Ruger's answer to S&W's new "L" 44mag????

Durn few can shoot ANY gun worth doodly squat, truth be known. Just as owning a guitar does not make one a musician, owning a gun does not make one a marksman.

I agree that smallish .44s will never be ***huge*** sellers.

I'd seriously like to see sales figures for the .410/.45 pieces compared to the rest of the revolver numbers. Heck, a complete breakout of the entire revolver genre would be interesting.

rugerguy said:

Jim Luke said:

Ale-8(1) said:

Personally, I wish one of my friends would buy one so I could shoot it!

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

X 2

I just don't want my money in one.

Click to expand...

I totally agree, beside anyone ever find out just how far any 410 shot has to go before it ( the pattern/group ) "opens up" to be worthwhile or even useful ??????
all I know is the Charter 44 has been around for a long , was never a big seller around here, and I have always been a fan of ANY caliber in a less than 'magnum' loading, so yes, the GP100 in say a 3 in and a 44 special would 'interest' me.............BUT how many would they actual sell to make it worthwhile???

Click to expand...

Would be interesting to see Lipsey's offer up a couple thousand to test the market.

Of course, we can just watch the S&W offering's sales.

If you want a 44 Special....see the 4 5/8" barrel Blackhawk.

Altho I have a GP100 and S&W Model 19 and a Redhawk and a K38....truth is for me I have come to prefer the SA revolver over the DA unless it is a J frame for pocket carry or an LCR for OWB carry.

And if I were to go strolling regularly around the Red River Gorge and didn't want to end up like the fellow from a few years back who offered up his leg as dinner to a black bear I would carry either a Blackhawk 41 or 44 or more likely a 1911 in 10mm.

Mr. Ale 8 (I like Winchester swamp water BTW),

I agree it would be interesting to see a breakdown for revolver sales. The 410 revolvers have sold well here in the bluegrass area and there really aren't a heck of a lot of "dangerous" snakes here! But many people are stupid and terrified of any snake.

clayflingythingy said:

(I like Winchester swamp water BTW)

Click to expand...

Ah, a gentleman of exquisite taste and refinement.

:mrgreen: :wink: :mrgreen:

My "Gorge gun" would be my 4-5/8" .45 Blackhawk with SERIOUS loads.

I think Ruger already makes the ideal revolvers, from Pocket Gun to Hand Cannon. Maybe they should add a 5-shot 44 special or 41 magnum double action on the GP frame just to fill out the line.

I agree with Jimbo357. The GP100 in .44 mag would not be exceptionally light as S&W has a Scandium gun in .44M if I recall. Also, there was the Taurus Tracker in the caliber. It could round out the line and keep a potential buyer away from competitors' products. Also, in the future the market will get saturated and new models need to be introduced to keep production up. If one focused only on volume sales then they would only make polymer autoloaders and small frame revolvers and surely not the large framed revolvers. I personally have no desire to touch off a full power .44 mag load in a Scandium S&W but will have the need for something like the GP100 in the near future as want something that is always carried. Lugging a Redhawk around for a while I have a feeling it might spend a lot of time at home.

I'll find out as I have a model 69 on order from my local gun shop. His distributor told him he sold the 3 he had on hand and I'll have to wait till his next smith wesson shipment.Not worried about shooting 1000's of rounds threw it, but a $750 44 mag I can carry in the woods all day intrested me.

Ruger already has the best 44's around , why jump on the S&W me too band wagon. Judge/Governor? Seriously? Niche guns for those with too much money and not enough brain cells. Ruger is thankfully above fads.

Jimbo357mag said:

41 magnum double action on the GP frame just to fill out the line.

Click to expand...

Bingo! We have a winner here. I couldn't agree more.

And make it a 2.5, 2.75 or 3 inch model ..... blued would be okay too.

A .41 Mag would sell more poorly than a .44. See anything chambered for that one anywhere? S&W had their 2 5/8" Bloodwork gun in .41 mag at one point, not sure it's still there. Some mysterious flattops NOT bashing the cartridge, it's one that should have made it, along with the .280 Remington, .260 Remington, maybe the .480 Ruger, and a bunch of others. But "deserve's got nothin" to do with it" as Will Munny once said.
"They've always just been presented as a very close range self defense alternative. - DixieBoy"
That was my primary point. Even at point blank range, you are injecting high speed shrapnel into the bad guy. You still have to aim, or at least point correctly, there is no spray and pray here. And after 10 yards or so, all bets are off.

These are good discussion points.

The concept of a "larger" GP100 chambering has come up before. When we talk about larger cartridges we must consider the size of the cylinder and the wall thickness at the outside of the chambers. It's worth noting that the .41 Mag and .44 Mag develop pressures essentially the same as the .357 Mag, in the neighborhood of 35,000 to 36,000 PSI. While the GP100 shows considerable chamber wall thickness in .357 we'd have to consider the wall thickness if the chamber holes were made larger. Knowing that Ruger usually goes "heavy" when designing stuff, I'd believe that they sized the cylinder to their comfort level with the .357 round, and might not feel comfortable enlarging the chambers for rounds that develop the same pressure as the .357. The .44 Special, on the other hand, develops pressure of only half that of the magnum rounds, so it is quite possible that Ruger would be agreeable with chambering the GP100 for this fine old round. The popular concept of "Ruger only" loads would have to be carefully examined in this case, of course.

None of this is intended to belittle the .41 Mag as a performer. It's quite capable, if not hugely popular, but that's another matter. Point is, I'd find it surprising for Ruger to chamber the GP100 for it, even if it were done in a five-shot configuration if that were necessary to get the bolt notches between the chamber bores instead of directly over them.

Just random thoughts . . .

Currently, I believe the GP has a cyl. diameter of about 1.557" vs. 1.57" on the 69. Distance from cylinder outside to chamber would be less on the GP unless the cylinder axis to bore center is less. Dave Clements used to offer a .44 Special conversion that would fire a load that would do in the forcing cone of a Smith 696 rapidly, a 250 grain at 1250 fps. I think the frame width at the yoke on the GP may be a bit less than a 69 so Ruger would need to do some redesign and perhaps use a thicker barrel shank. The Clements conversion used a larger diameter cylinder and he enlarged the cylinder window in the frame. Gary Reeder also offers a .44 Sp and .41 mag conversion on the GP with a new cylinder.

Never know about Ruger, after all they came out with a 7 shot .327 mag in the GP. Will it be a huge seller? No. But doubt whether the 69 or a lot of other models Smith develops sell large amounts either.

I think there is a market for it and I am a case in point. People who live, work and play in places where yogi and other four legged (some that have tails and swim) critters present a risk need a compact and powerful side arm. I spend a fair amount of time doing just that and for years carried my Bisley SBH Hunter in a shoulder rig. It is and always will be my favorite handgun, but it's a heavy and cumbersome setup that doesn't work well with some of my packs. Also, in the back of my mind I always wondered if I could get a second shot off fast enough. About a year ago I bought a Taurus Tracker in .44 Mag. It's a 5 shot, stainless steel with a 4 inch factory ported barrel. I tried out a S&W 329 and a Ruger Alaskan as well, but the Taurus was more accurate, felt better in my smallish hands and had a better trigger than the others. I know some of you look sideways at a Taurus, but I have three of their revolvers and have shot the snot out of them without a glitch.
The Judge and Governor are really aimed at the self defense market, at least in my mind. That's kind of silly given that that niche is totally dominated by semi- autos. A .410 slug weighs 1/3 to 1/2 of what a .44 or .45 slug weighs. Neither it or a buckshot load has the sectional density for deep penetration needed on a bear or hog. A .45 Colt would work, but I often wonder about the accuracy and velocity loss when that bullet makes the 1 1/2 inch jump down the cylinder before it reaches the barrel.
I like my Taurus a lot, but if there had been a Ruger GP 5 shot in .44 Mag..............

For many years, my nightstand gun has been a 3" Taurus 431 in .44 Special, full of Silvertips.

:mrgreen:

I think the 5 shot S&W 69 is a brilliant idea. Lighter than a S&W Mountain 44 but heavier than a 329 so recoil is not as fierce.
5 vs 6? When was the last time anyone needed 6 shots while hunting big game? I'll most likely buy a 69 at some point as I think it would be a better choice than my Lipsey Bisley with the 3.75 inch barrel.
Oh, and I also own a Govenor

Ale-8(1) said:

For many years, my nightstand gun has been a 3" Taurus 431 in .44 Special, full of Silvertips.

:mrgreen:

Click to expand...

I keep my in another secret place that is handy. They are nice guns. I only go to two forums. Both gun forums. I don't know anyone that doesn't want more power and a lighter gun to carry around. I don't care if Ruger brings the GP100 out in 44 Special. I think it will sell. The Charter Arms 44 doesn't sell??? Maybe not great but not because the idea of the gun is not a great one. Let Ruger or Smith bring that same gun out at a descent price point, (probably Ruger more then Smith) and watch it go out like hot cakes. If they could turn the GP into a 5 shot 44 Mag, buyers might not shoot a lot of 325 grain hard casts through is but they'd shoot it and they would carry it. (more than shoot it) Better to have it and not need it than... I don't understand how Taurus and Charter are more adventuresome than Smith and Ruger. Smith tends to be late to the party with what they bring out. Ruger invites people to some of their parties and have hit more than a few home runs in the last few years, but so has Taurus. S&W did it in an L frame which is what the GP is. No reason Ruger can't do it. I hope it's on the drawing board right now. What they do need to take into consideration is that a lot of us that would buy that kind of thing are getting older.

With everything going on right now with mooooslims being in the country and some are starting to behead folk I think they have a home run with their new AR. Timing really is everything.

Thanks for letting me know of this gun folks, I'm buyin one. I think it will hold up much better than the airweight 44 mags.

I'd love 44 special GP100!

Biggest concern would be that an awful lot of folks would immediately go for "Ruger only" loads trying to turn it into a .44 Magnum. You can bet Ruger is aware of this.

Ale-8(1) said:

My position here is that the .410/.45 thingies will max out their markets way before the small .44 magnums. Strictly my opinion.

Click to expand...

If you consider the use, then demographic, and application effectiveness, I think you'd change your opinion.

Or take the time to simply CALL Ruger, S&W, or Taurus (or ANY gun shop that handles a lot of snubby revolver volume) and ask about the volume sales of their 'powerhouse snubbies'. As a 'collector' of 44mag short barrels, I HAVE had these discussions, and the reality is that the Judge/Governor kills them for market volume.

Who's the demographic for a 410 revolver? Anyone that wants a 'nightstand gun,' especially those that recognize that they're inexperienced with handguns (which make up a majority of the current gun buying market). What's the benefit of a 410 revolver? Well it's pretty compelling that I can punch a fist sized hole in the back of a ham at point blank range with 6 shot, but not penetrate 2 layers of 5/8" drywall at 60ft - the distance between my old house and my neighbors house. It's pretty compelling that I can get a pattern just under the size of 'center mass' at 20ft, where lighter shot still has plenty of power to do what it needs to do (shooting expired ham's from the grocer is a blast, and you learn a lot). And the 410 really doesn't recoil so much that it's intolerable for the 'everyman' to shoot, and the high price of 410 shotshells tends to keep shooting volume down naturally. While it's obviously not a relevant CC piece, a 44mag really isn't a lot better. But for OC or home defense, I'd honestly say it's the best of both worlds in terms of the "handgun on the nightstand, shotgun under the bed" types. If you consider buckshot - my Judges both pattern fantastically with Federal #4 Buck - then your penetration risk increases, but the effective range does as well.

Who's the demographic for a 44mag snubby? Reality is - not many of us. While I'm on a short list for a 44mag 2.5" Redhawk, and own several "snubby" 44mags and Spcls (629 mountain gun, old 329 Night Guard, new 329PD Backpacker, Ruger Alaskan, Taurus 2" Raging Bull, Charter Bulldog 44spcl, & Taurus 445 44spcl - I won't get started on my 454/45c or my new 460 and 500 short barrels), it's no question that these are a horse of a different color, and while a lot of guys SAY they want one, reality is that not many guys ACTUALLY BUY THEM. They're fun to shoot ONCE, they're NOT fun to shoot 150rnds at a time on a Saturday afternoon. The Judge, on the other hand, is quite well behaved. What's the benefit of a 44mag snubby? Really not much. It's high recoiling and over penetrating, and doesn't offer the spread that a 410 shell does, so it really does require a skilled handgunner to manage effectively. Those of us that spend much time in bear country have realized that a 2-3" revolver really isn't the best medicine, in favor of 4-6" barrels for more effective sight acquisition and reduced muzzle flip. So what's the real benefit? My 44mag 2 & 2.5" revolvers are still pushing 300grn pills at 900-1000fps in mag cases, or 240grn pills at 750-800fps out of 44spcl cases, reality is that I could kill deer at 100yrds with that load, assuming I could get it there with a 4" sight radius. Kinda overkill for a defensive piece. And again, you're talking about a 3lb revolver that's about 6" in 2 dimensions, and about 2" thick... I can hide a pistol gripped Mossberg 500 under my coat, so claiming "a Ruger Alaskan fits under a winter jacket" is kind of a foolish argument"

There are a he11 of a lot more folks looking for a nightstand gun than for bear medicine anyway...

While I own them, it's not Ruger's style to produce 44spcl revolvers, and considering that Elmer's revolvers were all Special's until he came up with the idea to lengthen the case to keep folks from blowing their hands off, Ruger realizes that us handloaders will always try to push 44spcl up to 44mag levels, so they'll inevitably release it in 44mag. Frankly, of late it doesn't seem to be Ruger's style to produce 44mags in general.

Ale-8(1) said:

Anyone who likes a Governor or Judge should certainly buy one to support our firearms industries. My only recommendation would be to first examine the actual performance of the things and one's anticipated use for it.

Click to expand...

You should take your own advice here. Unless you've fired one yourself - which you admit you have not - how do you make assumptions about effective range and 'actual performance' of the Judge as a defensive revolver? As a defensive revolver, especially as a nightstand gun for a relatively new or non-expert handgunner, the Judge/Governor has a distinct advantage.