Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
November 7, 2015
Offline
Bert H. said
OK, I’ll bite on that question… Because you cannot shoot a 220-gr FMJ load @1900 fps out of that S&W without it blowing up in your hands! OTH, my Ruger Super Red Hawk .44 Mag loves it!! When I used to regularly compete in IHMSA matches, I would usually shoot 500-rounds per month of that load in that gun, and I shot it in competition for nearly 6-years before I stopped competition shooting. These days on the rare occasion that I shoot that gun, I run 180-gr Sierra JHP loads @1975 fps through it (I now have a Leupold M8-2X scope on it). It will cleanly take deer sized animals out to 100-yards.
Not a fan of anything in 43 caliber but the 44 Magnum has a well-deserved reputation for uncanny accuracy at high velocity as well as 44 Special velocities. For some reason the grand old 44WCF isn’t generally regarded as a cartridge known for accuracy.
Mike
If I recall, when Elmer Keith and S&W were initially developing the .44 magnum, they didn’t have rifles in mind. They were looking for a more powerful handgun round. However, it seems to me, a .44-40 in a revolver such as the Ruger Blackhawk, could be loaded to be a very fine performer.
steve004 said
If I recall, when Elmer Keith and S&W were initially developing the .44 magnum, they didn’t have rifles in mind. They were looking for a more powerful handgun round. However, it seems to me, a .44-40 in a revolver such as the Ruger Blackhawk, could be loaded to be a very fine performer.
No, you can be sure Elmer didn’t have rifles in mind. The inspiration of the .44 Mag had been very heavy .44 Spl loads he’d been shooting in his Triple-Lock. .44-40 was by this time regarded as an antique, a spent force; never chambered in any S&W heavy frame models.
November 7, 2015
Offline
steve004 said
If I recall, when Elmer Keith and S&W were initially developing the .44 magnum, they didn’t have rifles in mind. They were looking for a more powerful handgun round. However, it seems to me, a .44-40 in a revolver such as the Ruger Blackhawk, could be loaded to be a very fine performer.
I believe you’re right, Steve. The early 44 Mag revolver hit as hard as some rifles and often rivaled them in accuracy. Today’s version generally has quite a bit less velocity but is still quite accurate. Elmer was no stranger to the rifle but I don’t recall him being interested in the 44 Mag as a rifle/carbine round. Could be wrong, tho. I’ve only read a few of his books and caught just the last few years of his career as a gun magazine writer.
I’d be willing to bet that he probably could have given us some insight into the topic of this thread as he was quite good at judging distances and knew his rifles and cartridges very well.
Mike
steve004 said
If I recall, when Elmer Keith and S&W were initially developing the .44 magnum, they didn’t have rifles in mind. They were looking for a more powerful handgun round. However, it seems to me, a .44-40 in a revolver such as the Ruger Blackhawk, could be loaded to be a very fine performer.
Not really, the 44-40 is a rifle cartridge and can not be loaded for revolver use and perform flawlessly like the 44 Magnum. The 44-40 can be loaded for accuracy for sure, but not with the power and accuracy as the Mag. The 44 Special and Magnum are direct descendants of the 44 Russian…also a great accurate cartridge.
I have loaded the 44-40 hot in the larger frame Uberti 44 Magnum…did great at 100 yards but not like a Magnum. The heavier bullet is a must and that would mean changing the twist rate.
44-40 100 yards, 44 Magnum frame: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXBmLaFk4l8&t
TXGunNut said I’ve only read a few of his books and caught just the last few years of his career as a gun magazine writer.
In “Hell, I Was There,” he tells the .44 Mag story.
Caught a glimpse of him at a NRA convention (San Antone). Such a mob was crowded around him, all I could see was the top of his Stetson, so I moved along.
2 Guest(s)
