I think highly of the 44 Special

[Chill Wills]

I’ve spent a lifetime fishing, backpacking and hunting in the Rocky Mountains. Living right in the middle of it made even an afternoon trip easy and often, especially before kids and marriage. Now that the kids are grown, I find myself back at it again.
Except for Big Game season when I am already carrying a powerful rifle, I like to have a worthy sidearm with me. When I was very young, it was a Colt 22 Peacemaker and a Ruger Singlesix and soon I moved to larger calibers to include everything else as the years went on. Even a young strong guy quickly learns, really big heavy guns don’t get to go often.
Both Smith and Wesson and Ruger make 5 shot double action wheel guns chambered in 44 Special and both are no longer in production. Smith made the 696 and Ruger the GP-100. If you have had some experience with either or both, which do you think would be the better choice of the back-country handgun?

[Paul105]

You might want to consider the S&W M69. It's a 5 shot L Frame 44 Mag (basically an updated 696). It comes in both 2.75" and 4.25" versions. I have a pair and a spare of both and have shot them extensively. You can carry with your choice of 44 specials or 44 mags.

Here's my 2.75" shown with some hastily modified (belt sander) hogue tamers.
.
https://photos.imageevent.com/paul105/hobby/large/M69%202.75%20%20%202%20%20%20%20cropped%20%20thumb nail_IMG_4597.jpg
.

[Winger Ed.]

Either is a fine choice, but I've always been a S&W guy.

There's nothing wrong with a Charter Arms bulldog either,
at least once you get past the fact they'll never win any beauty contests.

[FergusonTO35]

I wonder about the Charter Arms Target Bulldog. I know it's not the choice for King Kong loads, but seems like it would be a good low cost/weight choice for factory spec loads. My woods wheelgun is an S&W 10-5 with the Lee 358-158-RF pushed to respectable velocity.

[Rockindaddy]

ChillyWills: A dear friend gave me a present of a like new S&W696 with the 3" barrel. I had to gather up a set of 44 Special dies and brass. The gun is fun with 200 gr and 240gr Keith style cast boolits. Can't imagine how my wrist would feel shooting the M69 with full house 44 Mag loads! My 696 shoots terrific !! I like to shoot a 30 cal ammo box full of 44 mag out of my 6" Annaconda. We fill my back yard range up with a lot of cast boolits. Don't know but you would be happy with a Ruger GP-100 a S&W696, or the S&W M69. 318279

[HWooldridge]

I have an older CA Bulldog and a 3rd gen Colt SAA in .44 Special. I probably kill more varmints with the Bulldog than anything else because it's either in a pocket or in easy reach. I built some heavier shot loads from 5 in 1 blank cases and sized in 38-40 dies. Those or a 200 gr. lead bullet over 7.0 gr WW231 work well on most everything I encounter in our neck of the woods.

[david s]

The S&W 696 predates the Ruger some. Afraid that I'm another S&W fan so no Ruger GP-100 here. The 696 isn't a pocket gun but needs a holster in my opinion. The L framed 44 is supposedly stronger than you would think but I haven't pressed my luck with it. I seem to remember Handloader magazine doing a reloading article about these S&W 44 Specials 6 or 7 years ago. Mines often loaded with the RCBS 44-250-K or the NOE clone version. I can't imagine you wouldn't be well served by either the S&W or the Ruger pistol with the Ruger possibly a bit more available now.
https://i.postimg.cc/RhKZ1SLY/IMG-2174.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
https://i.postimg.cc/MKHsGntt/IMG-2172.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

[david s]

Had a bit of an odd thought and hope it's not too far off target here. Have you considered the S&W 329 Airweight revolver? It's a joy to carry and frankly makes a better 44 Special than a 44 Magnum. Another option anyways.

https://i.postimg.cc/cCBcKjQ2/IMG-2505.jpg (https://postimg.cc/2L3WM097)

[Der Gebirgsjager]

Just for what it's worth-- I have a Taurus Mod. 441 .44 Spec. 5-shot, stainless. It has a 4" barrel, RR/WO adjustable sights, one of those for which I haven't take a photo. Very accurate. They quit making them in '97, but you might find one if you looked around. It's roughly "K" frame size. Their Tracker models are also worth a look.

DG

[Chill Wills]

I thought about the Taurus but the Ruger GP-100 is really the one I am hoping to learn more about. The Smith 696 is a known quantity but the Ruger products have a reputation of being built like a tank. I have no real experience with Ruger revolvers except for the 22rf I still have from the early 1970's.
I have a Smith 696 I got in 1999 but now I am shopping for a woods gun for my 20 year old son. He is spending a lot of time on his own fishing the remote creeks that are full of brush, willow and currant bushes. I think I would like to see him with something more than a fishing rod to fend off danger. He is getting better and trying hard but he could break and anvil. I would like to see him get the Ruger if it is the more durable handgun. (I will be doing the loading)

I have owned two Charter Bulldogs and for sure they are compact and light to carry but they are not the revolver I wish to go to in the woods in a pinch. That S&W 329 Airweight revolver is interesting loaded with specials, light to carry, being a magnum, I guess you could always load a little hotter than the special. But, I think I am sticking with the 44 Special. I have a 5.5" SSA 44 Special I shoot a lot and I handle warmer loads with the plow handle guns better, but double action for woods is the smarter choice.

What do you think of the Ruger? Is it the better revolver than the Smith?

BTW - I don't think I have shot a full power 44 Magnum in ten or twenty years.

[Lloyd Smale]

i love my 696. its in my jacket pocket every day in the woods bow hunting. ive killed a number of deer and hogs with it and one 280lb black bear. problem is finding one and what you will have to pay for it. i think if i was shopping today it would be a M69

[brokeasajoke]

I have a Ruger GP100 44spl 5" blued. I have honestly not shot it enough to be able to say much about it. For me the 5" just seems to balance well. When I first got it the trigger would sometimes not reset but after cycling the gun while watching TV one day I have not experienced that. My 357 gp100 7shot was fine out of the box. I have never hot rodded the 44spl. Mostly a diet of trailboss and 240gr SNS casting coated

[rkrcpa]

i love my 696. its in my jacket pocket every day in the woods bow hunting. ive killed a number of deer and hogs with it and one 280lb black bear. problem is finding one and what you will have to pay for it. i think if i was shopping today it would be a M69

I agree, as much as I love my 696, the M69 is the logical choice.

[georgerkahn]

I’ve spent a lifetime fishing, backpacking and hunting in the Rocky Mountains. Living right in the middle of it made even an afternoon trip easy and often, especially before kids and marriage. Now that the kids are grown, I find myself back at it again.
Except for Big Game season when I am already carrying a powerful rifle, I like to have a worthy sidearm with me. When I was very young, it was a Colt 22 Peacemaker and a Ruger Singlesix and soon I moved to larger calibers to include everything else as the years went on. Even a young strong guy quickly learns, really big heavy guns don’t get to go often.
Both Smith and Wesson and Ruger make 5 shot double action wheel guns chambered in 44 Special and both are no longer in production. Smith made the 696 and Ruger the GP-100. If you have had some experience with either or both, which do you think would be the better choice of the back-country handgun?

I am soooo happy to read you're "back at it again"! :) I have a 696-1 (serial CEA8xxx) which I adore, and it surely would be at the top of MY list for a back-country handgun! Some suggest the 3" barrel is a tad on the "short size", and its 5-shot capacity minimizes its effectiveness -- but I do not feel as such. I put a custom grip on mine, and I'd find it hard to improve upon. In younger days I carried a Ruger Security Six .357 (made in 1976) stainless 2 3/4" barrel revolver -- and the upgrade to the 696-1 was really appreciated by me!
An option that has been readily available in most markets is the Charter Arms Bull Dog. I, too, have one of these and, well, it may be hard to find a revolver to do better. Two of my huntin' buddies (sadly, one now deceased) carried this arm.
Re the Ruger, I have an SP-101 -- which, size-wise (also but 5-shot revolver) may also be worth your looking into. Mine is Model 5771 in .357 Magnum.
Good luck -- and again -- I'm most happy for you!
geo

[fordwannabe]

I love the 44 special buuuut I carry them in a 4 inch 29 and a 4 5/8 blackhawk. Had a Taurus tracker 5 shot but it consistently would not eject all 5 empties AND had a mystery trigger. Sometimes the trigger was 2 pounds and sometimes it was 13! It went down the road but if it had worked as expected that was a pretty good combination of weight and power. I mostly shot specials in it but when elk hunting in known bear country it got 300 grain HARD cast boolits at magnum velocities,

[contender1]

Well, I own both S&W handguns and Ruger handguns.
And I feel the .44 Spl is a FINE caliber.
If given the choice, I'd choose the Ruger over the S&W. You've already said; "it's built like a tank," so you understand the fact that it'll outlive you.
The S&W vs Ruger debate is as old as it can be from when Bill Ruger started building DA handguns. Both are good guns,, and yet,, they have different mechanisms on how the action operates. Out of the box,, usually the S&W has a smoother feeling action. Yet,, the Ruger is built to handle more than it needs to. Fewer parts and stronger parts that are less prone to breakage or failure.
I enjoy my S&W's,, but for serious work,, I pull out a Ruger everytime. As you said, "they are built like tanks!" (And I was Army,, and a tank was a desired item on the battlefield.)

[eastbank]

318319 i think highly of this S&W 624.

[Chill Wills]

I agree, as much as I love my 696, the M69 is the logical choice.

Isn't the M69 a larger, heavier handgun? I am thinking I want to hit the happy medium between small and light 357 mag and heavy full sized 44 magnum.

[Chill Wills]

i love my 696. its in my jacket pocket every day in the woods bow hunting. ive killed a number of deer and hogs with it and one 280lb black bear. problem is finding one and what you will have to pay for it. i think if i was shopping today it would be a M69

Yes, the 696's are going for $1000 or more. The Ruger is $500 to $700. They are out there but not many and pricey! I have had a 5" 629 25 years ago and sold it as just too large and clunky to carry while putting in long days on my feet in the woods.

[rintinglen]

318325318326
I had poor luck with my choices of 44 Specials back in the 70's and 80's. Looking back, I think part of the Problem was the false expectations I had. Skelton and Keith had extolled the caliber and the guns so much that when they failed to live up to my exaggerated hopes, I wrote off the caliber. I still believe that the older guns were not all they were cracked up to be.

However, with the new century came new guns. Starting with my S&W 21-4, I found that it was much more accurate than my recollections of the older guns and the flattop Ruger I got was amazing. It is one of the most accurate guns I have ever owned. About 5 years ago I got the 3 inch GP 100 and after much work, the action is nearly as nice as my Speed Six. All 3 shoot very well.

318331318332

[HWooldridge]

My Colt SAA in 44 Special is very accurate - basically ORH at 25 yds with cast bullets. I bought it new in the 1980's and it's never seen a jacketed abomination <LOL>.

Also helps to have a very light, crisp trigger pull. Some years ago, I killed a feral hog with it at about 75-80 yds - held even on the top of the head and dropped him, although I must admit to resting across the top of the truck's hood.

The Charter Arms gun yields man-killer groups at 25 yds - and you can roll a soda can around with regularity.

[rkrcpa]

Isn't the M69 a larger, heavier handgun? I am thinking I want to hit the happy medium between small and light 357 mag and heavy full sized 44 magnum.

Nope, M69 and the M696 are both 5 shot L frame revolvers. The only meaningful (IMO) differences are the M69 has the new style barrel that solves the thin forcing cone issue and it's chambered in 44 magnum.

[Chill Wills]

Nope, M69 and the M696 are both 5 shot L frame revolvers. The only meaningful (IMO) differences are the M69 has the new style barrel that solves the thin forcing cone issue and it's chambered in 44 magnum.

Thank you!

[sixshot]

I love the 44 specials & have a few of them to choose from. I have taken several deer with the Ruger flat tops, both in the plow handle shorty, the 5.5" bisley & a very special 7.5" bisley. Another one is my lovely little S&W 696, nice trigger, very accurate & easy to pack.
https://i.imgur.com/edPNotNh.jpg
Dick

[JAC43]

My only qualm with the GP100 44 Special is the wisp of a forcing cone.

https://i.postimg.cc/sxsNCsdw/pix379946154.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

[Gray Fox]

I have a 696 3" and a 2.75? 69. The latter may be my new trail carry gun, but I also have a new-to-me 2.5" 325 .45 acp that is handy with moon clips and hollow points that carries lighter.

[gc45]

Based on what many posters here had to say, I bought the 696 sometime back, it is a dandy gun for any old man, easy to carry when hunting too. No it is not a mag revolver but I never feel under gunned with 5 44 specials in the cylinder. I handload all my ammo and this great carry gun gets 210grain cast bullets as I have found accuracy to be better than heavier bullets. I give it a good load of 231 and unique both and she shoots terrific groups with either at 25 yds, well enough I feel confident if needing it in a hurry outdoors. Owning several 44 special revolvers from both Ruger and Smith, I do love them all!

[MT Gianni]

I have a Blackhawk 44 special, a 24-3 Smith 4" 44 special and a 4.25" 69. I bought the 24 unfired earlier this year and when I put the first 6 through it, I realized it was my most accurate revolver. I have 11 others. The Model 69 leaves the house the most often.

[Lloyd Smale]

318319 i think highly of this S&W 624.

ive got a blued one just like it and love it. other then my 3 in 610 its the most accurate n frame ive owned

[murf205]

My only qualm with the GP100 44 Special is the wisp of a forcing cone.

https://i.postimg.cc/sxsNCsdw/pix379946154.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

Is that Ruger accurate? That sharp forcing cone can be fixed fairly easy. If I could find one, I would give a report on the 44 spl Ruger but everywhere I searched, there are none to be had. As far as a S&W 69 goes, they have a reputation for really good accuracy.318345
This old girl is the only 44 spl I have left in the safe and it's long barrel makes it a bit ungainly for totin' but it is as accurate as can be. It;s almost 100 yrs old and that say's a LOT about the 44 spl.

[beemer]

My only qualm with the GP100 44 Special is the wisp of a forcing cone.

https://i.postimg.cc/sxsNCsdw/pix379946154.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

And cylinder wall is rather thin, I am under the impression that it is not a good idea to hot rod them. I don't own one but my good friend left his and the dies with me for a while. I believe that they were pushing the limit when they crammed the 44 in that frame. I do really like the gun and standard loads would do more than I ever need. The wood grips feel fine but slide around in my hand, a good set of mud grips would help.

[murf205]

Nope, M69 and the M696 are both 5 shot L frame revolvers. The only meaningful (IMO) differences are the M69 has the new style barrel that solves the thin forcing cone issue and it's chambered in 44 magnum.

I gotta' ask: If the 69 and the 696 are the same L frame, how did Simth & Wesson solve the thin forcing cone problem without changing the centerline of the of the cylinder? If it will take the over 30,000 lbs of pressure a full tilt 44 mag generates, the metallurgy must gave played a part as well. From the pic of that GP 100 the forcing doesn't have a ton of "meat" on it either. It would be informative to measure a 696, 69, and a GP 100 side by side. The only thing that gives me pause (other than the ridiculous prices) on a 696 is the fact that S&W would probably give you misery over service on a discontinued gun.

[Paul105]

Sold my my 696 before i could take any measurements. Have a 396, but too lazy to drag it out an take measurements. I did take some measurements vs 629 when I first got my M69.

629 Mtn Gun weighs 39 oz
M69 L Frame weighs 37 oz

629 Mtn Gun Cylinder Diameter: 1.70”
M69 L Frame Cylinder Diameter: 1.56”

629 Mtn Gun Cylinder Length: 1.705”
M69 L Frame Cylinder Length: 1.670”

(Note: The M69 cylinder is 1.670 inches and isn't recessed for cartridge rims -- a 1.712" hand load fits, but is right at the face of the cylinder. Lymans No 49 edition shows OAL w their 425421 Keith Bullet is 1.710". A .429 minus plug gauge will enter all throats a .430 plug will not.)

629 Mtn Gun Frame Window - Height: 1.735“
M69 L Frame - Frame Window Height: 1.600“

629 Mtn Gun Frame Window – Width: 1.880“
M69 L Frame - Frame Window Width: 1.820“

629 Mtn Gun Cylinder Wall at Narrowest Point: .095” -- (.0900” between chambers)
M69 L Frame Cylinder Wall at Narrowest Point: .060 “ -- ( .130 “ between chambers)
(629 Cyl Bolt Cuts are over the chamber while M69 bolt cuts are between chambers)

629 Mtn Gun Frame Top Strap – Width: .665“
M69 L Frame - Frame Top Strap Width: .665“

629 Mtn Gun Frame Top Strap – Height: .220“ to top of frame (includes sight mortiss)
M69 L Frame - Frame Top Strap Height: .210“ to top of frame (includes sight mortiss)

629 Mtn Gun Barrel Shank OD: .630“
M69 L Frame - Barrel Shank OD: .620“

629 Mtn Gun Frame Over Barrel OD: .900“
M69 L Frame - Frame Over Barrel OD: .880“

629 Mtn Gun Trigger Reach: 3.10“ (same grips for both 629 & M69)
M69 L Frame - Trigger Reach: 3.00 “

Brian Pearce -- Bolt notches weakest point - M69 thicker than M629 at this location


Took some pics of cyl/crane gas block interface 396 vs 69
.
396
.
https://photos.imageevent.com/paul105/hobby/M396%20cyl%20face%20gas%20block%20thumbnail_IMG_66 10.jpg
.
M69
.
https://photos.imageevent.com/paul105/hobby/M69%20cyl%20face%20gas%20block%20thumbnail_IMG_661 2.jpg

[Paul105]

Duplicate

[MGD]

I agree with Dave S. The 329 Smith is the best packing 44 special out there. You get light weight and a full grip and 4" sight radius. Just think of it as a 44 special that you can use 44 mags in. I loved mine but my hunting buddy loved it more so I'm looking for another.

[shooting on a shoestring]

Here’s a pic of the barrel stub on my L Frame Model 69.
318398

[brokeasajoke]

318399
Gp100 44spl 5"

[lar45]

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1010642157

[murf205]

Thanks Paul. Yr be r the thicker cylinder notches os the 69 were a surprise. I’ve never heard of one blowing out the notches but I would guess that it could bulge the bottom of the notch with an excessive load. Most of the 696 pics I see involve the rear shank cracks.

[Anchorite]

Hold the nostalgia and pass me a 44Mag. There is no substitute for cubic inches. In terms that are easier to understand, you can make a 44 Mag a special, but you can’t make a Special into a mag.

[DougGuy]

Hold the nostalgia and pass me a 44Mag. There is no substitute for cubic inches. In terms that are easier to understand, you can make a 44 Mag a special, but you can’t make a Special into a mag.

I won't speak for the other mfgr's offerings but the Ruger single action revolvers in 44 special can safely be loaded right up to the 44 magnum's doorstep in power and velocity.

Ruger will not comment on the 44 special max pressure but the 45 Colt/45ACP flattop blackhawk is rated for 45ACP+P pressure which is 23kpsi. I figure that the flattop in 44 special may be perfectly safe up to 25kpsi because the chambers are smaller diameter, cylinder walls are thicker, webs are thicker, and the bolt cuppets are thicker at the bottom. This level of power with a 240gr boolit in 44 special will fit right up under the lower end of the 44 magnum performance with the same boolit.

[Rodfac]

Another vote for Smith's M-69...the 4.25" bbl'd one. As to weight, it's within 1 oz. of my M-19 Smith. It's a 5-shot .44 Magnum, but really shines as a moderate weight .44 Special.

My regular load is Skelton's old favorite: any good 240 gr LSWC backed by 7.5 gr. of Unique in Special brass.
This is a sub-2" grouping load in all of my 44's, both Special and Magnums love it. MP360-432, hollow pointed with the large pin or the 'penta', and cast from a 50-50 allow of pure lead and ACWW's, at the velocities listed below, it's an expander in water, though I've not tried it on game. All things considered, I'd not be hesitant to use it for whitetails at close up, tree stand distances out to say 25-30 yds. Muzzle velocity runs to 950-1000 fps depending on bbl. length.

Here on our farm, we've used it to put down horses that have needed that last act of mercy. Penetration was not a problem.

The M-69's light enough for all day carry even on an OWB holster, but I prefer a cross chest 'tanker' style that makes the gun available no matter what I'm wearing, summer or winter. For my use, away from the farm, trout fishing in the Smokies of NC in bear country, it's a regular companion.

HTH's Rod

[Frank V]

I also find the .44 Special very useful & mostly use Skeltons old load. Penetration with a hard cast bullet in the 240gr+ has to be seen to be believed.

[Chill Wills]

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1010642157

That Ruger went for $1125 or so and will be all of $1200 to get it home. Wow! I know that one is a "special" one but still!!!

[brokeasajoke]

318399
Gp100 44spl 5"

And to think I only gave like $550 for this one in 2016 or 17 from CDN or sportsman's outdoor superstore. Can't remember

[JoeJames]

318399
Gp100 44spl 5"I bought one several years ago. I already had the Lipsey Ruger BH 4 1/2"; so I tried the GP100. It was clunkier and with the 5" barrel just heavier than my Ruger SA. Also I did not like the fiber optic front sight; preferring a regular patridge sight. Mine was about $520, and I sold it later for $600.

[murf205]

That Ruger went for $1125 or so and will be all of $1200 to get it home. Wow! I know that one is a "special" one but still!!!

That's one of my problems with GoingBroker. Since the tax happy states (mine included) started taxing internet purchases and the fact that some of the shipping cost is steeper than I think it should be. the deal is not very sweet on the tail end.

[W.R.Buchanan]

I started out on my .44 Special trip with a S&W M29 8 3/8" in 1976. I soon found out that I was good for exactly 12 Magnum loads before I started hurting so I started Casting Boolits and loading Specials. I still have unopened boxes of Winchester cases. The problem with the S&W Revolvers is they hit the web of your hand super hard and that sucks. I sold it and the next .44 I got was A SBH Bisley which has the best grip for powerful handguns there is ... Note: Linebaugh Pistols all built on SBH Bisley's. RIP John...

Then I got a S&W696 No dash. IE: Firing pin on the hammer. It was perfect but the guy had leaded the barrel so bad he scared himself and sold it. ($950) It had 50 rounds thru it! Took me almost 5 minutes to clean the lead out of the barrel! It is my Hiking Carry Gun or Back Up Gun.

Then I found out another little tidbit.[ B] The X Frame Grips fit on the L and N frame guns![/B] Now I have a 3/8" rubber cushion on the web of my hand !!! I can shoot my normal 6.0 gr of W231 Loads or Skeeter Loads all day and feel no pain. And the gun shoots to the POA with Keith Boolits.

Big FYI: Do NOT ,,, and I do mean,,, DO NOT !!! Fire a Jacketed Bullet after Firing Cast Boolits without cleaning the Forcing Cone of all lead residue.

It will split the Spigot on the barrel.There are NO Replacements!!!

This is why I only shoot PC'd Boolits in mine and won't be shooting any Jacketed Bullets ever.

If I ever gave up this gun I'd get a GP100/44 3" as I have looked at them and they are nice guns, and as close to a 696 as there is. I'd also jump at a 329 4" if one fell out of the Sky. That would be a killer carry gun.

Randy.

[murf205]

You know how to hurt a guy, Randy. I really want a 696 but they have been priced out of my league. A 69 is probably a tougher revolver but they dull finish and Hillary hole makes it the ugly sister.

[Rich S]

My .02,
I love mid range .44, either light loaded magnums or somewhat snappy specials 240gr at just a bout 900fps makes me smile/feel confident.
As to launching platform... between the two mentioned I'd go with a S&W if older production can be found or a Ruger if you are buying new. Also consider what feels right in your hand, as a long time S&W guy the rugers can feel funny to me.. but I just don't trust newish S&W's

[Uncle Grinch]

I had a Lipsey stainless Flattop BH 44 Spl with the 4 5/8” barrel that I bought new when they came out. Had a brain fart and sold it earlier this year when I was offered “too much money” for it. I replaced it with a 5” GP100 44 Spl. It’s a nice revolver, but it doesn’t feel as handy as the Flattop.

As I get older I seem to be having too many “brain farts”.

https://i.postimg.cc/2yJCcqm0/8-AA5-BF41-6-FD5-4999-A770-3-DBF8-A328158.jpg (https://postimg.cc/8fR8sz7v)

[david s]

Uncle Grinch at least your brain fart was better than mine, I wanted one of the blued 4 5/8-inch 44 Flattops and didn't pick one up when they were available. I'm still "making do" with the S&W 696.

[murf205]

Uncle Grinch at least your brain fart was better than mine, I wanted one of the blued 4 5/8-inch 44 Flattops and didn't pick one up when they were available. I'm still "making do" with the S&W 696.

Poor david, I can relieve you of your pain so that you can find a Flattop.

[rintinglen]

318701318702

I like these two a lot. the 24-is a 80's gun and very accurate with heavier boolits. The 21-4 is a thunder mountain gun and I carry it occasionally in the winter.

[smkummer]

I wonder about the Charter Arms Target Bulldog. I know it's not the choice for King Kong loads, but seems like it would be a good low cost/weight choice for factory spec loads. My woods wheelgun is an S&W 10-5 with the Lee 358-158-RF pushed to respectable velocity.

This is exactly what I have with its 4” barrel and adjustable sights. Currently it’s doing duty in one of my vehicles loaded with the skeeter load. That load is a bit much for practice but for carry, it’s ideal. I bought the gun used and it’s finish challenged so that makes it even better for vehicle and occasional carry.

[Chill Wills]

I ended up getting a Ruger GP-100 3" used. (44 Special) I think a good price, high $500's. It has after market black rubber grips that don't fit me well. The first 35 rounds through it put a good blister on the web between my thumb and palm with my load of RCBS 250K cast and 5grns Bullseye. This is a "special" load out of the Manual. It is not hot.
I am on the look-out for Ruger grips and maybe something else.

The one other thing that I wonder about is there is some cylinder wiggle when it is locked up, trigger pulled, cycled and hammer down. More than my Smith M696.
Accuracy was good for me at 25 yards, on paper only about an inch high but more left-right than I would expect like 3-4".

[alamogunr]

http://www.lasc.us/Fryxell44SpecialRevisited.htm

This article addresses the skinny part of the barrel extending thru the frame on the 696. I follow his advice and only use truncated cone boolits in mine,

I wanted an S&W 69 but decided that I could get by easily with the 696.

[Four-Sixty]

Like 20 years ago, I was at a pawn shop and had the choice of a used 696, or a single six. I opted for the single six cause I could not afford the 44 special ammo. That 696 was pretty.

[justindad]

What kind of velocities are you guys getting from the .44 Sp with 3-5 inch barrels?

[Thumbcocker]

4 5/8" Ruger .44 special Mia clone of H&G 503 8.0 of power pistol.

1. 926 fps.
2. 924 fps.
3. 923 fps.
4. 913 fps.
5. 927 fps.
8.0 of power pistol clone of Lyman devestator hollow point plain base.

1. 917 fps.
2. 963 fps.
3. 974 fps.
4. 984 fps.
5. 966 fps.

5.5 " Bisley .44 special H&G 503 clone 8.0 of power pistol

1. 954 fps.
2. 984 fps.
3. 966 fps.
4. 977 fps.
5. 939 fps.

Devestator hp 20:1 alloy 8.0 power pistol

1. 992 fps.
2. 990 fps.
3. 999 fps.
4. 997 fps.
5. 972 fps.

[W.R.Buchanan]

That was an excellent Article by Glen Fryxell. I had no luck with the Lightest Boolit I can make for .44's which is a Magma 190 gr SWC it shot so high it was useless. I settled on 429421 which I can make as a solid or 3 different HPs from a MP mould. I use 6.0 gr of W231 which I got from Brian Pearce in an Article about loading .44 Specials. It shot to the sights so I was happy using that load for IDPA where everything is close up.

I also have a 429215 GC mould that I will try with this gun and in my SBH Bisley as well. In the Bisley my Mid Range Magnum Loads are 8.0 gr of W231 with the same boolit. it had it's barrel Lopped off to 5" some time back and it carries a lot better than the 7.5" bbl did.

The other pic is My IDPA Rig for the 696. The BH Bisley was never fired and is gone now.

Randy

[Chill Wills]

I have been shooting the Ruger GP100 44 Special the last few weeks I made up and tested any number of loads for it.
So far, it likes and doesn't like certain bullets. Of the four bullets I have loaded for, the trend is for the heavier bullets and accuracy, but the lighter bullets not so much.

I have both the RCBS 250 SWC K and 250 SWC KT molds. It shoots them both better than the Lee 214 SWC and The Lyman 210grn bullet made for the 44-40WCF

Either of the heavy RCBS SWC bullets shoot well with 5grns of Bullseye or HP-38 or RED Dot and I am not totally settled on 700-X. But 5 grns of 700-X with the RCBS "K" SWC shoots best.
I think it was Joe James that said the Ruger is a little clunkier and I would agree. It may grow on me and I am going to change grips back to the Ruger Factory grips I have coming. My used GP100 revolver came (only) with after market grips that don't fit me well.

All testing done at 25 yards, for what every reason, the lighter LEE 214SWC lined its hits all up and down, 10 inches time and again. Powder changes did not help.

[Frank V]

The name says it all! .44 SPECIAL no 5 shot would be my choice, the good old 1950 Target, mod. 24, would get the nod. As for hotrodding it, why? We can safely get 900fps with a 245, to 250gr cast bullet. Unique works well. You almost have to see the penetration at that velocity to believe it. I have!
I feel if you need more power, a rifle or shotgun are indicated.
Some may disagree & I accept that.

[alamogunr]

In addition to the S&W 696, I had a S&W Highway Patrolman converted to .44 Spec. and later bought a Freedom Arms 97 in .44 Spec. Love them all. Just getting too old to shoot them as much as I would like.

[Bill.68]

I never understood this line of thought about guns being strong enough or which gun is stronger. Ive been shooting guns a good long time as many of you here have and Ive never met anyone who has shot a gun enough to wear it out.
And, if youre talking about ammo, if you need to load the Special to levels high enough to damage the gun then get a magnum.
Either gun, the GO or the 696, like my No- is going to do just fine within the confines of ammo choice. Mine is loaded with either a 250gr Keith over 7.7gr of PowerPistol or a 190gr SWCHP with 9gr of TrueBlue. It also shines with a 250gr RFHP.
The point here is if youre a Smith guy you wont go wrong with the 696 and if Rugers tickle your fancy get the GO. Either way you wont wear either out or break anything.
I will mention this though, the 696 does not have conventional rifling, its more of a polygonal rifling like a glock so bearing surface and velocities are more important.

[JoeJames]

The name says it all! .44 SPECIAL no 5 shot would be my choice, the good old 1950 Target, mod. 24, would get the nod. As for hotrodding it, why? We can safely get 900fps with a 245, to 250gr cast bullet. Unique works well. You almost have to see the penetration at that velocity to believe it. I have!
I feel if you need more power, a rifle or shotgun are indicated.
Some may disagree & I accept that.I accept that for sure. Something about a 240 grain swc plundering down range at @890 fps just seems to me to be a perfect balance of accuracy, penetration, and very tolerable and pleasant recoil. For my Lipsey Ruger BH 4 1/2" my favorite bullet is the Lee 430 240 TL.

319437

[Chill Wills]

I accept that for sure. Something about a 240 grain swc plundering down range at @890 fps just seems to me to be a perfect balance of accuracy, penetration, and very tolerable and pleasant recoil. For my Lipsey Ruger BH 4 1/2" my favorite bullet is the Lee 430 240 TL.

319437

I think I want to find a SWC mold that casts at about 240grns. Until then....

I just got a used RCBS Mold marked 250 SWC. I have been looking for something lighter than the two RCBS molds I have had forever. The first bought in the 1970's is marked "KT" and I cast loads and loads of bullets for my Super Backhawk with it. Then sometime later in the 1980's the supposed copy of the Keith bullet RCBS marked simply "K".

Both these molds cast heavy in my alloy of 96-2-2. The KT at 267grns and the K at 272grns. I don't want to push the load data for 240 grain bullets to the max using bullets 25 - 30 grains heaver. There isn't much for data on bullets this heavy in 44 Special.

The new to me RCBS 250 SWC weighs 262grains cast in the above alloy and I was hoping for something closer to 250. Yes, the design was likely produced with something Sb and SN rich producing a lighter bullet. In my alloy, not so much.

This RCBS SWC marked mold has three equal length driving bands and is much meatier in front of the crimp groove than the "KT" mold. I look forward to testing it in the S&W696. Hoping for an accurate load in the 850fps range.

[white eagle]

not sure what you think of single actions but as has been mentioned a Ruger Bisley blackhawk in 4-5/8" makes a handy carry gun and is a hoot to shoot

[Chill Wills]

not sure what you think of single actions but as has been mentioned a Ruger Bisley blackhawk in 4-5/8" makes a handy carry gun and is a hoot to shoot

Great minds think alike.
My woods gun here in western Colorado from about 1976 to 1999, before I found the S&W 696, was a Ruger Blackhawk 45 4-5/8" convertible. I found the S&W 696 in a local drug store in Glenwood Springs.

Accuracy in the Ruger 45 was abysmal!!! It took me awhile and a membership to the Cast Bullet Assoc. in the late 70's to discover how to look into these kinds of things. I discovered both cylinders on the Ruger 45 had throats running 0.456 and 0.457" .

0.452" bullets were bouncing around in the large throats. V.Smith, later to be LBT, was writing pieces for the bi-monthly Fouling Shot in those days and started advertising his molds. I called him. He was in Cornville, AZ back then and he made me a 4-cavity mold that cast 0.457" 255 grain bullets that greatly improved that handgun's performance. However, 45ACP ammo still sucked!

Truthfully, carrying the Blackhawk was fine and met my needs well. In the early 80's I had a short infatuation with a small, light Charter Arms SS 44 bulldog but it wasn't all I wanted in a woods gun. One day on the way to the NW corner of Colorado to hunt pronghorn in 1999, I stopped in a drugstore in Glenwood Springs that had a well stocked gun corner and saw the S&W 696 44 Special (wow!) and just had to have it! It was about $400 then.

This current string of posts is because my collage age son wants a sidearm to carry while fishing the bushy creeks and camping the remote areas he is now frequenting. ...And, ....he wants my Smith 44 special! I have loaned him my S&W m-10, but something bigger is better. I found a Ruger GP-100 44-Special but have not given it to him yet. I'm not done playing with it! :razz: He might get it next spring.

[delftshooter]

I won't speak for the other mfgr's offerings but the Ruger single action revolvers in 44 special can safely be loaded right up to the 44 magnum's doorstep in power and velocity.

Ruger will not comment on the 44 special max pressure but the 45 Colt/45ACP flattop blackhawk is rated for 45ACP+P pressure which is 23kpsi. I figure that the flattop in 44 special may be perfectly safe up to 25kpsi because the chambers are smaller diameter, cylinder walls are thicker, webs are thicker, and the bolt cuppets are thicker at the bottom. This level of power with a 240gr boolit in 44 special will fit right up under the lower end of the 44 magnum performance with the same boolit.

Just a question,, so you are advocating the use of HEAVY special loads in the GP-100. Even though ruger has refused to convert into a .41 magnum based on frame strength.

[Kosh75287]

I understand the allure of the Single-action .44 Spl. revolvers, but the thought of engaging multiple "2-legged varmints" (which is never NOT a possibility) with it and its slow reload time kinda dulls my enthusiasm for them (unless a lever-gun in .44 something is close at hand).
There's not really a lot wrong with the CA Target Bulldog, except that it is darned obstreperous and short-lived with "Elmer Keith" loads in it. It is light, handy, unobtrusive, and an absolute joy to carry. As a "carry-often/shoot seldom" weapon it may be the best buy for the money.
The S&W M69(6) is about the same size as the CA Target Bulldog, though a little heavier. It will be more controllable with and tolerant of "Elmer Keith" loads, though a bit less of a joy to carry. Same goes for the S&W M329 in all respects. They'll both be less economical than the Target Bulldog, though longer-term players in the sidearm game.
The 7.0/W231/200 gr. load mentioned by someone is probably as good a load as the Keith-Skelton 7.5/Unique/240 gr. LSWC load, and perhaps a bit easier on the revolvers. Another load with which I have personal experience is 7.0/Herco/215 gr. "Button-nosed" SWC. It clocked at about 900 f/s from a 6.5" S&W M624, but performed well in the CA Target Bulldog without shaking it apart. I would guess that the velocity deficit in the CA Target Bulldog was about 75-100 f/s, which is still puh-LENTY of horsepower on the receiving end.
SHORT ANSWER about your choice of .44 Special revolvers is that ANY of the ones mentioned will work just fine. It will finally become a matter of familiarity as to which of the revolvers you might shoot best, especially under time pressure.

[bcraig]

I think I want to find a SWC mold that casts at about 240grns. Until then....

I just got a used RCBS Mold marked 250 SWC. I have been looking for something lighter than the two RCBS molds I have had forever. The first bought in the 1970's is marked "KT" and I cast loads and loads of bullets for my Super Backhawk with it. Then sometime later in the 1980's the supposed copy of the Keith bullet RCBS marked simply "K".

Both these molds cast heavy in my alloy of 96-2-2. The KT at 267grns and the K at 272grns. I don't want to push the load data for 240 grain bullets to the max using bullets 25 - 30 grains heaver. There isn't much for data on bullets this heavy in 44 Special.

The new to me RCBS 250 SWC weighs 262grains cast in the above alloy and I was hoping for something closer to 250. Yes, the design was likely produced with something Sb and SN rich producing a lighter bullet. In my alloy, not so much.

This RCBS SWC marked mold has three equal length driving bands and is much meatier in front of the crimp groove than the "KT" mold. I look forward to testing it in the S&W696. Hoping for an accurate load in the 850fps range.

I have a Stainless Rossi 92 44 special/mag that functions well with 44 special and holds 10 round's of HSM 240 semi-wadcutter Ammo.
Going to be Loading it with the Starline brass from the HSM factory loads along with 5.5 Grains of HP-38 and some old Winchester Large pistol primers and some 250 Grain Hollopoints I bought from Matts bullet's
Should be somwhere about 950-1,000 fps.
Should be a decent lean in the corner of the house gun ,a little over 5 pounds unloaded,easy to shoot ,low recoil,decent Magazine capacity,subsonic so easier on the ears if needed.

I haven't deer hunted in years but if I decided to should work fine for 50 Yard deer Hunting in the wood's.


I had one of the Charter Arms Bulldog Pistols back around 1980 for pocket carry but it did not work for me.

Was not a good pocket for me as the tight jeans I wore (to try and impress the Ladies at my age of 20)was not very good for pocket carry of anything!:redneck:

But I liked the pistol and the concept.

Now I am older(will be 64 soon)I wear The Propper brand of Khaki BDU pant's that I carry a Glock 26 in the pocket using a MIC brand trigger guard Holster for safe carry of loaded chamber and 11 round's of Federal 147 Gr Hollowpoint.
Also keep a Glock 33 round magazine in the truck's console.
I imagine I could Keep a Charter 44 special in both of my pants Pocket and still have bout the same firepower.

[Kosh75287]

I imagine I could Keep a Charter 44 special in both of my pants Pocket and still have about the same firepower.

Somewhat better stopping power, though...

[Chill Wills]

Lately I have been loading test ammo for the 44 Special and various 250 - 265gr SWC bullets for use in my Smith 696 and Ruger GP-100 3" barrels. 25 yards, chrono and checking location of the groups V the POA. That in its self has been interesting! Loads print in different places left and right. I am testing powders in the faster pistol class for the short barrels. Woods use. More on this later.

- On a fluke I loaded Herco using the **Lyman 44th guild and got velocity much faster than predicted. The run of the mill Bulls Eye, WW-231, Red Dot loads were producing velocity in the high 600's into the middle 700's FPS as I worked up to max. The Herco blasted them into the high 800's and middle 900's (FPS). Listed pressures were supposed to be in the safe range for standard 44 Special.

What do you make of this Herco load?

**SEE CORRECTION IN POST 76

[rintinglen]

@ Chills

I just looked in my copy of the 44th Lyman. There are no loads listed for the 44 special using Herco. Herco was widely used as a magnum powder in the 50's and 60's, until pressure testing revealed that recommended loads were substantially hotter than had been supposed. I don't know where you got your load data, but in the 2004 Alliant manual, 7.7 grains was listed as giving 805 fps @12,600 cup out of a 5.6 inch test barrel. If you are getting nearly 100 fps more from a 3 inch revolver, something is amiss.

[Chill Wills]

It is the 7.7gr. load and sorry, I cited the wrong source. It was the 1992 Hercules Reloaders Guide.

The data is correct. 944 average for 5 shots, RCBS "K" SWC shot in the Smith 696. Accuracy was one of the better loads on the target. I will load some more and replete the test.
Being surprised at the recoil and chrono numbers, I put the other 5 rounds through my 7.5" Ruger SBH. The load was also very accurate and the average velocity was 997 FPS.

[delftshooter]

The lack of a GOOD ever day duty grade 44 special has really hurt the handgunner. Look at what elmer and skelton and so many other of our fore fathers did with the 44 special. Look at what happens in a magnum gun, magnum case, and a mere 1 grain increase in powder (7.5 unique to 8.5 gr). pure perfection.

We have such a beautiful low pressure round, that can do so much, but so little guns for it.

[Bazoo]

I think I want to find a SWC mold that casts at about 240grns. Until then....

I just got a used RCBS Mold marked 250 SWC. I have been looking for something lighter than the two RCBS molds I have had forever. The first bought in the 1970's is marked "KT" and I cast loads and loads of bullets for my Super Backhawk with it. Then sometime later in the 1980's the supposed copy of the Keith bullet RCBS marked simply "K".

Both these molds cast heavy in my alloy of 96-2-2. The KT at 267grns and the K at 272grns. I don't want to push the load data for 240 grain bullets to the max using bullets 25 - 30 grains heaver. There isn't much for data on bullets this heavy in 44 Special.

The new to me RCBS 250 SWC weighs 262grains cast in the above alloy and I was hoping for something closer to 250. Yes, the design was likely produced with something Sb and SN rich producing a lighter bullet. In my alloy, not so much.

This RCBS SWC marked mold has three equal length driving bands and is much meatier in front of the crimp groove than the "KT" mold. I look forward to testing it in the S&W696. Hoping for an accurate load in the 850fps range.

If you need it, I can supply a picture of the RCBS data for the 44-250-K. Mine weighs 262 grains when cast from WW alloy. The book does list it as 250 grains, notwithstanding, I at least like having bullet specific data.

[Bazoo]

I really like my Ruger Blackhawk 44 Special, after changing the XR3 grip frame to a stainless XR3-RED grip frame.

https://i.postimg.cc/xdJkR5FY/B2-ECB96-A-809-A-40-A3-B96-E-1527-D4559382.jpg


18 consecutive shots at 20 yards, rested off the top of my Tracker.
https://i.postimg.cc/vT1pfYhD/E25345-F4-744-B-48-DF-B122-F5-AEA6-ED68-E7.jpg

[Chill Wills]

That is a very handsome Blackhawk! The accuracy is great too!!! Nice!

[Bazoo]

That is a very handsome Blackhawk! The accuracy is great too!!! Nice!

Thanks! I wish I could shoot that well all the time!

[curioushooter]

I too think highly of the 44 Special. Where I really think it shines above all is in a 3" 5-shot revolver and loaded to the high end of standard 44 special power level. This is a good size comparison. Top is a 6.5" S&W 624 (N-Frame). Middle is a Ruger New Model "Flattop" (Small frame) Blackhawk Bisley. These are both 6-shot. And bottom is a Rossi M720, a 5-holer.
325874

The Smith and Ruger can be taken all the way up to 25k PSI Keith loads with no sweat, and such loads are reasonably comfortable in such weighty revolvers. My preference is to slightly back off on the power with the full weight bullet (255-260 grain SWC) about 100 FPS with a faster powder. I easily achieve 1100 FPS with 9 grains of Longshot with a lot less drama and violence than the 17 grain/2400 Keith load and the powder goes nearly twice as far, but seems to do best with heavier bullets. It disappoints around 200 grains.

With the little Rossi I have really three loads, all withing standard pressure limitations, inspired by Glen Fryxell's excellent article: https://www.artfulbullet.com/documents/Fryxell_44Spl_Revisted.pdf I have a clone of the Lyman 429348 (full wadcutter with a narrower forward section that greatly facilitates loading) made by Accurate in aluminum. The bullets are about 185 grains. With 9 grains of Unique this is a smoking load going 1000 FPS+ out of just a 3" revolver. I used this load to stun two big hogs (domestic) and was very unimpressed by the penetration, both going about 4 inches through the skull, destroying the brain, and lodging on the back side of the skull. This makes it actually a great stunning load however as the bullets don't go into the body, works just like a captive bolt gun.

I also like the 200 grain Lee RNFP with a 8 grains of Unique. This is surprisingly more accurate than the wadcutter too. Mine cast up around 208 grains. Gets just over 900 FPS.

But the real surprise is 8 grains of Power Pistol (which it slower, cleaner, meters nicer, and is more dense than Unique) with the full weight (~255 grain) semiwadcutter like a 429244, 429241, or H&G503. It to manages just over 900 FPS--nearly a "skeeter load." In the lighter Rossi this is quite a handful compared to the lighter bullet. I am interested in trying the 429215 cause it sort of splits the difference in weight (around 220 grains). This is the most accurate load of all and closest to shooting point of aim. I have shot many pigs with the skeeter load and it always goes clear through the skull ends up in the neck or lungs.

I really like the Rossi. It is about the size of a K frame and built just like a S&W, and it's a shame S&W never made a 44 special in the K frame. The trigger is meant to be staged and I've found it accurate to shoot this way. Don't even want a hammer spur. It handles snake shot loads well and with more load than any 357 can deliver. And it serves up nearly 45 ACP momentum. It's a great general purpose or truck revolver. Light (26 oz with the rubber pachmayrs) but not toy like. Plenty of power. Can do shake shot. And the little speed strips work well enough. As you can see it's much smaller than the other revolvers which are basically 44 Magnum sized IMO. My thinking is might as well get a magnum, even if you never shoot it at that power level. Tightgroup in 44 magnum can duplicate any heavy 44 special loads. But the bigger revolvers can never be as portable and neat as the Rossi.

[Bowdrie]

it's a shame S&W never made a 44 special in the K frame.

There just isn't enough room between the cylinder pin and the O.D. of the cylinder to fit holes big enough and still have the wall thickness to take much load.
And then the distance between bore axis and the top strap wouldn't allow it either.
However, with the L-frame 696 and the later 69 we have just the room needed.
The same thing is when S&W chambered the .45Colt in the N-frame, the cylinder walls are woefully thin, those guns will not withstand very heavy loads before the cylinder starts to swell under the bolt notches.

[curioushooter]

There just isn't enough room between the cylinder pin and the O.D. of the cylinder to fit holes big enough and still have the wall thickness to take much load.

Diameter of the Rossi is only a few thousands greater than my M19. Same with the frame window. I would think this could be done. The bolt notch thing isn't a concern in the 5-chamber gun. If Rossi did it S&W could. My guess is that with Charter Arms out there S&W didn't see profit. It's a good combination, IMO. I also think 41 Magnum 5-shot could be done in a K frame, which would be nifty. Taurus made a 5-shot 44 special called the model 41, too.

The 696 is a L frame, large enough for 7-shot 357 or 5 shot 44 MAGNUM as in the model 69. L-frames are large, duty sized revolvers, IMO. If autos hadn't been invented, police would probably carry 7-shot 686s with 4-6" barrels.

The Model 25/625s are chambered in 45 ACP and can easily take it's much greater pressures (23,000 PSI) compared to 45 Colt, see Handloader #337. N-frames have larger diameter cylinders than Uberti SAA clones or Flattop blackhawks/new vaqueros, which take these pressures. They do have the notches cut off top dead center of the chamber however.

Even the pre-war N-frames took standard 45 ACP pressures.

[Chill Wills]

So, this brings me to a question I have been wrestling with two of the three 44 Specials I wish to carry in the woods, not so much on the city streets, where I do not live. The difference being, for 300, 400 or 500 pound threats, heavy bullets and lots of penetration is a good thing and I don't care if the bullets exit as there is nothing behind to worry about.

I have both a Smith 696 and the Ruger GP-100 44 Specials. The Ruger may be a gift to my son.
To what level can these two revolvers be loaded to? And for the record, I am not looking for 44 Mag loads. These specials are the revolvers I own and about 15,000psi is what the long time limit is with published data. I saw some good info in another thread just yesterday that offers three different loading levels.

"For those who want to reload the .44 Special, this is a good read."
https://www.goodrichfamilyassoc.org/...%20Special

[Bowdrie]

I am not looking for 44 Mag loads. These specials are the revolvers I own and about 15,000psi is what the long time limit is with published data.

I too use a 696. You know, for a gun that was not a big seller, and many denigrated as neither "fish-nor-fowl", the 696 has now become a "grail", must-have for S&W collectors and prices have reflected that.
As such I have no interest in loading "low magnum" ammo for it.
A #429421 moving around 850>900 will do anything you need and doesn't strain anything, and the pressures are below 15K with several powders.
The reports of cracked forcing cones have not come from low pressure/heavy bullets, it's been the opposite.
Too many shooters fall victim to the fly-weight bullet at hyper-speed mentality, chasing after more "energy" or a flatter trajectory.
It's not a good trail to follow for the .44 Special and most of the guns chambered for it.

[Chill Wills]

We are thinking about the same. I have a few SWC bullets in the 250 - 265 grain range and I am sorting through what bullet and which powder is best. I will be very happy to settle on an accurate load in the 850 - 925 fps range that stays within or does not produce much over the standard max pressure.

FWIW - the Smith has had the accuracy advantage over the Ruger in all testing. OR - It could be that I just don't shoot the Ruger as well.

[curioushooter]

Chill Wills:

I would say it is unnecessary to load hotter for your purposes. The 696 and GP100 both have pretty thin barrel extensions and this is why I never purchased one; compare a 696 and model 69 (which as a much larger frame hole and thicker barrel extension but are the same L-frame 5-shot platform). I have a 624 (N frame) and Flatop Blackhawk. Both of these have been established to take Ketih loads (the most powerful 44 special loads) with ease (basically 44 Medium loads if you ask me. 250 grain at 1200 FPS is not a whole lot different than 240 grains at 1250 FPS which is what Hornady factory loads run). I have that little Rossi which I never shoot anything beyond standard, and which frankly, is a handful even with standard ammo.

8.0 Grains of Alliant PowerPistol is with a 250 grain cast "Keith" bullet is listed on Alliant's website (https://www.alliantpowder.com/reloaders/powderlist.aspx?type=1&powderid=8&cartridge=32), and also in Handloader #236 (Aug-Sep 2005). It works with short barrels well with less waste and drama (and is cleaner) and approximately the same velocity as 2400. Years ago (you can search on this site) I did calibrated gel testing in the 357/38 Special concluding that the standard 158-172 grain cast SWC is a penetration MONSTER even at 38+P velocities going through 28" of block. This test proved to me that penetration is more important than expansion. It is only after sufficient penetration is achieved that one needs to start thinking about expansion. 43 caliber bullets are not much smaller than typical expanded 357s to begin with and depending on alloy if you have a big flat meplat you can expect some "mushrooming" if your velocity is over 1000 FPS.

I have not tested this load on gel, perhaps I will today! But if I were faced with the same situation (black bear, 200-500 lbs) animal defense and wanted it in a compact package I would choose a my 44 special Rossi with Lyman 429421 or 429244 or RCBS 44-250-K or H&G 503 or clone of type with 8 grains of PowerPistol for about 900 FPS. This is approximately the "skeeter load" of 7.5 grains of Unique btw, but it does it within standard pressure limits, using a slower powder. If I didn't have one of these bullets I would use a 429215 and if I didn't have that the Lee 200 grain RNFP with the same charge of PowerPistol. Mind OALs. Keith type bullet put a lot of weight out front in a big long nose and so occupied less case space allowing significantly greater charges. Sometimes going to a lighter bullet of a different design isn't necessarily safe. Just be smart! Cast softer of 20:1 or what I call 96-2-2 (96% Pb, 2% Sn, 2% Sb). I love the Rotometals antimony nuggets. You can cast quite soft using the 429215 I've found with that copper diaper. And of course sizing. I like to size my bullets to be the same as throat diameter if possible.

My second choice would be a 45 ACP 1911 with a 230 grain ball type load or preferably a 230-250 grain flat pointed cast bullet. I would put this second despite having 9 rounds (a considerable advantage over 5) on board for two reasons. 1) I have ingrained habits with S&W DA revolvers, Khar K9, a H&K P7, and S&W 3rd Gen pistols (what I did my CCW safety course with)---my carry pieces over the years--and all do not require the deactivation of a safety. A certain amount of presence of mind must remain for me to use a 1911 or Hi-Power correctly. 2) I would load the Rossi such that the first chamber to fire would be loaded with snake shot, the next four with the bear load above. This is how my wife carries her 38 snub (638, which can decock). It is because most of the things that need shooting are little varmints. And to bigger varmints a most unpleasant blast of #6 birdshot is enough to make them go away without mortally wounding them (think black bear which are often scared by cats, flying whiskey bottles, just yelling at them). If they don't, well, then a solid will soon follow. I would carry a speed strip with another 5 in a pocket or some easy place to access. My experience with virtually all animals, particularly predators, is that they require multiple non-survivable shots to go down. Unless shots hit the CNS right on (and sometimes even if they do) they can still do harm simply by thrashing about. Because my wife is on-farm butcher/processor I get a lot of real-world data on deer and domestic pigs. The more I get the more I prefer slightly heavy for caliber soft cast bullets with a large meplat going close to 1000FPS at impact the bigger the caliber the better until it becomes impractically large.

I see that charter arms has a larger 45 Colt revolver now. That I might consider with again a 250 grain cast flat point bullet. But I have never seen one of these or tested any 45 colt loads in short barrels.

[Chill Wills]

Good read. There is a lot in there to chew on.

All my heavy SWC molds cast heaver than stated. I have three versions of the RCBS bullet. The KT, the K and one called the SWC and a Hoch. All SWC and all going 264grs for the Hoch to the RCBS K at 275 in a 96-2-2 alloy.

Most load data list lead at 250 or in some cases 240grs.

I don't have any Alliant PowerPistol. Sounds like a good one to try, or at least try to find. The Herco is very good.

You write of the 44 mag revolvers: "which as a much larger frame hole and thicker barrel extension but are the same L-frame 5-shot platform". I don't know what part of my revolvers are the "barrel extension". Is it the rear of the barrel that houses the forcing cone?

I don't think I need to go overboard with heavy loads of powder and higher than standard pressure to get what I want. And, I understand you are not advocating that.

I have not tested every last combination of powder and lighter bullet but in my testing, the big SWC's have had better accuracy with the Ruger and Smith.

Herco, Unique, Universal, Red Dot, Bulls Eye, HP-38/WW-231 are what is on hand.