"Point of order. The original flat top Blackhawk 44s were built on the large frame - I have three of them. Beefy revolvers, they are about the same age as the early Smith 44 Magnums, but, I think, hardier as are most single actions over same size swing out double actions. The Super Blackhawk was built on the same frame, but with a new design rear adjustable sight. I prefer the early XR3 grip frame to the longer Super frame.
Elmer Keith has written that Ruger brought out the original 44 on the 357 frame, but blew it up in testing. Thus the big frame came into existence. "
I apologize for my errors. I was thinking about the early test guns & such,, and typed before really thinking things through. I made a mistake & Neuses is correct. The only frame dimensions that changed from the FT 44's to the Super Blackhawks was the rear sight area,, which the Super got the protected ears.
I should have slowed down & thought before I typed my earlier response.
Like the picture sixshot has shared,, I have a .44 blown up frame. I use it as a teaching tool. (No,, I didn't blow it up,,, I purchased the scrap frame as a tool)
That said,, no matter how good it's built,, metal can get stressed if worked harder than it's designed. And while I own a few FT 44's as well as a few OM 44 Supers,, I generally use medium to milder loads in all of them.
Why?
I've found the sweet spot for accuracy for each gun, and use that as my guide. I tend to shy away from "loudenkickinboomer" max loads. As I mentioned in my earlier post,, I want the guns to outlast me & my grandkids. I experiment with different loads & such to find accurate loads. Accuracy trumps everything else. And if I find a hotter load to be the most accurate,, I study it,, and try & find a different powder & bullet combo that produces the same (or better) accuracy without going to to tier loads.