What's so special about the .44 SPL?

[Bucks Owin]

Honestly, I don't aim to start a flamefest here but I just don't see the allure of the .44 Spl's "comeback" for lack of a better term. Seems like everybody and his uncle wants to get their hands on an OM .357 Blackhawk (or worse yet, a Flattop!) and ship it off to one of the many 'smiths that are making a lot of money converting these old guns. Why?

In the first place (IMHO) the .357 magnum is the superior round since it outpowered the .44 Spl way back in 1935.

Elmer Keith (again IMHO) was headed in the right direction with the .45 Colt until he got a little carried away with the powder charge and heavy sized down .458" rifle boolits (along with web head .45 Colt cases) and nearly lost his thumb blowing the head off a case and the loading gate off an old SAA Colt....
( Too bad he didn't get together with Dick Casull who was experimenting with the .454 back before the .44 mag's arrival....)

So then he shifted his aim to the .44 Spl cartridge and getting 1200 fps out of a 250 gr boolit. He succeeded (at 36K!) and wanted S&W to market his load. Wisely, S&W with Remington decided to go with a longer case and voila! The great .44 mag..(with even MORE velocity) The rest is history...

But back to the .44 Special. If one stays with SAAMI pressure levels, it's performance is slightly below the .45 Colt's. (Also at SAAMI levels) or about par with the .45 ACP. It's energy dump is less than the .357 mag's with full tilt loads. If one "hotrods" the .44 SPL with the "Keith load" what do they have? A watered down .44 mag. Of course "full tilt" .44 mag loads in a lightweight gun aren't much fun, ask those with S&W "Mountain Guns" or Bulldog .44 SPLs so there is a point of diminishing returns as I see it in practical recoil....

I guess if I just HAD to have a .44 SPL I'd have a NM .357 converted and live with the slightly larger frame. (Or cut down and lighten a SBH .44 to the point it was painful to shoot and then load down the .44 mag to .44 SPL ballistic levels) Best solution of all would be a USFA "Rodeo" in .44 SPL. Then I'd have it all, the "feel" that Bill Ruger copied with the original Flattop, a pricetag far below a converted OM .357 and a dedicated .44 SPL chambering. They even load "5 beans in the wheel" like a S/A sixgun should. Hell they're even made under the "blue dome" in Colt's old factory! (And build a better "Colt" than Colt does! IMO)

I just don't see the allure of the .44 SPL and would love to hear some valid reasons for it's apparent "rediscovered" popularity. And if it really is that popular, why aren't the manufacturers jumping on the bandwagon?

Dennis

BTW, if an OM .357 with "more power" is the objective, why are there no conversions to .41 mag which can leave the .44 SPL in the dust energy wise....

[Jumptrap]

Folks have a desire for the oldies and.......most have learned that packing a magnum doesn't equate to having a big Johnson in your pants. The old 44 special is so damned accurate and pleasant to shoot and, it pokes a big hole and tosses a heavy bullet. It just isn't fun to stand and blast away with full house 44 magnum loads...let alone those handcannons made by the aforementioned Casull, et al.

True enough, you can load a 44 magnum down and achieve the same results....more or less. You can also shoot specials in a magnum....everybody is aware of that too. In the same vein, most are also aware that the Specials are no slouches in their own skin and 'enough' is enough. Sort of like saying why swing a 10 pound sledge when you can have a 16 pounder? Swing one a few times and you'll soon see why.

I have a 8 3/8" model 29 and I have a K38 and a few other handguns.....mostly I find handguns useless.......but for shooting, the K38 sees 20X use to the 29. Reverse checkering in my palms is no fun from full house 44 mag loads. If I need something that shoots 'hard', I always get a rifle.....they smoke a 44 magnum easily.

This is no flame.....not at all. The oldies are making a come back because folks have made a full circle and realize that somebody did their homework a long time ago. back in the 60's and early 70's everybody wanted a 440 or a 454 hotrod so they could smoke the tires for 180 feet.....it was fun and they were cool dudes ...man! Now, the same dudes like me..are fat and bald and drive Toyota 4 bangers...because they are reliable and easy on gas.....been there and done that street dragging thing with the 400 horse gas suckers.....now come back to the mild and reliable. 44 magnumitus is akin to a 440 magnum MoPar. How many kilotons does an H bomb have to have to be 'bad'? I figure anything beyond one is overkill...hehehe!

[9.3X62AL]

Good points all around, Buck. I don't disagree with any of 'em.

I just like the 44 Special. Its real appeal to me would have been as a service revolver, with 4" barrel, using some sort of 240 grainer at ~900-950 FPS. Yes, very close to both the 41 Magnum and the 45 Colt--and any of those 3 options would have been fine with me. FINALLY, my agency approved the 357 Magnum for service use in 1994, and I still have the M-686 x 4" on paper with the agency that went on many "rides along the river" with me over the years.

Like you, I don't like seeing OM Blackhawks getting worked over. They are few and finite in number--as are M-28 S&W's, which also get re-done into 44 Special on occasion. If S&W made 1000-1500 of their N-frames in an even split between 4" and 6" and in 41 Magnum (NOT that Hunter contraption), 44 Special, and 45 Colt each year--and resist the temptation to adorn the things with gold inlays, sycophantic ad copy, and other useless BS--I think the market would respond favorably. We're only talking 4500 units each year to service us multi-use types, then they can go hog-wild with their niche-marketed specialty examples. I suspect the 41 Mags and 45 Colts would sell VERY well, the 44 Special a bit more slowly. There is a DEFINITE market out there for classic revolvers minus frills and nonsense that is only being serviced by the used gun venues.

The 44 Special as factory-loaded isn't much of a cartridge--it barely exceeds the ballistics of its predecessor 44 S&W. There are a few decent loads "out there", but if you want good work from the 44 Special, you need to handload for it. The 44 Special I have is supposedly safely capable of 1200 FPS with the Lyman #429421. I don't think such loads would do the platform any good over extended usage, and the 1050-1100 FPS concoctions I brewed up last year were as much fun as I care to have with that revolver. Hell, the M-29 x 4" ain't much fun once you get past 1200 FPS with the 240's, either--which is why my 44 Magnum is a Redhawk x 5.5".

I think my M-624's best load is what has become known as "Skeeter's Load", as written about by the late Skeeter Skelton--7.5 grains of Unique atop the same 240-250 grain SWC, in my case either Lyman #429421 or #429244. In my 6.5" barrel, it runs about 950 FPS, which is neck-and-neck with the 45 Colt. Just my opinion, but the 40 caliber+ revolvers are real fun to shoot with "classic" cast boolit weights at 900-1000 FPS, and the 10mm autopistol isn't bad like that either.

Since I have examples in both "Specials", 357, 41, 44 Magnum, and 45 Colt--I'm not "married" to the 44 Special--or to any other of these fine calibers. I like them all. I've had a number of examples in most of these calibers, and from swapping, selling, and buying I've put together an eclectic assortment of side iron that I enjoy greatly. I would not want to be without a 38 or 44 Special again--and the same goes for the 3 Magnums and 45 Colt.

MIke Venturino did a pretty good article on this same subject in the most recent Handloader. It is worth a look-see.

[Bent Ramrod]

The .44 Special is the perfect caliber for anyone who wants the whole "big bore" experience. You can load it to (about) any practical level with (about) any weight bullet, there are lots of mold designs and bullets available, cases last approximately forever, you can use carbide dies, it's easy to find accurate loads, and leading problems are minimal to nonexistent. It's fun to shoot at factory load levels and very accurate, and it preserves this accuracy when you stoke it up.

The balance between power, accuracy, effect, ergonomics, controllability for repeat shots, and carry weight for handguns for the average shooter was pretty much achieved by the end of the 19th century. 200-250 grains bullet, 800-1000 ft/sec, 3 pounds plus or minus (preferably minus) weight loaded. And as large a diameter hole as practical.

Within all these criteria, the .44 Special has a higher aggregate of good points than any other cartridge.

[Bass Ackward]

If you want to see what a 44 Special is like, just buy a 300 plus grain bullet for a Mag and you will see what reduced case capacity does for accuracy at lower pressure levels.

A 44 Mag with a 300 grain Sierra bullet bullet has 19.772 grains of powder capacity at 1.61 OAL. A 44 Special with a 240 grain bullet seated at 1.61 OAL has a 23.967 grain powder capacity.

The 300 grain bullet occupies enough space in the magnum case that for all intents and purposes you have created a "short" 44 Special. That, along with the fact that the bullet weight produces more inertia, reduced charges burn better which .... improves ignition. Add to that case grip on a longer bearing area etc, etc.

Thus most people find heavier bullets to be .... more accurate believing that it is the bullet design itself that produces "all" of the accuracy. And when they go to light bullets, the general comment is that you have to run them on the top to get accuracy. Or that they are too finicky at lower velocity levels. Why? You have to run them on the top to produce reproducible ignition because you have increased the case volume and cut inertia of the bullet. So consistent ignition is harder to produce.

So if anyone wants to impress me with their reloading / shooting capabilities with cast in any caliber, tell me what you can do with light bullets for a caliber. That is when life .... presents the most challenge.

So Dennis, you already own a 44 Special Flatop with that 300 grainer. :grin: How do you like it?

[Char-Gar]

I have never been bitten by the 44 Special bug, although I had tried to contract the fever for many years. I have owned over a score of sixguns in 44 special and sold two this past year. I am now down to one 1931 vintage 3rd. Model HE. At sometime I went over the bench at Mico and wears their front and rear sights, plus their target hammer and trigger. The backstrap is nicely checkered as well.

I have not found the 44 special round have any great inherent accuracy than any other round.

I have found the 44 Magnum round to deliver supurb accuracy all up and down the power scale, from mild target loads to fire breathing magnums.

For a mild vintage big bore chunking large pieces of lead, I favor the 45 Colt.

[Bucks Owin]

Excellent answers guys!

Bass Ackward, I agree somewhat. The 310 gr seems to stay accurate at any velocity from 850 to 1300 fps while my 225 gr loads like to go "redline" for best performance. However boolits in the 240 to 265 gr in mag cases seem to suffer no accuracy loss when "throttled back" to .44 Spl velocity in the Flattop....

I suppose the gun itself is more likely to affect the grouping ability than any "inherent accuracy" that the .44 Spl may have, despite the Special's reputation for exceptional accuracy. My 8.375" M29-2 seems to bear this out as it's accuracy with either cartridge is "pretty good" but not in league with the Ruger....

Being a lover of "things old" myself, I can savvy the "nostalgia" angle too...

What a fine bunch of guys here. I'm impressed with the logical, well thought out replies instead of.........Well you know! :-D

Best to all,

Dennis :Fire:

[Swagerman]

I love two calibers the best, .44 special and .45 Colt.

I find that the .44 special just slightly out does the .45 Colt but not by much.

Don't quote me, but I think the .44 special is the advent of the .44 Russian which is a mighty accurate caliber its self. If memory serves and it usually doesn't anymore, the .44 special came into being around 1903. I wonder if it was S&W or Colt that came out with it first.

In fact, I wouldn't mind having a .44 Russian, or a .455 to complete my shooting collection before I bite the bullet. But I'm just wishing impractically, can hardly get myself to the range anymore...nor can I shoot all the dang guns I've got as it is.

Will be leaving a nice catch to my son one of these days. The reloading setup is pretty impressive as well. :mrgreen:


Jim

[454PB]

You should get one, Dennis. All that mouth split .44 magnum brass you just can't throw away can be trimmed down and start a new life as a special!

I've owned two ,44 Specials, a Charter Arms Bulldog that was stolen from my car (while it was in the garage) and now a Taurus 445 that I really like.

I've always wondered about the guys that buy a heavy .44 magnum and then feed it .44 Special ammo. For a light, powerful, and easily concealed sidearm, you can't go wrong with a .44 Special.

Then there's that "nostalgia" thing......

[felix]

44 Russian came first, I think. Jim, don't count on your children taking the appreciation that you have. You might have to find some relatives who would "contribute" cash to the estate for the guns, and then they would parlay that back to the kids in the form of cash much later in their lives. Tommy, my oldest, appreciated the mechanics of making boolits and loading, and lost interest after he learned to shoot well. Nick, my youngest, likes military guns and the ammo already loaded. Just the opposite of Tommy. Tommy likes accuracy, Nick likes to blow things up. Neither deep down could care less about guns. ... felix

[Swagerman]

Felix, you are so right in this generation of fickleness and trendy crappola.

However, my son is ex-marine in near 50 and loves guns, he has about the same amount of guns as I, but not the old timers like the .44 special and .45 Colt S&W revolvers. Plus, he doesn't seem the least interested in reloading as he works so many hours he doesn't seem to have time to get into it.

We'll have to talk about that, if he tells me he won't want the RL equipment I'll think about selling it off when I get too far in age.

Jim

[floodgate]

Swagerman:

The .44 Special was indeed an outgrowth of the .44 Russian, with a 0.200" longer case to provide a bit more performance using 26 grains of black powder vs. the 23 of the Russian, with the same 246-grain bullet, around 1907; but was almost immediately loaded with smokeless. The early factory rounds, though, seem to have been loaded to the same performance level as the Russian. It was introduced in - and for - the famed "Triple-Lock", known by the factory as the "Military Model of 1908", the first of the big N-frame side-swing S&W revolvers. It was soon also chambered in the Colt New Service and the Bisley and standard Colt SAA's; and was retrofitted to some of the older S&W single-action No 3 break-open revolvers. I have always felt it would be an ideal "carry" weapon in a 5-shot version on a modifid "K" frame; sort of a "Super Chief's Special", and indeed, S&W has tinkered with this idea a couple of times in the past. I had a master armorer build me one (with some modification to the frame), and it is a delight to shoot.

floodgate

[9.3X62AL]

I stand corrected on my "44 S&W" reference made above--the Special WAS derived from the Russian, not the outside-lubricated/heeled bullet 44 S&W/American. Thanks for straightening that curve out, gents.

Yes, a nice No. 3 replica in 44 Russkikh would get my attention....as would a Schofield in 45 S&W. Not meaning to stray too far outside the topic, but all these Italian replicas done up in 45 Colt are like fingernails on a chalkboard to me. I know the reasons why it's done--it just doesn't seem "right"--sorta like a Range Rover fold-out picnic table in a Testarossa.

[Swagerman]

Floodgate, thanks for the great information on the S&W .44 special.

Jim

[floodgate]

Al:

"Yes, a nice No. 3 replica in 44 Russkikh would get my attention."

I have one of those Uberti S&W #3 replicas in .44 Russian, bought from a friend who had shot some fairly heavy loads in it, leaving the hinge a bit wobbly. He went on to get one of the S&W Custom Shop Schofields, a truly geeorgeous piece! But despite the excruciatingly fine sights, mine is a lot of fun to shoot - at least in good light conditions. I have always liked that second-finger spur under the trigger guard.

Doug

[9.3X62AL]

After posting the bit earlier about the top-break S&W replicas, I just had to take a look at the Uberti web page.

That was unwise.

Not only does it show BOTH Russian (complete with Cyrillic markings) and Schofield replicas available--the company is now listing Springfield Trapdoors, both rifle and carbine versions. The prices aren't for the faint of heart or light of wallet, but there they are--for lottery winners and such like. I do my best to stay off the Uberti and Cimarron Arms sites, such things jeopardize budgeting greatly.

[44man]

I am guilty of long winded responses! I see all of you are joining in on the long winded stuff too. But none have made it simple here. The simple response is that the .44 special is just plain FUN!

[HiWayMan]

I find the .44 spcl has about the same performance as the .45ACP in a wheelie with what I believe to be less recoil. I also like the .44 Russian - more velocity with less powder than the .44 special. And they are tack drivers in my guns. My daily carry is a S&W 21-4TRS.

[Swagerman]

Dumb question time...

Is it OK to shoot the .44 Russian round in a .44 special cylinder, or is the bullet jump too great for a leap stretch. Accuracy would probably suck. :confused:

Jim

[Bass Ackward]

Excellent answers guys!

Bass Ackward, I agree somewhat. The 310 gr seems to stay accurate at any velocity from 850 to 1300 fps while my 225 gr loads like to go "redline" for best performance. However boolits in the 240 to 265 gr in mag cases seem to suffer no accuracy loss when "throttled back" to .44 Spl velocity in the Flattop....




Dennis,

A 265 grain seated in a Mag can actually have less case capacity than a 240 in a Special. That is the whole design theory to a Keith or semi wadcutter. Use the excess weight off the nose to make a longer case filling bullet for the same weight comparred to a RNFP. And what is the general consensous on those designs? Keiths for light to mid levels and RNFPs for the heavies. :grin:

I just used the 300 grainer as an example because you have resent experience with it.

Just look at commercial handgun molds. You couldn't find a RNFP 25 years ago. Strange huh? When most designs were RNFPs in cowboy days when lead was all they had. Even Veral Smith stated that his bullets needed more velocity to stabilize them unless you choose the heaviest ones per caliber. What he missed was that hanging most of your bullet weight outside of a case was increasing your case capacity and he wasn't getting the ignition he thaught he was until he stepped on it. So he mistakenly blamed stabilization.

When it comes to handgunning you have the speed of sound barrier to deal with. This will negatively affect accuracy on 90% of common bullet designs if you go out far enough. Especially the wide meppies. So unless you really want to move WELL above this velocity level and stay above it to your target, 1100 fps muzzle velocity is all you really need. Just decide what bullet weight you want / need to launch at that speed and get a case big enough to hold enough powder to get you there. Any length or capacity you get over that point just starts to work against you.

This is what killed Elmer Keith. Once he got a bullet design that WOULD stabilize once it passed through the sound barrier at long range, he didn't have enough case capacity to launch it without creating too much pressure for the day. His powder selection basically stopped at 2400. Had Elmer had 296 or 4227, I doubt that he would have pushed for the magnum case design. And it may have never came about. The 44 Mag was born to launch the 250 keith bullet with 2400 powder.

The "inherent" accuracy theme comes from more from flexibility of multiple load possibilities than true accuracy for most people that use the term. Especially in hanguns.

[slughammer]

At first it was the "one gun to do many things syndrome" that attracted me to the 44spl, much like getting a 357 so you can shoot 38's too. My first 44 was bought to replace a GP100 I sold to buy a 1911. After the 1911 came along I missed my wheel gun (having already been tainted by the teachings of McGivern and Keith). Why go to a 44 to replace a 357? Well, it's the "one gun that can do everything". From hunting PA groundhogs and whitetails to loading 44spls to shoot steel plates. I soon found the 44 N frame to be too heavy for fast plate shooting and bought a 38/357 for racing. I shoot the heck out of 38's and 45acp every year, but it's taking me 2-3 years to go through the 500 specials I loaded. This is because the 44spl doesn't play any competitive games for me, the 44spl I keep around JUST FOR PLEASURE. My current dedicated platform for 44 spl is a 3" S&W 696. This is the same frame as a 686 357 mag. So for the extra diameter I give up one shot, the 696 is a 5 shooter. You're going to laugh at my current batch of ammo for the 696; a cast 240, Federal primer and 4.0gr of Clays. Over the chrono it does an honest 600fps out of the 3" barrel. I'm trying to get out of the "one gun" syndrome, now I'm specializing. Right now the 44spl is not for competition, not hunting, not defense; its just for pleasure.

[jar-wv]

I'm one of those guys that had an OM 357 converted to 44 special. I thought a long time about it before I decided to do so, as I am aware there is not an infinite supply of them. The 357 was not in pristine condition by any means. The 44 special has a new 4" barrel, jeweled hammer, polished grip frame and rounded grips. It is very accurate and is going to be used as a close range whitetail gun. I recently picked up a 357 flattop, a beater, and am torn between doing a conversion on it or reblue, action job and leaving it as a 357.

jar

[felix]

Jar, I have a near mint 357 old model, one that I hardly shoot. Probably no more than a couple hundred rounds through it. I got it from a neighbor's estate after he passed away. He used it as a night stand heater. 6.5 barrel, I think. Would you like to have it? ... felix

[13Echo]

Dawgonit Jar! How come I can never find a beater OM or Flat top to convert? I never see them in the gun shows or gunstores around here and I've been looking and have all my LEO friends looking.

Jerry Liles

[jar-wv]

felix. Yeah I'd love to HAVE it. It would be the BUYING it that would be a problem. I'm presently in on a couple of GB molds and still have a bunch of nose punches and sizer dies to get, so funding is kinda tight right now. Besides that, the wife would go nuts if I brought another sidearm home right now, even though she's the one that tipped me off on the flattop.

Jerry. Ya gotta just keep on looking. Last one my wife found was in a newspaper add, where I seldom look.

jar

[Bucks Owin]

I'm one of those guys that had an OM 357 converted to 44 special. I thought a long time about it before I decided to do so, as I am aware there is not an infinite supply of them. The 357 was not in pristine condition by any means. The 44 special has a new 4" barrel, jeweled hammer, polished grip frame and rounded grips. It is very accurate and is going to be used as a close range whitetail gun. I recently picked up a 357 flattop, a beater, and am torn between doing a conversion on it or reblue, action job and leaving it as a 357.

jar


Hey, beaters are OK with me for conversions. Heck, it gives them a new lease on life! It's the FT and 3 screws that are still good shooters as is that I'd like to see left as is....

Your conversion sounds like a beauty!

Dennis

BTW, I know what the temptation is like. I've seriously thought about having Clements turn my FT .44 into "the gun Ruger never built but I wish they would have", a 10" .45 Colt FT....
Now if I could only find a .44 FT beater......[smilie=1:

[C1PNR]

Jar, I have a near mint 357 old model, one that I hardly shoot. Probably no more than a couple hundred rounds through it. I got it from a neighbor's estate after he passed away. He used it as a night stand heater. 6.5 barrel, I think. Would you like to have it? ... felix
Felix, as much as I want to do one of those conversions, I'm afraid that example you have is just too nice to convert.

I'm wondering now if maybe one of the "Security Six" models would lend itself to this conversion. It's a double action, but the only one I've ever fired was quite accurate.

[Bucks Owin]

Felix, as much as I want to do one of those conversions, I'm afraid that example you have is just too nice to convert.



Good for you amigo, that's a GOOD example to set! :drinks:

Bravo!

Dennis

[454PB]

Hey Dennis, they only made 1000 of those 10" flattops......are you sure you want to modify it?

[Bret4207]

I like the 44 Special. It's a little different and suits me. As for the accuracy of the 44 Spec., I believe this goes back to the day when your choice was a 44 Special, 44-40, or 45 Colt. Neither the 44-40 or 45 Colt were made with the tolerances of the 44 Special at that time. Read the old articles in the Rifleman from the 10's, 20's and 30's and you'll see examples of guys going through 5 or 6 44-40's before they got a "keeper". Same with the Colt. Oversize bores, under size barrels, undersize boolits- all sorts of issues. The 41 Mag is a modern example of this done right. From the start the design specs were "right" and most all were good shooters. Just my opinion, but waht I've read and seen seems to bear this out.

The 44 Special usually comes in a package about 1/2 pound to a pound lighter than a comparelable 44 Mag. Thats another plus for me. I tend to actually carry my guns in a hip holster while trying to do field work or wood cutting or fencing. Half a pound makes a difference after a while. Given the choice between my old Super Blackhawk (now gone) and my Charter Bulldog for carry while working- well, there isn't even a choice. Plus, if you scratch a Bulldog on barbwire, who cares?!?!

[Edward429451]

I like the 44 Special too. I only have a CA Bulldog for it and am striving to get as close to 45acp ballistics for it as I can. I have it fairly close, 696fps with Lymans 232 gr SWC bullet and I like what it does. Energywise, it works out to be similar to a 38 special but punches a bigger hole and the recoil level is such that The little Bulldog will stand up to it until the kids take it over. Plus the muzzle rise isn't excessive so allows faster follow up shots. Not the general direction that most of you gents are taking with the cartridge, but very useful nonetheless.

Plus the nostalgia. They can be trimmed down when they split. Brass has been free for me because all my 44 mag buddies who do not reload and buy the specials, give or trade me the brass, and it's very easy to load for.

44 Special may not be a whiz bang ferrari cartridge...but it'll get you there like a good ol Chevy and is very versatile.

[9.3X62AL]

Good points, Bret. I think you're right on the 44-40/45 Colt vs. 44 Special dimensional quirk issue and the respective accuracy reputations of the calibers mentioned.

Dimensions matter--a lot. The BisHawk I have in 45 Colt is doing some very good things for me, now that I have .454" boolits hitting .453" throats and going into .452" grooves. Bret is on to something here--once the revolver gets built right, the critter and its caliber work. I would add that most 357 Magnums adhere to dimensional integrity, as have most 32 S&W Longs I've worked with. It would be intriguing to get one of those bass-ackwards Ruger Vaqueros in 44-40, open the throats to mesh with the .430 grooves, and load boolits that fit the throats correctly. I'd wager that an accuracy dividend would be paid.

[Bucks Owin]

Hey Dennis, they only made 1000 of those 10" flattops......are you sure you want to modify it?

Yeah, I know. That's why I decided against the notion, even though the result would be mighty nice I think....
Maybe I'll find a totally trashed .44 FT someday....

Thanks amigo,

Dennis

(Oddly enough, Clements didn't even mention that when I got a quote, he seemed quite willing to go ahead with the project. Maybe he thought I HAD a "junker"...)

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a356/BucksOwin/Flatt013.jpg

[BOOM BOOM]

HI,
I HAVE AN OLD MODEL RUGER 357 FLATTOP i BOUGHT IT AROUND 1970.
It does just fine in 357, after I took 2 gunsmithing classes I bought a P.O.Ackley barrel & put a 9 " barrel on it, still have the original barrel.
Lots of fun to shoot,worth every penny iI spent.
Would not part w/ it , unless some one had a Ruger SS Redhawlk in 357 they wanted to trade for it.
One can't be without a 357 you know.

[Poohgyrr]

I'm wondering now if maybe one of the "Security Six" models would lend itself to this conversion. It's a double action, but the only one I've ever fired was quite accurate.

They were done by a gunsmith in the 70's if I remember right, or the early 80's?? I don't remember who wrote about converting the old Ruger .357 dbl actions back then. But it had five shots and he liked it a lot. Something about he should have named it the "Fast Five"... I have a Speed Six and it would be sweet, but I haven't done it..

And .44 Specials are just plain fun. I did have Steve Young tune & shorten a M92 short rifle and chamber it in .44 Special - it is a blast & teams up well with a wheelgun.

And with shorter barrels, the Special has a lot less recoil & muzzle blast.


http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/5015/croppedm92444cb.jpg

[Frank46]

POOHGYR, now thats one fine little lever gun. Maybe marlins missing the boat with their 44 carbines. I would imagine the ballistics would greatly improve with the 44spl versus carbine / handgun and not beat you to death at the same time.
I have a 44mag marlin that I bought used and so far only have shot J word bullets in it. Suprisingly good accuracy but one of these days will try cast. Anyone have a boolit that casts fat for a 44 marlin?. I need at least .432 diameter, with gas check. Frank

[Bucks Owin]

HI,
I HAVE AN OLD MODEL RUGER 357 FLATTOP i BOUGHT IT AROUND 1970.
It does just fine in 357, after I took 2 gunsmithing classes I bought a P.O.Ackley barrel & put a 9 " barrel on it, still have the original barrel.
Lots of fun to shoot,worth every penny iI spent.
Would not part w/ it , unless some one had a Ruger SS Redhawlk in 357 they wanted to trade for it.
One can't be without a 357 you know.

Hmmmm...

I'll be watching for a SS Redhawk to take you up on that!
(Love those Flattop "carbines"...) :drinks:

Dennis

[Frank46]

i gotta ask, who out there makes a good 44 special revolver. i have not had much success with my 44mag redhawk with reduced loads. But would turn on to a nice revolver in 44 special. Frank

[Swagerman]

Charter Arms new ownership is still making them with the short barrel, 3" I thinkl

Some single acton six guns by Uberti, Cimmaron, and some clone SAS made here in the states...forget their names.

Forget finding a S&W in .44 special, it would be a miracle if you did.

Then you could find an N-frame and make a conversion for some major bucks, end up with a dream revolver like this one.

[9.3X62AL]

i gotta ask, who out there makes a good 44 special revolver. i have not had much success with my 44mag redhawk with reduced loads. But would turn on to a nice revolver in 44 special. Frank

Frank--

Would that include loads put up in 44 Magnum cases? My Redhawk just dotes on Lyman #429421 atop 8.0 grains of Unique ("Skeeter's Load", Long Version).

[Bucks Owin]

Personally, I think that the notion that the .44 Spl is somehow more accurate than the .44 mag is a myth. The bore is the same, the twist is the same and assuming the velocity is the same (eg reduced mag load) the accuracy should be the same. The boolit doesn't "care" which case it was propelled out of, all other things being equal.

Can some folks shoot the .44 Spl more accurately than a "faster" .44 mag load? Certainly! But not because of the "inherent accuracy"...

The "actual" accuracy will depend on the gun itself and the shooter, not the length of the case as far as I'm concerned. It still takes "X" amount of pressure from either case to drive the same bullet at the same velocity...

JMO,

Dennis

[felix]

Dennis, the shape of the pressure curve is paramount, not the integer parameters. ... felix

[Bucks Owin]

Dennis, the shape of the pressure curve is paramount, not the integer parameters. ... felix

Explain how that can make a difference between .44 Spl and .44 mag regarding "inherent" accuracy...

Why is say a 250 gr bullet at 850 fps from a .44 Spl any more accurate than the same bullet leaving a .44 mag at the same velocity?

Dennis

[Dale53]

I have set out of this discussion because I am admittedly biased. I admit it freely, so there:mrgreen:.

I have four .44 Specials: one S&W Model 24, 6.5", one 624, 6.5", one 624, 4", and one Cimmaron 4 5/8" Colt Clone. All will shoot well under 1" at 25 yards with the Lyman Keith 245 gr and 7.5 Unique. That is a great general purpose load. You can also get 1200 fps with the same bullet with 2400, Win 296, H110, and Carbine Ball (WC-820). Frankly, I do not use many of the high velocity loads - I use my various .44 mags for that use. The point is, I can get perfectly safe satisfactory high velocity loads with the Specials.

There are not many revolvers that will shoot with target accuracy from 650 fps to deer loads at 1200 fps and still weigh a half pound less than the model 29 S&W. There are a delight to shoot and a delight to carry. They have "advanced" sights (compared to their contemporaries) and wonderful triggers just out of the box (I am speaking of the 24/624,s).

I have fired thousands of rounds through the various .44 mags and .44 specials and if I could only have one it would be a .44 magnum. I am not limited in numbers of pistols and revolvers and so can and do shoot the revolver and pistol that "satisfies the moment".

Besides, any devotee of Elmer Keith (I am certainly one of many) doesn't need an excuse to own, load, and shoot one of the finest revolvers ever produced (the Models 24 and 624 S&W). To me, they seem especially "User Friendly".

Dale53

[Bucks Owin]

I'm not biased against either one, I love 'em all! (And wouldn't mind owning a Bulldog myself!)

I'm addressing the notion that the .44 Spl is "more accurate" than the .44 mag which is a statement I've seen numerous times in numerous places....(not necessarily here...)

I don't buy it...

Dennis

BTW, I've tried tests by shooting .44 Spl in both the 10" Flattop and an 8.375" M29-2 and can find no difference, both rounds are finely accurate with loadings they "like". But I figure to be "fair" the .44 Spl should be a dedicated chambering for any comparisons.....

[Willbird]

I know that theory has been around a long time, that the 44 special was inherently accurate. I think it came about BEFORE the 44 magnum even existed...it is a smaller cartridge, so in some respects it may have been better suited to smokeless powders than the 45 colt (especially early smokeless powders). A larger dia bore is easier to make properly than a smaller one. Also larger bullets for the most part are more accurate than smaller ones due to having more mass to counteract any casting or swaging errors, and deformations from travelling from ctg. to muzzle. Also "accuracy" was for the most part determind by target shooters...and larger bullets will increase your score on a normal pistol target by the old rules. Also the 44 special was chambered in the triple lock, which I am told was a very finely made pistol.

I would think if you did some crono work on 44 magnum, 44 special, and 44 russian.....say 100 shots at a given VELOCITY within the scope that all 3 ctg. could handle, say 700 fps. And you did this with say 5 powders for each ctg. (thats a LOT of shots) I would put my bets on the smallest ctg. giving the most consistant velocity. Which on paper in a revolver hand fired should be the most accurate, at least in the vertical spread.

I have a smith top break target revolver in 44 russian, the quality of mfg of these revolvers is really something you cannot explain, if you handled it you would know immediately what I mean. So in any comparison between 44 special and 44 magnum the sheer quality of the revolvers that were made for each ctg. comes into play, and I am willing to bet there were far more finely made 44 specials than 44 magnums...even tho the magnums WERE fine pieces of work in the early years...the total quantity made in the "good" years probably did not come even close to 44 specials made.

Bill

[9.3X62AL]

Dennis et al--

I wish I could shoot well enough to wring whatever "better accuracy" might exist in a 44 Special that doesn't in a 44 Magnum from either platform. I've run the Special from 700-1100 FPS, and the Magnum from 850-1400 FPS using the same boolits (largely #429244, some #429421), and I remain the weak link in the system. All the loads are wonderfully accurate, more so than I am for sure.

I'm bound to say that the 38 Special/357 Magnum would be the same story, as is the 41 Magnum.

More succinctly, I think the 44 Special is the most USEFUL of all these calibers, with the 357 Magnum a very close second. This applies to cartridge reloaders only, if factory loads are the only measuring stick then the 357 Magnum leaves the 44 Special in the dust. My M-624 x 6.5" is significantly lighter than my Redhawk x 5.5", and there are few venues where I need more than 1100 FPS given to a 245 grain SWC.

[Bucks Owin]

Dennis et al--

I wish I could shoot well enough to wring whatever "better accuracy" might exist in a 44 Special that doesn't in a 44 Magnum from either platform. I've run the Special from 700-1100 FPS, and the Magnum from 850-1400 FPS using the same boolits (largely #429244, some #429421), and I remain the weak link in the system. All the loads are wonderfully accurate, more so than I am for sure.

I'm bound to say that the 38 Special/357 Magnum would be the same story, as is the 41 Magnum.

More succinctly, I think the 44 Special is the most USEFUL of all these calibers, with the 357 Magnum a very close second. This applies to cartridge reloaders only, if factory loads are the only measuring stick then the 357 Magnum leaves the 44 Special in the dust. My M-624 x 6.5" is significantly lighter than my Redhawk x 5.5", and there are few venues where I need more than 1100 FPS given to a 245 grain SWC.

I think you and I are pretty much on the same page Al. I think any "accuracy advantage" of one caliber over another pretty much rests with the vehicle itself and not any "inherent" accuracy advantage...

My "personal" likeup would go:

1) .45 SAAMI Colt or .357 as "all around" gun. (Self defense, "some" hunting, to size of deer at close range)
2) .45 "Ruger Colt" or .44 mag as "all around hunting"
3) Everything else....

I prefer the .45 Colt over the .44 Spl in FACTORY loads, there's somewhat more choice bullet wise and the .45 Colt can certainly do anything the .44 Spl can power-wise. maybe slightly more....(Of course both cartridges can be "hot rodded" in the right guns, the .45 more so than the .44 Spl IMO)

Anyway, one of everything would be perfect! :D

Dennis

[Glen]

What makes the .44 Special special? I like it, it's fun to shoot, it puts moderately large moderately heavy bullets right where I want them to go, it kills well in the hunting fields, it's chambered in some really neat (and some really classy) guns, and it's got a nostalgia factor that is hard to beat.

And perhaps most importantly in this forum, it served as the inspiration for the 429421 and the 429421 HP, arguably two of the finest cast bullets ever designed for a revolver.

Those are a few of the things that make the .44 Special special.

[Swagerman]

I pose this question, what if you take a .45 Colt brass and shorten it to the same length as the .44 special case, you'd have the makings of a really good moderate load better suited for fast powders.

The shorter .44 special brass case is just about ideal in length and performance in reloading.

Jim

[Glen]

Wouldn't that be called the .45 Schofield? (or .45 S&W if you prefer)?

[Swagerman]

You are probably right, the Schofield would most likely be it.

However, how many shooters get to handle the .45 Schofield, never seen or shot one, let alone handled a brass case in that caliber.

Wish someone would list some loading data on it to see if its comparable to .44 special.

I may have one magazine that has some loading info on it.

Jim

[Bucks Owin]

You are probably right, the Schofield would most likely be it.

However, how many shooters get to handle the .45 Schofield, never seen or shot one, let alone handled a brass case in that caliber.

Wish someone would list some loading data on it to see if its comparable to .44 special.

I may have one magazine that has some loading info on it.

Jim

I would say that since there's more bullet base for pressure to work on (.452" vs .429") that a ".45 Spl" would outperform a .44 Spl velocity wise with equal weight bullets...

Dennis

[lawboy]

The 44 special is a karma cartridge. All aspects of casting bullets for it, reloading it, and shooting it have a very calming and peaceful effect on me. It is like I am carefully preparing some specialized ammunition for an important purpose. When I am shooting 44 special in my SBH or custom Bisley Blackhawk, it is a slow, deliberate, process that I savor.
I have an equal but different love for and relationship with the 44 magnum. The Magnum is about modernity, fast, efficient, forceful, URGENT impressive via bigger, faster, stronger, MORE. Sometimes I need and want that. Other times, I want to savor the moment. Ergo, the 44 Special.

[Swagerman]

Bucks, I agree with you. The .45 Colt shortend brass case would be a humdinger, it should work better with the faster powders I would think.

Though I wouldn't want to hot rod it, just moderate loads would be fine in the 750 to 900 fps range should be fine performers. Yet, not be excessive in recoil.

But we would probaboy be making the same velocities as the .45 acp or auto rim...so why bother.

Best leave the .45 Colt alone.

Jim

[StarMetal]

With this shortened 45LC all you're talking about is reinventing the 45acp and 45AR in a revolver.

Joe

[Bucks Owin]

The 44 special is a karma cartridge. All aspects of casting bullets for it, reloading it, and shooting it have a very calming and peaceful effect on me. It is like I am carefully preparing some specialized ammunition for an important purpose. When I am shooting 44 special in my SBH or custom Bisley Blackhawk, it is a slow, deliberate, process that I savor.
I have an equal but different love for and relationship with the 44 magnum. The Magnum is about modernity, fast, efficient, forceful, URGENT impressive via bigger, faster, stronger, MORE. Sometimes I need and want that. Other times, I want to savor the moment. Ergo, the 44 Special.

That's kinda how I feel regarding the SAAMI .45 Colt and the "Ruger Colt"....(or the .454 Casull)

One's a nice "mellow to shoot yet not to be trifled with" cartridge while the hot rod version is a real "hell on wheels"....

Dennis

[Bret4207]

I don't think anyone is arguing that the 44 Spec is "more" accurate than the 44 Mag. Is the 44 Spec inherently accurate? Yup. Given a well made gun, cartridges like the 32 Long, 38 Spec, 44 Spec tend to be inherently/easy to get to give good grouping. Is the average pistolero going to get better groups with a full house 357 or a mild loaded 38? Same or more with the 44 Spec/44 Mag. "Inherently accurate" in my book also has the definition of being easy to handle. Given a well made gun, good loads and time to become accustomed to it I'll bet the 44 Mag/45 Colt are just as accurate. I know most 41 mags I've seen are shooters, but they benefited from good design specs from the start. The Casulls and Linebaughs, Freedom Arms all shoot well once the shooter becomes accustomed to the platform and load.

The "legendary" inherent accuracy of the 44 Spec probably go back to the days of less than SAAMI specs in gun and ammo as I mentioned in an earlier post. Guys used to rave about the "gilt edged" accuracy of the Hornet- 1.5" groups at 100 yards. Now we'd scoff at any gun that called itself a varmint rile that only averaged 1.5" groups. What was "inherently accurate" and "gilt edged accuracy" has changed through the years. I don't think it's anything worth considering anymore. Most cartridges can be reloaded to give good accuracy using the knowledge we've gained over the years. We share that knowledge much more freely now than 50-75 years ago. It just progress boys. Look at the "old wives tales" we've put to bed here (Shooters/Aimoo/Cast Boolits) in the past 8-10 years.

So IMHO the whole issue of why the 44 Special is special comes down to the same reason some guys like 204 Rugers, 25 WSSM's, 250 Savages, 270's, 30-30's, the '06, a 38 S+W, the 45 AR, a 338 Mag, a 38-55 or a 44 Schofield. Emotion and opinion combined with more emotion. We just like 'em!

[Swagerman]

Not only accurate, but pretty dang well one handsome revolver...the 2nd model.

Jim :mrgreen:




http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e321/44and45/2ndmodel.jpg

[Bret4207]

Isn't the "Thunder Ranch" S+W pretty much like Swagermans photo above? Can't recall the details since I only see the mainstream rags at the grocery once in a while, but that photo tickled my memory.

[Swagerman]

Tpr. Bret, the 2nd model begin just before we got into WW-1, a large contract of them was made for UK, Canada, New Zealand and I think Australia. It was made in their .455 caliber.

These revovlvers were really well made by the craftsmen at S&W, but they were not making them fast enough for the U.S. government so they took over the factory in that WW-1 time period.

The Thunder Ranch model of today does not bare a lot of resemblance to my gun, the TR has an underlug like the 3rd mode or more modern made Smithsl.

The internal mechanism is also greatly changed. The shape of the sights are a lot different as well as the grips and frame handle.

They want too much money for the modern made guns, I'm glad I own the old timers I have.

This is a 3rd model made in the 1930s, note the underlug on the ejector rod...and the front sight placement.

Jim

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e321/44and45/P6190014.jpg