurate then a 7.5 inch gun. If I want to tote around a big old 7.5 inch gun with a scope in a chest rig id just as soon carry my 5 lb Kimber montana. If your looking for easy to shoot and accurate its a no brainer. Me I handgun hunt because with a short barreled handgun in a hip holster I can move through the woods like I don't even have a gun. I can draw and shoot in a second and mostly I do it for a challenge. I went through the tc contender thing. then the scoped long barreled revolver then took the scope off and finally found what I like. What challenges me and what fits the way I hunt with a handgun. that's a 4-6 inch revolver in a hip holster. Never once did I shoot a deer or anything else and think to myself "boy I wish I had a longer barrel on this sixgun"
If the handgun is accurate, the owner will carry it. I carried a 7.5" SBH in a cross draw rig with no problem. To think someone would leave a 6" handgun at home because of one inch over the "carry limit" is just weird. If its my most accurate pistol, I am taking it hunting!

[Lefty Red]

Mr Smale,
I totally agree with the short barrel being as good as s longer barrel. My favorite handgun is a 3.5" SW M27. Shot many deer, even with its illegal length barrel. Same goes for any BH with the short 4.75"ish barrel. Out to 100 yards, game doesn't notice the difference.
My comments mostly are to the newer shooters of big bore handguns. The recoil between the longer and shorter barrels is the same. It's the muzzle blast that gets to the newer shooters, IMHO.
Jerry

[willk]

Brenda Lea and I own several of both. If a fella reloads and utilizes cast bullets, at least in the Ruger single action (or double action) it is hard to find fault in either one. I carry my full sized stainless Blackhawk in .45 with the 4 5/8 barrel. I hunt with my .44 Super Blackhawk Hunter. Accuracy is just as good in any of them. Not up to Freedom Arms Model 83 but better than I can hold. Hitting IHMSA pigs at 100 meters from a decent sitting position is easy with the scoped Hunter. Shooting nice, tight groups at open sight revolver ranges is easy with both our .45 flat top in medium frame and our full sized .45 Blackhawk.

We own five different .44's and three .45's.

[35 Whelen]

I currently own five .44's Special's and two 45 Colts. By this time Saturday I will own a third 45 Colt; an American- built USFA. I carry both a lot and for just pricking around the creek bottom and the ranch as I'm prone to do, I carry one of the .44's. But for hunting I prefer a .45. So far I've only taken game with the .44's so I know they work, but there can't be anything wrong with a bigger hole, right. As far as one cartridge being more accurate than the other, BALDERDASH. Come on guys, a properly built revolver is accurate. Period. Sure, my NM Vaquero has been quite a challenge to get to shoot accurately, but that had nothing to do with the cartridge and everything to do with the manner in which the revolver was built.


you know we differ there pal. Ive put a fairly good amount of meat in the freezer with 4 inch guns. Even animals as big as 1200 buffalo and as small as a grey squirrel and never once to I remember thinking to myself "boy I wish I had a longer barrel" I will say this though a 4 inch redhawk is no doubt the heaviest gun ive carried in a hip holster for a days hunting. It worked ok but id might have been heard mumbling "boy I wish I had an N frame instead":2gunsfiring_v1:

Someone beat me to it. Before I gave a nanoseconds thought to buying a 3 lb. revolver, I'd try carrying one. Granted, if you're just taking it to the range, no problem. But if you're really planning on carrying it for extended periods, I'd look for something lighter.

35W

[44man]

There is a method to my madness. I do not need ear protection when hunting, hate it, can't hear deer or where they are. The longer barrel gets noise farther away but for some reason I do not hear the blast with deer, unlike on the range where one shot is too much.
Then vision is not good and short barrels are harder for me. So I would still need a red dot and that takes the short gun off the hip anyway.
My big bores have a sling and hang at my hand when stalking but tuck it in a shoulder holster and it is out of the way to drag or climb a ladder stand.
My rifle hunting friends are always fussing with the rifle, rope to pull up and I wind up carrying the gun for them when they drag. No revolver is as cumbersome as a rifle.
I admit if I needed to hip carry I would have a handier revolver but that is not how I hunt. I do not carry a rifle and I don't need a "backup."
if you can hit at 100 off hand with a short gun, good for you but when you get my age, you will shake more, the longer barrels hold still better. For years I shot smaller groups at 100 with a long revolver then I can with a rifle.
Notice how one click on a short gun will move POI a lot with opens, means you must hold with .001" to .002" precision.
My IHMSA guns were long enough for a 1-2-3-4 sight setting. I click is 1" at 50 meters, etc. Long range shooting rubs off for hunting at close ranges too. I suppose if i was in bear country I would also like a little gun on my hip or to avoid the truck seat mash. But my primary gun is still a long revolver in a shoulder holster.
Long barrels are easier to work loads for with any boolit because 50 to 100 fps can get stability over the velocity loss of a short gun. You can back down a load better then trying to make them faster. I see 1/2 gr of powder take a revolver into the Goldilocks zone, a load you might not burn.
But I never hunt with a Unique or Bullseye load either, I still believe in energy placed.

[44man]

Boolit diameter and a hole poked larger by a few thousandths is a myth. I have watched a .501" hole in deer book it over 120 yards. Boolit just not right. I fixed the boolit and now deer drop at the shot.
The .44 is just right with velocity, energy and accuracy. You will not talk me into a 4" gun though. 6" is where I stop. Too much work with less.

[Petrol & Powder]

I'm with Lloyd. If I was going to carry a 7.5" revolver with a scope I would just take a rifle. I don't doubt that there are some great revolvers out there that are capable of very good accuracy but the lines between handgun and long gun get a little blurry at some level and downright silly at another level.
It's like all those threads about, "What's the best handgun for Alaska or Bear country, etc.". Everyone wants to one-up the last guy and it goes 454 Casull, 460 S&W, 500 S&W mag and before you know it someone is trying to stuff a Minuteman III ICBM into a revolver cylinder! At some point you just get a rifle!

OK, I'll go away now...but just out of curiosity -what is the diameter and overall length of a Minuteman III ......?

[44man]

I'm with Lloyd. If I was going to carry a 7.5" revolver with a scope I would just take a rifle. I don't doubt that there are some great revolvers out there that are capable of very good accuracy but the lines between handgun and long gun get a little blurry at some level and downright silly at another level.
It's like all those threads about, "What's the best handgun for Alaska or Bear country, etc.". Everyone wants to one-up the last guy and it goes 454 Casull, 460 S&W, 500 S&W mag and before you know it someone is trying to stuff a Minuteman III ICBM into a revolver cylinder! At some point you just get a rifle!

OK, I'll go away now...but just out of curiosity -what is the diameter and overall length of a Minuteman III ......?
I like your thinking, those guns you mentioned can fail faster with the wrong bullet/boolit then the .44. I do like the .475 and .500 JRH for fast kills and the .45 Colt works so of what use is a .454 or .460 if you get things wrong? Most with a .454 want Colt loads anyway.
But you don't see a longer revolver with a red dot in a shoulder holster is still better then a rifle to carry. Your hands are free. You will not feel the weight for the most lethal gun for anything on earth. No, I do not ever want a .500 S&W because I don't want to shoot factory loads or a meat grinder. I profess a love for the JRH and it will do all over and above the S&W.
Since we shoot cast, you open a can of worms with too big.
I like big bores but bigger is NOT better once you reach what works. I think the .475 is best over all others for hunting.
Yet you will bark at the moon to tell me a .357 is better.