44 Special Range Day

[Pavia]

Worked up loads for a newly acquired Bulldog 44 and my 3” Ruger GP100 using Unique and 240gr LSWC Keith boolits.(Fed LP and Starline brass)

6.0gr Unique
6.5gr Unique
7.5gr Unique (Skeeter load)

The 6.0gr load was firm, but mild in the Bulldog and easy on the Ruger.
The 6.5gr load was stout, but still controllable in the Bulldog and fine in the Ruger.
I didn’t try the 7.5gr load in the Bulldog. I’m sure it would be stout and the Bulldog can take it, but no reason to stress the firearm.

In the Ruger, the Skeeter load was a joy to shoot. It was the most accurate out of the bunch. Recoil was noticeable, but not severe. The Ruger is built like a little tank and had no issues with this load.

The 6.5gr load will be my carry load for the Bulldog and the 7.5gr is my carry/all purpose load for the GP100.

Every range session with the 44 Special makes me love this cartridge more and more.

All the best!

294310

[Walks]

You're right to keep the 6.5gr load for the Bulldog. I tried it in mine, as it was the only .44Spl load I used at the time was 7.5grs. Just a bit stout for me even back then, so I down loaded .5gr then 1.0gr. That 6.5 worked well. These days it's my Cowboy load of 4.0grs of TiteGroup under a 210-215gr Bullet. The old lee#429-208-WC cuts a Clean hole and is very accurate too.

[Pavia]

Thanks. I’m sure I could carry and fire the 7.5gr loads in the Bulldog with no ill effects, but I like shooting the little Bulldog and 6.5gr with 240 Keith bullet is no joke. I’ll stick to a mix of the majority load of 6.0gr for range work, and 6.5gr to keep me honest, haha.

[Pavia]

Damn it. I just paid too much for a S&W 696 revolver era 1998.

[Pavia]

Good thing I loaded up Skeeter Loads.

[Thin Man]

I have a Taurus 431 (blue, 3" w/ fixed sights) that often travels with me to the hunting camp. I had tested several loads in the 240-250 boolit weight range that gave decent groups but the recoil and slower M.V. caused groups to print higher than I wanted. I usually carry snake shot loads in it when I am working out chores at the camp (I hate snakes!). I found success when testing the Lyman 429348 boolit at 180 grains, then picked up a Lyman 429625 mold. This is a 2-part mold with separate molds for the base unit (hard alloy) and a nose section (soft alloy) to make hunting loads. The base section alone weighs 175 grains and I tested these against each other. Load data came from the Lyman #45 manual where they show a maximum load for the 180 grain boolit at 11.5 grains of Unique. I loaded down to 10.0 grains Unique and found success. Both of these boolits grouped tighter than the heavier boolits and closer to where the sights were looking, more of what I was hoping to find. Next I tested this load in a Charter Arms Bulldog and got the same results as with the Taurus. The "348" boolit is a conventional wadcutter and the "625" base resembles a yawning hollow point. Either one is a suitable candidate for a trip to the camp.

[Pavia]

294358

[W.R.Buchanan]

Pavia: the hot tip with your 696 is to get a set of X frame Grips from S&W They fit right on the frame of the 696 and have about 3/8" of real padding where the Web Area of your Hand interfaces with the grip. That way you can shoot the gun all day with heavier loads like Skeeters.

All S&W pistols have the same grip profile and they all hit you right in the web of your hand which gets old pretty fast.

The X Frame grips were a night and day difference.

And you got one of the good 696's It would be a 696 No Dash, with the Firing Pin on the Hammer as opposed to the 696-1 with the firing pin in the frame and the 696-2 which has the stupid lock.

I paid $950 for mine and it was worth every cent. My normal is load Keith boolit with 6.0 gr of W231. Shoots right to the sights.

The one thing you have to be aware of is not firing a Jacketed Bullet after firing Cast. If the forcing cone has any lead built up in it,,, it will crack the barrels spigot and there are NO REPLACEMENTS!!! The gun will be fine as long as you don't do that. They were actually proofed with Magnum level loads and were fine but that small NO NO is something to be avoided.

On the M69 that problem was addressed by making the Barrel Spigot (area around the forcing cone) thicker, and area in the frame around it heavier. The M69 is an L frame .44 Magnum.

IMHO the 696 is a better gun and it would have been fine if they had just addressed that one small flaw. Instead they left the door open for Ruger to fill it with the GP100/44 which has been pretty successful.

By shooting PC'd Boolits in the 696 you never will get any leading! Something to think about.

Randy

[AnthonyB]

A 696 is one of my Grail guns. I have the Ruger GP100s and am on the lookout for a Smith 69.
Tony

[pworley1]

44 Special in a Bulldog makes for a fun day at the range.

[racepres]

44 Special in a Bulldog makes for a fun day at the range.

Always.. After much trial and error with my old, blued, original 3", Bulldog... I "carry" the Speer swaged 240SWC over 4.0 gr Red Dot.. at a Mundane, but hard hitting 650fps.. If I wish to print lower... a 200 Lee CFP, over 6.0 gr Unique, gives 775fps...
Tho my old Bulldog wears Pachmayrs.. I do Not want "More", thanks

[HWooldridge]

I have an older blue 3” Bulldog - it is a joy to carry and shoot. Mine seems to like a 220 gr bullet that I normally shoot in 44-40; hits to POA at 20 yds and doesn’t kick quite like the heavier slugs.

[Pavia]

I got some leading with the lighter loads using the hard cast Keith SWC, so I’ll take a look the PC bullets or stick with 6.5gr and up. Thanks.

[racepres]

I got some leading with the lighter loads using the hard cast Keith SWC, so I’ll take a look the PC bullets or stick with 6.5gr and up. Thanks.

I know we are supposed to be "all about" casting here... but the 240 swaged SWC seems a Natural for the Special!!! For many reasons.
That, and I refuse to cast two different alloys for the same Boolit... Not something I want...

[Pavia]

I was using a hard cast boolit from Missouri Bullet Company with a BN of 18. No leading with the 6.5 or 7.5 loads, so softer choice for 6.0 is warranted. Also the 6.0 was fired out of a new Bulldog and I’m sure there is some roughness in the barrel and just needs a bit of a break in. I like the idea of the idea of the powder coated bullets to color code between firearms.

[Pavia]

294403

On its way to my FFL!

[murf205]

294403

On its way to my FFL!

Pavia, I don't know what you consider too much for that 696 but it must have been good if you sprung for it. That is one gun you will never regret buying. Just follow Randy's advice about loading for it and you might want to consider the powder coating route to keep leading to a minimum. If you don't want that lil' 696, PM me cause I would love to find one that somebody didn't want my first born as payment.

[Pavia]

I paid $1500. That’s not deal, but I’ve seen them go close to $1800. So, I probably spent too much, but this is a bit of a grail gun, however I still love all my 44s.

I have some nice Altamont boot grips on the way for it.

[Pavia]

I also have a Lipsey’s 44 Special Ruger Flattop Blackhawk in 4 5/8”. Blued with Altamont fake Ivory’s.

[rkrcpa]

Hard to beat the 696

https://i.imgur.com/3o29pmT.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/9gnJzHG.jpg

Two different Pachmayr profiles. Without the back strap covered is easier to conceal, with the back strap covered is more comfortable to shoot.

Anyway you choose, it's a winner.

[Pavia]

It’s the finest 44 revolver ever.

The Bulldog is a tool.

The GP100 is a solid tool.

The 696 is what a Colt Python was to sixgunners in the 1960s… perfection.

[murf205]

294412294413

This is as close as I ever got to owning a 696. The mod 24 is one of the last nickel guns to leave the factory and it has a Hillary Hole. It shoots pretty good with Elmers boolit.....but it AINT a 696. The other one is a Hand ejector made in about 1927 and it is the most accurate 44 I ever shot...but it AINT a 696. Those L frame guns are about as perfect size for the 44 Spl as can be found. Why, oh why, didn't I, well, you know the rest of that story.

[Dunross]

I have a similar combination. A 3" GP100 and a Bulldog Pug. As they are both short barreled guns I favor 200-215gr full wadcutters in the 700-750fps range. Good defense loads and quite manageable. No need to drive them hard as they don't have to expand and I'm not shooting large game. They let the air out just the same. Been using Unique and Trail Boss.

[Pavia]

I have a similar combination. A 3" GP100 and a Bulldog Pug. As they are both short barreled guns I favor 200-215gr full wadcutters in the 700-750fps range. Good defense loads and quite manageable. No need to drive them hard as they don't have to expand and I'm not shooting large game. They let the air out just the same. Been using Unique and Trail Boss.

Going to load some 200gr with 7.0gr Unique.

[georgerkahn]

W.R.Buchanan;5333012]Pavia: the hot tip with your 696 is to get a set of X frame Grips from S&W They fit right on the frame of the 696 and have about 3/8" of real padding where the Web Area of your Hand interfaces with the grip. That way you can shoot the gun all day with heavier loads like Skeeters.

All S&W pistols have the same grip profile and they all hit you right in the web of your hand which gets old pretty fast.

The X Frame grips were a night and day difference."

My 696 apparently is not the "Holy Grail" model -- mine is the 696-1 -- but I truly adore it!!! (It is in the CEA8,000 s/n range; 5-shot 3" barrel). Interestingly, I load an even Steven six grains of Unique in mine. I splurged for a quite costly holster to complement it, and is MY holy grail revolver.
Might you kindly post or PM me the "X-frame Grips" (as specific as you can be?) you tout? I'd really be most appreciative!
Thanks much!
geo

[AnthonyB]

Question on the 696 - why is it better than the M69? I mean, other than the two piece barrel, EDM rifling, lock, MIM internals, and fit and finish not comparing; isn’t the L-frame 69 a possibly available substitute?

That would have been in purple if I knew how. I have the stainless 3 inch GP100, and it is a typical Ruger tank. I have the trigger down to just over 3 lbs. SA, but the revolver is heavy. I have both of the 5 inch GP100s, and the regular and Bisley FT 4 3/4 blued versions. I am saving pennies and selling blood toward a FA97, but I still want a 696.

So serious question - should I consider the M69 as a place holder for the eventually found 696?
Tony

[Pavia]

Question on the 696 - why is it better than the M69? I mean, other than the two piece barrel, EDM rifling, lock, MIM internals, and fit and finish not comparing; isn’t the L-frame 69 a possibly available substitute?

That would have been in purple if I knew how. I have the stainless 3 inch GP100, and it is a typical Ruger tank. I have the trigger down to just over 3 lbs. SA, but the revolver is heavy. I have both of the 5 inch GP100s, and the regular and Bisley FT 4 3/4 blued versions. I am saving pennies and selling blood toward a FA97, but I still want a 696.

So serious question - should I consider the M69 as a place holder for the eventually found 696?
Tony

I specifically didn’t buy a new 69 because of the two piece barrel (a cop out for solid revolver manufacturer) and of course the lock. I passed on the 69 because the GP100 was superior. The 696 is course the proper L frame 44. The GP100 is not worse than the 696. It’s just the 696 is rare.

[Pavia]

Elmer Keith would have owned both a 696 and a GP100 in 44 special and also a Bulldog.

[Piedmont]

Elmer could have owned a Bulldog and I have seen nowhere that he did.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Here's some better pics of the X Frame Grip that works on the N fames and L frames as well.

You can see how the padding in the upper area of the grip protects the web of your hand from getting pummeled by the gun's recoil.

The early 696's were almost custom shop guns. The double action Trigger pull on mine is smooth all the way up to the "Wall" then crisp let off. The single action pull is about 2.5 lbs. and has no creep whatsoever. Like a glass rod breaking.

I would take a GP100/44 over the M69 simply because the idea of firing .44 Magnums in a L frame gun is just too painful to even think about. They have all the bugs worked out of the GP .44's now so any one you'd get would probably be pretty nice. Plus that the finish on the M69's is nothing close to the 696's. The 696's were always Niche guns and the numbers were low and it made me feel alot better about paying $950 for mine when I saw them going for $1800? Looks like a good investment!

Randy

[sharps4590]

Good grief...are 696's really bringing that much? I bought mine the year they came out....and darned if I can remember what I gave for it...but obviously it wasn't that much!!

[AnthonyB]

Good grief...are 696's really bringing that much? I bought mine the year they came out....and darned if I can remember what I gave for it...but obviously it wasn't that much!!

Let me be first to offer your money back on it!
Tony

[AnthonyB]

Randy;
The M69 would be a 44 Special shooter for me, not an investment. The GP is nice but is overbuilt like all Rugers.
Tony

[W.R.Buchanan]

Randy;
The M69 would be a 44 Special shooter for me, not an investment. The GP is nice but is overbuilt like all Rugers.
Tony

i really don't see why they had to make the M69 a .44 Magnum. They could have just done an upgraded 696 and be done with it. The whole purpose of this new gun was to cure the problem with the 696 and the thin forcing cone. They could have fixed that and been done with it but no,, they had to lengthen the cylinder and make the gun into something it was not meant to be in the first place.

Randy

[megasupermagnum]

You might want to back off on those loads. I don't know who told you the GP100 is overbuilt, but it is not. It was "overbuilt" to handle original 357 magnum, but nothing was done for 44 special except bore the barrel bigger. As far as durability, it is on par with the Bulldog, but not more. On this site alone there are a surprising number of GP100's with cracked forcing cones. For whatever reason Ruger decided to bore out the 357 magnum barrel, instead of the one they used with the 10mm auto. They are left with a paper thin forcing cone, and do not hold up to hotrod loads.

[rkrcpa]

Good grief...are 696's really bringing that much? I bought mine the year they came out....and darned if I can remember what I gave for it...but obviously it wasn't that much!!

I just looked, I paid $399 for mine in June of 1997.

[murf205]

Question on the 696 - why is it better than the M69? I mean, other than the two piece barrel, EDM rifling, lock, MIM internals, and fit and finish not comparing; isn’t the L-frame 69 a possibly available substitute?

That might not matter to a lot of people but it does to some , me included. The finish is about as appealing as a Yugo bumper and for what a new S&W revolver cost, it's appearance ought to be appealing. I can live with the MIM parts, EDM barrels, Hillary Hole, slouchy fit but all in the same gun? Nope. Flame me if you want to but Smith and Wesson can do better than this. And this comes from a devoted S&W addict. How about a 44 spl 586 with a 1 pc barrel and better polish blue!

[Piedmont]

i really don't see why they had to make the M69 a .44 Magnum. They could have just done an upgraded 696 and be done with it. The whole purpose of this new gun was to cure the problem with the 696 and the thin forcing cone. They could have fixed that and been done with it but no,, they had to lengthen the cylinder and make the gun into something it was not meant to be in the first place.

Randy

They probably wanted to sell guns and they have a history of discontinueing .44 Specials ever since they introduced the .44 magnum. It sells better.

[sharps4590]

I just looked, I paid $399 for mine in June of 1997.

That sounds about right rk. Is that the year they came out? It has to be close.

[AnthonyB]

In 97 I was an Army CPT with three kids who had just started graduate school at Vanderbilt. I couldn’t afford the 696, but was young enough to think I could always get one later when I could afford it.
Like I tell my wife, I was young and stoopid then. I am older now.
Tony

[rkrcpa]

That sounds about right rk. Is that the year they came out? It has to be close.

They came out in Late 1996, I ordered one as soon as I heard about them.

[sharps4590]

That's what I did. I'm thinking I read an article about them in Shooting Times back when it was a decent magazine. I dropped Guns & Ammo LONG before '96. Don't take any of them now.

[Pavia]

The Skeeter load is my max and isn’t considered a hot rod load. The 15,000psi is around for 100 year old guns, not a modern GP100.

[rkrcpa]

I have some 195gr swchp to try in the 696. I leave the Skeeter's for my Blackhawk.

[Pavia]

Skeeters load is around 16,000psi. You must be thinking about Elmer Keith’s hot loads of 2400. That’s a different animal. A 696, GP100, and even a Bulldog can handle 7.5grs of Unique, but admit it’s a handful in a Bulldog and not pleasant. Not because of the stress on the revolver, but rather the stress on one’s palm.

Recoil and certainly pressure on that load in a 696 or GP100 is average at best.

[alamogunr]

I've always had a soft spot for .44 Specials. I've got the 696 that I got in 2004, the S&W Hwy Patrolman that Jim Stroh converted around 2006(or possible later, I just don't remember) and the just purchased FA 97. Just didn't have room in the budget for any more but these scratched the itch very well.

As far as the stocks go, the ones shown in the pictures that rkrcpa posted are the same as on mine. They handle recoil very well since I don't load to the max.

BTW, I paid $460 for mine in 2004

[alamogunr]

One more thing. I appreciate the caution by Randy to be careful about shooting jacketed behind cast. I don't and am unlikely to do so but there will be a note to the son that ends up with the gun to follow that advice.

[Pavia]

Yes smart advice.

[megasupermagnum]

Skeeters load is around 16,000psi. You must be thinking about Elmer Keith’s hot loads of 2400. That’s a different animal. A 696, GP100, and even a Bulldog can handle 7.5grs of Unique, but admit it’s a handful in a Bulldog and not pleasant. Not because of the stress on the revolver, but rather the stress on one’s palm.

Recoil and certainly pressure on that load in a 696 or GP100 is average at best.

Nope, if you search you will find quite a list of GP100's with cracked forcing cones from the Skeeter load. I know there are at least 3 posts on this site, and more on other forums.

[Pavia]

Post links please. Not denying, but I’d like to read it. Thanks. I did a through search for the 696 and the Bulldog and no such occurrence. Most of the forcing cone issues I saw with the GP100 centered on the 357 mag.

Again… no disrespect and I appreciate the dialog. The

[megasupermagnum]

This was the first one on google.
https://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?370130-GP-100-44-special

This one post #21 broke at 50 rounds
https://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?352622-Ruger-5-quot-44-Special-half-lug-GP100/page2

There's quite a substantial list of cracked forcing cones out there in 44 special. The 357's are built quite well, and will live a long life. Same for the 327 and 10mm auto's. The 44 specials unfortunately are built to handle actual 44 special 15,000 psi loads, and no more. It isn't because the cylinder will fail, it's that for whatever dumb reason Ruger used the 357 barrel instead of the 10mm barrel, leaving a paper thin forcing cone.

[Pavia]

I respect your knowledge. This is a good discussion. Not to call out the obvious, your examples are limited and don’t address any load with 7.5 gr Unique. Also the difference between 7.5 and 8.0 grains of Unique isn’t castrophic but still much more.

Myself and many others reject your “research”

Do you own and shoot any of the 44 specials in this thread? Not being a jerk, but if have actually owned these firearms and witnessed stresses on it, I’d like to know.

[Silvercreek Farmer]

I just looked, I paid $399 for mine in June of 1997.

Around $700 in todays dollars…

[Forrest r]

I respect your knowledge. This is a good discussion. Not to call out the obvious, your examples are limited and don’t address any load with 7.5 gr Unique. Also the difference between 7.5 and 8.0 grains of Unique isn’t castrophic but still much more.

Myself and many others reject your “research”

Do you own and shoot any of the 44 specials in this thread? Not being a jerk, but if have actually owned these firearms and witnessed stresses on it, I’d like to know.

Magasupermagnum has tried to give you excellent advice, understandably it's a hard pill to swallow. But the other turn of the coin, he's trying to enlighten you on the pros and cons of what you deem a "superior" firearm along with trying to protect your investment and more importantly, your health.

Perhaps a little due diligence (that research thing) on your part would help with a little clarity on what the "true" pressure of your 16,000psi 7.5gr/unique keith 250gr swc bullet combo actually is. If you figure that one out it may give you perspective on the link provided with the +/- 15,000psi/ww231 load that cracked a forcing cone.

Most don't grasp why the gp100 in 44spl failed nor do I see the short bbl'd version listed on the ruger website anymore. Then again the 1 you posted could still be listed and I missed it.

Myself I'd pick a s&w 69 over the gp100 (or 696) every day of the week and twice on sunday if the "strength" of the firearm was the main concern.

The 44spl is a fantastic cartridge and there's a ton of threads about the 44spl on this website including people who have pressure tested (2011?) that skeeter load. Their results have mimicked tests done by handloader magazine's 2005 and 2018 44spl articles.

At the end of the day you have 3 different revolvers chambered in 44spl with the bulldog known as a weak design & the other 2 with forcing cone issues.

[alamogunr]

The first thing I noticed about the 696 when I received it, way back when, was the thin section of barrel that extended thru the frame. I wasn't really concerned about it because I have never shot max loads in any handgun. I didn't know about the concern about jacketed following cast at that time. It sounds as if even mid power loads could cause a problem in that scenario.

Having been made aware of these things, I'm not sure why the OP is concerned about lower level loads. A .44(.43?) caliber bullet of decent design should put paid to any confrontation. If more power is wanted for carry, just practice with reasonable loads and higher power for carry. If a gun saved my life, I wouldn't worry about any possible damage to the gun.

[megasupermagnum]

I respect your knowledge. This is a good discussion. Not to call out the obvious, your examples are limited and don’t address any load with 7.5 gr Unique. Also the difference between 7.5 and 8.0 grains of Unique isn’t castrophic but still much more.

Myself and many others reject your “research”

Do you own and shoot any of the 44 specials in this thread? Not being a jerk, but if have actually owned these firearms and witnessed stresses on it, I’d like to know.

That's fine, and chances are you won't have a problem. Ultimately I think velocity is the killer in this case anyway. To answer your second question, no. I am not a 44 special fan at all. That does not mean I dislike it.

[alamogunr]

Reading this thread caused me to go to an article(The .44 Special Revisited) by Glen Fryxell on the LASC site. In the article he recommended lighter weight bullets for the 696 and Charter Pug than commonly used in .44 Special. Specifically, +or- 200 grains. Also, his thoughts were that adequate bearing surface to work in the polygonal rifling of the 696 is required.
I've been going thru the Accurate site and came across two that I would like to try but thought that others might have supporting or conflicting thought about.

I am looking at these Accurate designs:
http://www.accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=43-200W
and
http://www.accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=43-190C

Just curious what others might think of them.

I've never had much luck with double ended wadcutters but am not opposed to trying again.

[rking22]

In my 696 no dash the Lee 200 shot very well and a Lyman 200 designed for the 44-40 was excellent. The Lyman was a 2 1/2 inch shooter at 25 yards, sorry I don’t remember the load as I just had a bunch but no mold. There is a 235 gr NOE RF that I really like in the GP, works well on hogs and deers at 7.5 unique:) Most of my shooting was with the Skeeter load, and I don’t have a .429 jacket in the house. After Larry Gibson’s pressure tests on the Skeeter load I have dropped to 7.2 grains for my 696 and GP100, just being prudent and the difference is meaningless on the receiving end.
Note: on that statement about polygonal rifling, my 696 no dash is standard rifling, no idea about the later ones. I bought mine used in 97, has been a favorite every since. There were 2 in the case, wish I’d bought both, a helpful buddy suggested just that as I was trying to decide between the two!

[alamogunr]

The reference to the polygonal rifling in the 696 came from the Fryxell article. I'll go to the shop this afternoon and check my 696. Strange I never thought to look at it to confirm. Maybe I'll be lucky and find regular grooved rifling.

Not in this thread's focus, but I hope someday to find a Ruger Flat Top in .44 Spec. It will seem like a real bargain after the FA 97.

[AnthonyB]

Not in this thread's focus, but I hope someday to find a Ruger Flat Top in .44 Spec. It will seem like a real bargain after the FA 97.

THREAD DRIFT WARNING!

Alamogunr (and all others); I am getting ready to buy a 97 in the next few months. In your experience, are they all everyone makes them out to be? What diameter are you sizing your bullets? I have read the 97 44 Specials may need .429; my others run best on .432 to .434(Redhawk). Did you get the 5.5 or 4.25 inch barrel? I am leaning toward 4.25, but am not yet fully decided.

I started out wanting a 44 Special but am really considering a dual cylinder 45 Colt. 45 ACP is my favorite pistol cartridge, and I will never run out of brass. 2k of Starline 45 Colt will last the rest of my life.

I have the blued Ruger FT and Bisley 4 5/8 and considered sending one to Bowen. Trying to decide which to send and looking at the approximate cost led me down the FA road. Does anyone with both have an opinion on the Bowen FT vs. the M97?

Thanks to all for thought and opinions.
Tony

[alamogunr]

I got the 5.5" barrel. Plug gauges show my cylinder to be .429 in all throats. I haven't been able to shoot a whole lot since I got it but about 50 rounds loaded with a couple of cast bullets from RCBS GC molds were sized and lubed in a .431 die. Lube was NRA Alox that I mixed myself. These bullets shot well, at least to my level of competence. No leading.

[W.R.Buchanan]

One more thing. I appreciate the caution by Randy to be careful about shooting jacketed behind cast. I don't and am unlikely to do so but there will be a note to the son that ends up with the gun to follow that advice.

That came direct from Brian Pearce and I talked to him directly about it, after reading an article he wrote in Handloader. The gun can handle magnum pressures, but that problem with a leaded forcing cone and firing a jacketed bullet thru it are death to the gun. There are no replacement barrels.. Best solution is to just stay away from Jacketed bullets altogether, and if you PC your boolits you won't have any problems with leading. But even so, you need to check the barrel often to make sure it's not leading..

My gun is quite happy with the 6.0 gr of w231/HP-38 with a Keith/MP 240-260 gr SWC PC'd. Probably around 750-800 fps. It will do anything you would need to do with that gun and you might actually be able to hit something with it. With a 3" bbl these guns are not that easy to connect with, and take lots of practice to get good with. Once I got mine settled down with the above load that shot to the sights, and I could hit a man sized target consistently at 25 yards I used it in some Local IDPA Matches and did OK. I can't load it as fast as Uncle Jerry can, but it was still usable. Certainly not a Glock, but a 250 gr slug will hurt more than a 115 gr slug, everyday.

I have a really nice Mernickle Holster for mine and I also have a Kydex Holster for IDPA and a complete gun belt with speed loaders.

Randy

[W.R.Buchanan]

In my 696 no dash the Lee 200 shot very well and a Lyman 200 designed for the 44-40 was excellent. The Lyman was a 2 1/2 inch shooter at 25 yards, sorry I don’t remember the load as I just had a bunch but no mold. There is a 235 gr NOE RF that I really like in the GP, works well on hogs and deers at 7.5 unique:) Most of my shooting was with the Skeeter load, and I don’t have a .429 jacket in the house. After Larry Gibson’s pressure tests on the Skeeter load I have dropped to 7.2 grains for my 696 and GP100, just being prudent and the difference is meaningless on the receiving end.
Note: on that statement about polygonal rifling, my 696 no dash is standard rifling, no idea about the later ones. I bought mine used in 97, has been a favorite every since. There were 2 in the case, wish I’d bought both, a helpful buddy suggested just that as I was trying to decide between the two!

I was just looking at my 696 No Dash and after cleaning the barrel until it was sterile, I saw that it appears that the lands are slightly tapered on the sides. But that might be a little subjective because seeing a taper that is only .004 long might be a bit presumptive?

This may have been a concession to the EDM tooling used to rifle the barrels on these guns? The barrel has a mirror finish on he inside

Randy

[alamogunr]

Checked my 696 today. It is a -1 and the barrel is the standard S&W 5 grooves I haven't tried to find when it was made and don't really care.
The grooves don't appear to be very deep but I don't do much barrel gazing so am not sure that means anything.

Think I will hold off on molds for awhile and use what I already have. I'm not that interested in spending a lot of time on the 696 when I've got the .44Spec 97 and converted Hwy Patrol. to play with.

[tward]

Love the 44 special! Nice round to shoot and easy and fun to reload. I have a Charter arms Bulldog that I bought used, it was hard to open and the cylinder release felt odd and worked hard. I finally sent it back to Charter Arms, got it back in about 10 days all fixed with no charge and a note saying they didn’t like my Pachmayr grips so they put on a pair of theirs. Great customer service and the grips feel good.
The Bulldog is a little much on my hand with Skeeter loads so I found a Ruger Super Blackhawk in 44 mag with a 4 5/8 barrel . The Skeeter loads are very nice in this gun and now I cut back my loads for the Bulldog for more comfort.
I did a little shooting with some Lee 310 gr boolits that seems promising for hunting. Anyone have any experience with this boolit in their 44’s?
Stay safe and good shooting, Tim

[Pavia]

Thank all for the great advice. I’m now smarter on reloading for the caliber and the firearms. Appreciate it!

[W.R.Buchanan]

I did a little shooting with some Lee 310 gr boolits that seems promising for hunting. Anyone have any experience with this boolit in their 44’s?
Stay safe and good shooting, Tim

I have shot them in my Marlin 1894CB, but you do have to run them pretty hard to get any accuracy out of them due to the Bullet Length and slow twist of the Rifle.

I have had best luck with my Mihec .429421 and 429244GC clones moulds in all my .44's. The .429421 is for light to midrange loads in both Pistols, 696 and SBH Bisley, and Midrange Rifle and the the 429244GC works best in the rifle and I've gotten <1.5" groups at 100 yards with Iron Sights wit that gun.

I PC all of these.

Randy

[h8dirt]

THREAD DRIFT WARNING!

Alamogunr (and all others); I am getting ready to buy a 97 in the next few months. In your experience, are they all everyone makes them out to be? What diameter are you sizing your bullets? I have read the 97 44 Specials may need .429; my others run best on .432 to .434(Redhawk). Did you get the 5.5 or 4.25 inch barrel? I am leaning toward 4.25, but am not yet fully decided.

I started out wanting a 44 Special but am really considering a dual cylinder 45 Colt. 45 ACP is my favorite pistol cartridge, and I will never run out of brass. 2k of Starline 45 Colt will last the rest of my life.

I have the blued Ruger FT and Bisley 4 5/8 and considered sending one to Bowen. Trying to decide which to send and looking at the approximate cost led me down the FA road. Does anyone with both have an opinion on the Bowen FT vs. the M97?

Thanks to all for thought and opinions.
Tony
I have a FA M97 in 44 Special. In addition to a Ruger FT Bisley, I also have 44 Special Rugers converted by Messrs. Bowen, Clements, Horvath and Gallagher (none of which are FT’s). Mr. Bowen’s guns, IME, are excellent. For my use the other customs are on par with it. Now days, IMHO, a stock Ruger is just a starter kit towards a fine revolver. But … none will out shoot the FA. If I could only have one, it’s the FA M97. Be sure to get the action job when you buy the revolver. Just my $0.02 worth.

[Chainsaw.]

You now have a Bulldog, a Gp100 AND a 696 all in 44 special. Sorry but I just can’t find a reason to feel sorry for ya! :razz: I’m just envious!

I have found 8 grains of HS6 to be a great all round utility load in 44sp with 240s. 800fps in my 5” N frame and 1000fps in my 1892. And accurate as can be.