Why is .44 Special so good?

[Sonnytoo]

It was the first handgun I owned. It can be used on anything from snakes and rabbits or squirrels to deer and black bear. Brian Pearce even has a 307-grain cast SWC loaded @ 1055 fps, assuming you have a proper gun to handle it. These loadings are from HANDLOADER magazine. It can be purchased in N-frame, L-frame and even smaller revolvers, in addition to Ruger flattops, Lipsey's models and even some Bisley models now on the market from Ruger. Something for everyone.
Sonnytoo

 

[estacado]

Like the mystique of the 44Spcl, have had a Smith 24 and 624 for 20 years. I now have a M21 and 3 Lipsey Blackhawks to boot. The last 3, two with a 6 month wait, and the last one just showed up in the gun case, were something I lusted after for years. I was going to convert a 50th Anniversary 357 to 44 Spcl and now I have 3 for the price of one. The 3rd, a 5 1/2" model, was traded for. Had spent the money long ago, so no depleting of the "butter and egg money." Life is good with the 44 in hand. Like one once said, "if you have to ask."

 

[Bucks Owin]

E-L-M-E-R K-E-I-T-H nostalgia.....IMO, that's the reason for the lukewarm popularity of this cartridge. Another is that it's a "big bore" that recoil sensitive shooters can shoot well. As factory loaded, it's a "weak sister", even when compared SAAMI loaded .45 Colt. It has a reputation for fine accuracy, though I find it no more accurate than the .44 mag, but has less range. It will never equal the .45 Colt ballistically and personally, I would rather have a .44/40 to play with. But then, I'm not as enamored with E.K. as 99% of the .44 Spl fans....Rather than the perfect all around bigbore, I say it can't do anything that the .44 mag or .45 Colt can't do better except kick less. And that's a very valid reason to choose a .44 Spl. No one can shoot accurately with a cartridge that intimidates them! But at my bench, the .44 Spl is was played with, found to be a "ho hum" cartridge and is now "obsolete".... :shock: But for those that love the .44 Spl, power to them! Anything that burns powder gets my approval FWIW... :wink:

 

[Rclark]

It is a handloader's dream, it covers the whole spectrum from mild to wild. It's all most shooters and outdoorsmen need. Perfect.

Say, that's exactly how I feel about the .45 Colt ! Like one once said, "If you have to ask." ..... We each have our 'preference', nostalgia, and historical perspective to come up with the perfect pack'n revolver that fits each of us.... The .44Spec is special, the .38spec, the .45 Colt, the .45ACP, etc..... All special in their own right.

 

[CraigC]

E-L-M-E-R K-E-I-T-H nostalgia.....IMO, that's the reason for the lukewarm popularity of this cartridge.

Blah, blah, blah. In properly sized sixguns like the Colt SAA and mid-frame Rugers it has it all over the .45Colt. Regardless of what .45Colt true-believers like you think, it is a better cartridge for the platform. It is more efficient, gains more velocity with a better safety margin and uses less powder to do it. Unless you're running a large frame Ruger or better (or using blackpowder), the .45Colt is a lot of wasted case capacity.

Funny thing is, I was a fan of the .44Spl and had a custom mid-frame Ruger built in the cartridge years before I read any Elmer Keith.

...found to be a "ho hum" cartridge and is now "obsolete"....

Obsolete??? Maybe you need to crawl out from under that rock Dennis. Hell froze over, the .44Spl is now chambered by Ruger in at least five different configurations and is more popular than ever. It's finally getting its due.

But for those that love the .44 Spl, power to them! Anything that burns powder gets my approval FWIW...

Sorry bro, you can't spend several paragraphs bashing a cartridge and its proponents and then make everything okay with that statement. We know how you really feel.

 

[gak]

E-L-M-E-R K-E-I-T-H nostalgia.....IMO, that's the reason for the lukewarm popularity of this cartridge. Another is that it's a "big bore" that recoil sensitive shooters can shoot well. As factory loaded, it's a "weak sister", even when compared SAAMI loaded .45 Colt. It has a reputation for fine accuracy, though I find it no more accurate than the .44 mag, but has less range. It will never equal the .45 Colt ballistically and personally, I would rather have a .44/40 to play with. But then, I'm not as enamored with E.K. as 99% of the .44 Spl fans....Rather than the perfect all around bigbore, I say it can't do anything that the .44 mag or .45 Colt can't do better except kick less. And that's a very valid reason to choose a .44 Spl. No one can shoot accurately with a cartridge that intimidates them! But at my bench, the .44 Spl is was played with, found to be a "ho hum" cartridge and is now "obsolete".... :shock: But for those that love the .44 Spl, power to them! Anything that burns powder gets my approval FWIW... :wink:

--------
Lemme see, apparently you missed the significant part about being able to be chambered in smaller (i.e., handier in the hand and easier to tote) guns--than the .44 Mag--while at the same time having more "margin" for error/warming up vs the .45 in same smaller-framed guns. Those factors plus there are some factory loads out there that are at least "satisfactory" and "new loads" from the likes of Georgia Arms are about as nice as they get. Anything more needed, yes, the .44 Mag, and I have that for those few times I need more. Never a cartridge more perfectly matched to a gun than the .44 and Colt SAA/clones and Ruger mid-frame FT and (hopefully/prospectively) New Vaquero. I ditto CraigC's and others' comments about "perfect."
Keith not an overriding factor. I also didn't read him til years later. Just sorta re-verified what I'd figured out long ago.

 

[maxpress]

barrys engine analogy is really good.

.357 has left a special tone in my ears that will last a lifetime. that being said i can have a round that fits in a .357 package that will poop bullets at down to 700 fps or fling em up to 1200 which should take care of any need i have round here.

 

[Lee Martin]

I wouldn't say it's perfect. Truthfully, it works like any other straight walled revolver round. With well constructed loads in the right gun it's plenty powerful and very accurate. But so is the 41 Magnum, the 45 Colt, the 44-40, the 38-40, etc.

The 44 Special has a big following because it was well promoted by Keith, Skelton, and countless others (and deservedly so). Couple that with it being chambered in great revolvers like the S&W triple-lock and Keith's #5 and its mystique only grows.

I like the 44 Special. Just not sure I buy into it being some magical cartridge.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

E-L-M-E-R K-E-I-T-H nostalgia

Baloney!! Some of us like the 44 Special because we have old guns that were built before the 44 Mag was invented. By the way, Dave nice Triple Lock. I am really jealous.

I have 4 S&W 44 Specials. A 44 Hand Ejector 2nd Model, 2 44 Hand Ejector 3rd Models, and a 624. The 624 is the only one made in the modern era. I am still looking for a Triple Lock that I can afford.

Here is my 44 Hand Ejector 2nd Model, probably made around 1915 or so. Yes, it has a prominent line around the cylinder, doesn't bother me a bit. When you find one of these puppies, you grab it and don't quibble about minor things.

Here is one of my 44 Hand Ejector 3rd Models. Also sometimes known as the Model 1926. This one was made in 1927. The nickel plate job is not factory, S&W never nickel plated hammers or triggers. Neither are the stag grips factory, but they are what came on it and I really like them. This is my Saturday Night Pool Hall gun.

Those guns are what the 44 Special cartridge was meant for.

The 44 Special cartridge has been around since 1907 or 1908. It was introduced by S&W for the then brand new New Century Model (Triple Lock). The 44 Special was really nothing more than the old 44 Russian cartridge lengthened a bit, just like the 44 Mag is a stretch version of the 44 Sp. In fact, the original ballistics of the 44 Sp were identical to the 44 Russian, which was still being produced at the time. The 44 Russian was one of the preferred target revolver rounds in the late 1800s, particularly with shooters of break top Smith & Wesson revolvers.

 

[Barry in IN]

Barry,

That's an excellent analogy and the perfect explanation. Mind if I borrow that one for future reference?

Sure. Feel free.

 

[gak]

...And the SAA platform is what the .44 Special was "meant" for as well, they just didn't know it at the time! --and by its time of introduction (essentially lengthening the Russian) the .45 was too well established and may have worked better as a BP round anyway. Advance to the post 1900 age of smokeless and its a different story--or can be.


To the gent's comments about the .38-40 and .44-40, great rounds, comparatively, but there are sizing and lubing issues over and above both the .45 and .44--and in the day the "-40s" ran together with the Special (1910s through 1930s) before reloading issues or rather, comparatively, complexities, were as apparent, the Special had a stronger case as well...but, again, too late for the "case" to be made for the Special and darn few .44s were made.


Regarding the same gent's mention of .41 Magnum, a great round as well and the only argument thrown in here that's a solid one (it being straight-walled as well and nicely sized, caliber-wise, for mid-frame guns--but guns, bullets (and complete factory ammo) are arguably harder to come by than the .44.


I think the point, again, about "perfect" was made relative to platforms out there that work particularly well for it, obviously..and for those--the DAs folks have mentioned as well as SAA types--the Special is that, perfect.

 

[Barry in IN]

I think the Elmer Keith connection is baloney also.
(Only because for me, the .44 Spl influence was Skeeter Skelton!)

I've been thinking on this .44 Special subject for a couple of days, mostly from this thread and from having just bought another last week.
I like the 44 Spl because it's therapeutic.
It's fun.

Most of my shooting nowadays is in the form of defensive practice. As a stay-home dad with an often disabling injury, I feel I owe it to my kids to do all I can to defend them so I don't usually use practice sessions on anything but work with my carry guns.
If I take the time to shoot something else, it needs to be worthwhile otherwise I'm using time better spent with my carry guns.
It needs to provide easy fun.

Shooting a .22 is OK, and great to break bad habits that pop up, but often lacks some in the satisfaction department. I want to feel some more bark.
The .38 Special is getting close. One of the most fun shooters I've ever had was a 3" J-frame. But it still falls a little short on bark and punch.
Shooting a .357 gives the punch and bark. Too much bark. It makes the dirt fly, but is not very fun or relaxing.
The .45 Colt is nice, but my only .45 Colt is an N-frame and while I love looking at them, I never could handle them well due to their size. I've also had to fiddle around more than I'd like (or expected) to get some good shooting handloads in it.

The .44 Special is fun. It makes the dirt fly and pokes big holes in paper. It goes boom instead of pop or CRACK! It can go in some slightly smaller guns than the 45 Colt- guns I don't mind carrying out into the woods for an hour's worth of play shooting. Preparation is easy because anything I've used for powder or projectiles has shot at least "OK" and usually "pretty good" or better.

In short- It's fun. It's the most fun handgun cartridge I can think of.
And it takes little effort to make that fun.

 

[dougader]

My problem is like all the great calibers, but I don't have the resources to get in deep with every one that comes along.

I picked up first on the 45 Colt, simply because when I compared it to a 44 magnum I liked my options better... then I handled a Lispeys 44 special... and a friend's Uberti/EMF Colt clone in 44 Special. I'm real partial to the 4-5/8" barrel length, and I'll tell you, if that Uberti had a shorter barrel it would already be mine.

When I picked up my Lipseys, I didn't have ammo or reloading dies for it. I only bought it for an investment. Then when Ruger's 2010 catalog listed the 44 Sp BH I sold it for a quick profit, only to find that I really miss the little sucker.

I'd like to get going on the 41 Special, too, but I just have to limit the number of calibers I'm set up for. So I now have 44 Special dies ordered and already have bullets and powder ready... and do plan to grab another one or two 44 Special revovlers to go along with that as time goes on.

I have to say, I am a big fan of the old 45 Colt, but I like the 44 Special just as well. I find my favorite 45 Colt now days is the Montado, which is built on the medium frame... and I like those low pressure loads best, too. Its just plain fun to shoot. I mean, there's not too much in Oregon I can't handle with either a 44 Special or a 45 Colt.... both loaded to their original presure levels.

I really don't find one cartridge any more "special" than another. My problem is, I like them all!

 

[Bucks Owin]

I wouldn't say it's perfect. Truthfully, it works like any other straight walled revolver round. With well constructed loads in the right gun it's plenty powerful and very accurate. But so is the 41 Magnum, the 45 Colt, the 44-40, the 38-40, etc.

The 44 Special has a big following because it was well promoted by Keith, Skelton, and countless others (and deservedly so). Couple that with it being chambered in great revolvers like the S&W triple-lock and Keith's #5 and its mystique only grows.

I like the 44 Special. Just not sure I buy into it being some magical cartridge.

My sentiments exactly amigo. Why it's a "reloader's dream" in comparison to any other straight walled case is beyond me. It's reputation for fine accuracy is due to some fine revolvers chambered for it, past and present. It doesn't seem as prone to the "whims" of manufacturing tolerances as the .45 Colt or .44/40. When I said "obsolete" I used too strong a word, but I really DO feel that once the interest in the new FT wanes, the resurge in interest in the .44 Spl will too, except for those who can't progress past EK's era. That's not a slam BTW, I'm still "hung up" on the old .270 and Jack O'Connor's proven success with it. (Along with myself and my dad's) Ballistically, the .44Spl is about par with the .44/40 but easier to reload for less experienced handloaders. In a converted OM I'd put it about equal to SAAMI pressure .45 Colt (255 gr @ 1,000+ fps) but in comparison with what the .45 LC can do in a Ruger, it's left in the ballistic dust of course. CraigC seems infatuated with the round, and we've done this dance before, but in reality there's not all that much "special" about the .44 Spl. other than it's low recoil and "handiness". (Although I don't mind carrying the couple extra ounces of steel needed to contain the .45 BH with it's ability to digest "Linebaugh loads" when needed) The "short" 44's easy to shoot well, chambered in good guns and IMO, that's it's only strong point. I'd rather tinker with a .44/40 but then I like challenges at the bench...Bottom line, a good old round, and if loaded sensibly in a smaller frame, plenty stout for deer at shorter ranges, but NOT in the same class as the .41, ."43" and .45 cal "hot rods"... JMO of course... :wink: (Oh, BTW, I don't hate the .44 Spl as "some" may think, I'd love to have a .44 FT in the future. I just don't drink the ".44 Special Kool Aid" and feel the .45 LC is "more for the money" if I had to choose :wink: )

 

[gak]

Bucks Owin, I thinks that's the very point--really decent round in handy-sized guns that seem to be "perfectly" matched . What did I miss? I don't mind carrying around a few extra ounces either--when needed--but then it's my .44 Mag Ruger, conveniently using the same bullets. Out of a FT, SAA (or, conceivably, New Vaquero) it's .44 Special all the way, and those are, yes, handier to cart around and more fun to shoot IMO.

 

[maxpress]

it helps when you buy 1000 .429 bullet lots and have 2 different cases and power levels to load them into. besides having 2" 5 shots up to SRH's

 

[M'BOGO]

To answer your question, my two cents. In the FT Ruger platform, the holes in the cylinder and barrel make for a very well balanced sidearm, but give a larger safety margin than the .45 Colt, which has thinner cylinder walls. The 4 3/4 SAA is well regarded as the best balanced, most natural pointing sidearm. The two 1/100's in bore diamater hardly change any of that.

I too agree with the small block, verses big block engine analogy, but take it one step further. The big block Chevy, verses the Pontiac Ram Air IV, is a good way to look at it. The .44 mag is the Chevy, the .44 Spc is the Pontiac. The Chevy makes the hp by revving, the Pontiac is a low rpm torqe monster. You can make the .45 Colt into a torque monster with heavier bullets, but not faster in the midframe rugers, unless you use five shot custom cylinders. With the extra steel in the .44 spc, you can get the little extra.

By all means, try it, you'll like it.

and yes, I like Elmer Keith, not jak watziznutz

 

[Nicksterdemus]

It's a good sized cartridge and I have no need for a magnum.

I picked up my Bisley 5 5/8" and truly I'm in love.

I wish the grip frame was narrowed the width of the wood stocks.

I don't need the wide cross section, but the hammer is great coz I can operate it w/o flexing/reorienting my grip.

I couldn't do that w/std Lipsey's 44 spl or a NV 45.

It's a cryin' shame that the Bisley conversion is 200 clams from Brownell, + shipping.

I know the gunsmith price is cheaper, but still.

I guess the SS NV is going to need a Bisley conversion as well or at least the trigger and hammer.

I'd like to see the 44 spl in a DA along the same mid-size frame lines.

 

[snakeeyes4445]

I'd have to say it would be the Elmer reason for me. Guns and Ammo, with his writings, were on the magazine rack in our high school in SW Wisconsin in 1961. Talk about the good old days. He sold me on number three shot for long range water fowling, custom big bore rifles, the .44 Spl, and his famous #5 grip.
Besides, the cartridge is lucky for me. My dad saw me take the top of the skull from a barn sparrow at 60 yds. My five inch 2nd Model HE with 6.0 gr of Unique was a good gun and load combination. I put five shots in one small round hole, standing with a two hand Weaver stance, in front of my uniformed policeman friend when practicing at an indoor range.
Elmer also taught me about. shooting long range at impossible targets........luck of course, but that cartridge was all I had then and I have never lost confidence in it.
For a short period of time I lost interest in the cartridge. It was right at the time S and W was producing the three inch L frame 696. I didn't buy one that sat under the counter for four months. The price was 400. Yikes, hate to think about that one.

 

[ProfessorWes]

If I wanted to follow in Elmer Keith's footsteps, I'd buy a .44 Magnum. I just don't really have a personal need for something that powerful. Where I live, .357 Mag, .44 Special or standard .45 Colt will do anything I need a handgun to do and then some...and the .44 Special does practically everything the .357 does with less recoil - it certainly has less "snap" than full-power .357s - and, for me, more accuracy.

Mind you, I didn't really understand the appeal of the .44 Special until I picked up one of the Lipsey's flattop .44s to go along with the similarly-sized .357 Anniversary Flattop I already have. The Lipsey's .44 was pretty much an impulse buy for me.

Then I fired them side-by-side and discovered that 200-grain Gold Dot .44 Specials out of the Lipsey's Flattop felt like .38 +Ps out of the Anniversary .357. And made gratifyingly larger holes in the target.