WHAT IS THE FASCINATION WITH THE 44 SPECIAL?

[Dave T]

...the Colt SAA, the Randall knife, the Black Widow bow, the Parker SXS, the .44 Special...

Man oh man, Rich. That is some good stuff. Had all of them but the Parker and admired quite a few of those from a distance. Thanks for the mental Christmas Card! (smiley face goes here)

Dave

 

[Rclark]

I also have a NV in .45 4 5/8 barrel with an actual weight of 39 ozs. For carrying there is a significant difference between 39 and 43.5 ozs. And the NV feels just great. It is my favorite handgun even though I struggle with the sights.

Well, my NM .45 5 1/2" Blackhawk weighs in at 37 1/4oz. Loaded with 5 rounds it comes out at 40 5/8oz. There might be your answer to weight and sights . Plus you can shoot some 'heavies' in it too if desired.

 

[Muley Gil]

"If, like Smith, you put the .44 Special on a Magnum frame, you gain nothing as far as size and portability goes."

If you compare a S&W 4" M24-3 .44 Special to a 4" M29, you find that the M24-3 has a tapered barrel and a shorter cylinder vs the bull barrel and longer cylinder of the M29. These factors add up to a considerable weight saving for the .44 Special. The balance is also different.

 

[Hondo44]

Much of what I like about the 44 has been said with only the following to add:

If one wants the true original appeal and potential weight saving of a 44 Spl med frame gun, like the Skeeter early 357 flat top custom conversions to 44 Spl, do as I have:
Take a new lipsey's 44 FT and replace the ejector housing and grip frame with earlier Ruger alloy parts and replace the grips with walnut. Now it's under 39 oz and you have the original package and the appeal that goes with it.

And you can also make yourself an even lighter 44 Spl, in a New Vaquero package by swapping a Lipsey's 44 barrel and cylinder into the NV with alloy parts. That swap also netted me a cool 45 Colt Med frame FT to match my 44 FT. Switching barrel front sights was the only detail work for this swap.

An advantage to the 44 Spl chambering in Colt Single Actions was the extra chamber wall thickness which allowed stiffer 44 loads for specific tasks.

And last but not least regarding availble 44 loads; a major appeal of this caliber is the cornacopia of handloading potential for those of us that love to reload.

 

[CraigC]

Love BOTH of those sixguns....thanks for sharing. I think lanyard loops are COOL!

Thanks, me too!

Craig: Who did the work on your 44 mag Bisley conversion? Very nice.

Thanks, David Clements did most of the work. Grips are American holly by CLC.

If you compare a S&W 4" M24-3 .44 Special to a 4" M29, you find that the M24-3 has a tapered barrel and a shorter cylinder vs the bull barrel and longer cylinder of the M29. These factors add up to a considerable weight saving for the .44 Special. The balance is also different.

I agree. There is a substantial difference between a 6" model 29 and a 6½" model 24. Not to mention the better sights on the .44Spl model 24. The .44Spl holds enough appeal for me to fully justify recently paying $850 for a 6½" model 24, even though I already had a 6" model 29 that is a fine shooter. If I were pressed to choose one over the other, it would be the Special.

 

[Hondo44]

I did the same thing; bought 2 1955 Pre-model 24s (each one more than $850 though) and gave my 29 to my son. 24s are just classics and nothing feels better to me. What vintage is your 24?

 

[Dave T]

I wasn't going to mention this one, this being the RugerForum, but since a few others have brought up S&W here's a 44 Special I really like:

It's a 4th Model 44 Hand Ejector from 1947. It left the factory with a 6-1/2" bbl but a previous owner chopped that down to a poorly executed 3-1/4" and welded a washer on for a front sight. Yea, it was a sacrilege. A gunsmith friend got it from the owner's widow and at my suggestion installed a 4" barrel from a 24-3. He then tuned it up, bead-blasted and blued it and sold it to me. It's my favorite 44 Special...and they are "special". (smile)

Dave

 

[Hondo44]

That's one sweet 44. Is that the original 1947 vintage hammer?
Thx,

 

[CraigC]

What vintage is your 24?

It's a 24-3 from the `80's. Looks to be unfired but that will change very soon. Also need to order some Herrett's Ropers for it but the Ahrends Retro Targets from my 29 will do for now.

 

[JesterGrin_1]

I think that someone has mentioned that the BIG IRONS is more of a passing fad. I do not think there sales will remain good enough to keep up production. As I feel shooters have found that there really is no reason to have those huge guns.

But alas I do not own anything in .44 SP except for a Charter Arms Bulldog. Everything else in .44 is a Mag. As I feel the .44 Mag is as big as a person really needs in a hand gun. If you need bigger bring a rifle .

But I am also waiting for the new Ruger in Stainless in .44 Sp as I also feel it would be a good field gun for carry. As even in my .44 Mag that I may use in the field just for carry I have downloads for it if I do not plan to hunt with it. Thus why carry that when I can make up .44Sp rounds for less which means more enjoyment per shot lol.

 

[Dave T]

Is that the original 1947 vintage hammer?

I don't think so Jim. In addition to chopping the barrel the hammer had been partially bobbed. As I said earlier, what was done to that fine, original revolver was a real sacrilege.

Dave

 

[Bucks Owin]

Ounces and fractions of inches (in OAL and cylinder/frame girth) to guns are kind of like wheelbase inches in cars, every additional (or fewer) counts more than you think--in weight, portability and handling, especially when carrying around on the hip for a few to several hours. The three ounces initially noted by the OP as well as more modest overall dimensions of the mid-frame, to me, make enough of a difference to make the case.

Well, let's see. A Uberti "1873 Gunfighter" 5.5" .45 Colt weighs 2.3 lbs according to their ad. My math ain't what it used to be but that's well under 40 oz, the frame is "small" and while not built like a Blackhawk, they don't cost like a USFA or custom built 3 screw and I expect one could safely coax 1,000+ fps from a 454190. There ARE "handy packing" .45 Colts out there. I still claim it's the "spirit of Elmer" at work with all the "reasoning" of having a "light, easy packing" .44 Spl. (Maybe it's a beltload of .45 Colt cartridges that is "too heavy"? :lol: ).....Cold and clinical, Dennis 8)

 

[M'BOGO]

There is definatly some Number 5itis in and out there.

 

[dougader]

My Ruger Blackhawk in 45 Colt has the aluminum gripframe and erh and weighs 36 ounces empty. That's pretty light IMO, especially if you want to push 260 grain Keith SWC's much over 1,000 fps.

But I agree the medium frame is nicer to handle. I'd like to see about swapping for the aluminum frame, etc, on a 3-3/4" Montado in 45 Colt. That's built on the medium frame just like the standard New Vaquero.

 

[Hondo44]

Dave,
Well I think you did a very fine job of ressurecting a classic workhorse of bygone years. Some of my acquired old, abused guns but brought back to life are my favorite guns. They come cheap and with a little work make wondeful shooters that can only appreciate in value and can be used a lot without worry of depreciating them. They're comfortable, practical and great fun guns. More fun then my almost safe queens.

Do you still have the original barrel and if so want to part with it? Hardly anything is unsaveable with enough time and effort and I have more of that than anything else.

 

[BearStopper]

Considering a 30-30 rifle outpowers a 44 magnum then it puts a different perspective on what is considered necessary for a big game round.

Energy figures never tell the whole story.

When it comes to hunting small and medium game at close range it will get the job done with proper placement but a serious big game hunter would be better served by a .41 magnum and up.

Magnums add velocity and velocity only serves to flatten trajectory. A properly loaded .44Spl will take anything in North America short of the big bears. The 250gr Keith bullet over Skeeter's load of 7.5gr Unique will fully penetrate any deer from near about any angle.

I dont disagree that a .44 special is capable of taking a deer or even larger game but it is a fact that the .41 and .44 magnums will do more damage and better suited for larger game especially when we consider that full house 44 special loads aren't recommended in the new Ruger. Since similiar bullets can be loaded in all three then energy is a deciding factor. Yes my comparison of a 30-30 and a .44 may not be a completely fair comparison ut it plays a part. Shot distance and shot placement are the most important factors with any of the aforementioned calibers and the .44 special while capable isn't any better. Also consider that Skeeter didn't use his .44 specials to take larger game so his idea of a more compact lighter .44 is nullified when you use .44 magnum class loads in it due to the larger heavier revolver that is needed to do so. Increased velocity adds increased energy and increased penetration with any given load.

 

[Hondo44]

This discussion is all very interesting, informative and even friendly and civil. However I'm afraid it has evolved somewhat from the original post of the 44 Spl appeal or maybe only to the very edge of it. And therefore is being missed by many connoisseurs of this excellent forum. I'm enjoying it and suggest in the most humble way that perhaps a new post may be in order. If not please carry on.

 

[Dave T]

Do you still have the original barrel and if so want to part with it?

I didn't do the work and the guy who did kept the barrel and what ever other parts that he replaced. I bought the completed re-build from him.

Dave

 

[CraigC]

... especially when we consider that full house 44 special loads aren't recommended in the new Ruger.

Where did you get that idea? The new Ruger .44Spl is possibly one of the strongest guns ever chambered in the cartridge and fully capable of digesting the old 1200fps Keith load. If you think you can kill a whitetail any deader with a Magnum, I'll invite you to prove it.

Since similiar bullets can be loaded in all three then energy is a deciding factor. Yes my comparison of a 30-30 and a .44 may not be a completely fair comparison ut it plays a part.

No, energy is meaningless and we would all be better off if they stopped printing and pushing that garbage. Energy is highly dependent upon velocity and velocity is the most rapidly diminishing factor. Bullet weight and momentum is what penetrates. Penetration is what makes holes, large caliber is what makes large holes and energy is just a number in a magazine. Big bore sixguns kill all out of proportion to their paper ballistics and yes, the .44Mag is a better killer on larger game than the .30-30 (within its range). If you can push a 340gr .44 to 1400fps out of a levergun, you can take any game on earth. No one would make that recommendation with the .30-30. The .223 produces more energy than the .44Mag, would you use it on moose???

...the .44 special while capable isn't any better.

Nobody said it was better.

Also consider that Skeeter didn't use his .44 specials to take larger game so his idea of a more compact lighter .44 is nullified when you use .44 magnum class loads in it due to the larger heavier revolver that is needed to do so.

You really need to so some reading on this subject. The whole point of the mid-frame .44Spl is to have plenty of cartridge to do just about anything that needs doing in a lighter, more portable package than large frame .44Magnums. No, you don't want to run them at 1200fps all the time but the guns are capable.

Increased velocity adds increased energy and increased penetration with any given load.

Wrong again. Forget energy. With cast bullets, extensive penetration testing has proven that anything much over 1200fps is just flattening trajectory. Too much velocity can actually be a detrement to penetration.

 

[Bucks Owin]

"With cast bullets, extensive penetration testing has proven that anything much over 1200 fps is just flattening trajectory. Too much velocity can actually be a detrement to penetration." Maybe if the cast bullet is soft (or brittle) enough. But given an alloy equal to the task, that would mean for instance that a 300 gr bullet fired from a .45 Colt @ 1200 fps and the same bullet fired from a .45/70 @ 1800 fps show no difference in penetration? Something wrong with this logic IMO......Dennis :?