.44 mag

A

ammo.crafter

New member
I was thinking about using my .44 mag lever action for an upcoming wild boar hunt (I usually use a single shot .357 Maximum).

As regards handloading:
What is the difference between reloading recipes for a handgun and a rifle?
Is there a formula to convert handgun recipes to rifle recipes?
Anyone have a pet rifle load any where from 240gr to 300gr?

Thanks.
 
Just doing a fast review of data from Speer #14 manual, it looks like rifle and revolver data interchange.
I haven't loaded for a 44 mag for decades. But when I was down south, hunting for feral hogs, 240 grain bullets worked fine in our carbines. At that time, early 80s, the only heavier bullet option was either 250gr cast, or 265gr Hornady bullets.
 
The hodgdon reloading site shows 44 mag in pistol and rifle sections, doing a quick comparison, it looks like the rifle is about 300 or 400 fps faster. I have both and thats about what ive experienced.
 
As regards handloading:
What is the difference between reloading recipes for a handgun and a rifle?
Click to expand...

A handgun and a rifle firing the same ammunition?? Generally speaking no differences.

And don't assume that just because the data is in the rifle section it was developed for and in the rife to maximize the rifle's advantages.

I have loading manuals where the data (.357 & .44 Magnum) for rifles and pistols is EXACTLY the same. Pretty sure all they did was take the pistol loads, firing them in a rifle, record the velocity increase from the longer barrel, and print that in the rifle section of the manual.
Not saying everyone does this, but it seems to be the usual pattern.

Is there a formula to convert handgun recipes to rifle recipes?
Click to expand...
No, or rather, only in the most general terms, a rough XXfps per inch of barrel, and that varies widely with the powder used and other factors specific to the individual gun and ammo. You get more velocity from a longer barrel, but how much is not a straight constant that is accurately predictable due to may factors.


Anyone have a pet rifle load any where from 240gr to 300gr?
Click to expand...

I don't load heavier than 240/250gr in .44 Mag. That weight, with a properly constructed bullet will do anything that needs doing and some things that don't...:rolleyes:

I never fell into the popular hype that 300gr bullets were "needed", something that became popular a few years ago thanks to some gunwriters who thought it was a neat idea. Another factor might be that I simply cannot use, and do not wish to use them in some of my guns.

Lever guns are a bit picky about length, and especially the Marlins. Its entirely possible that 300gr bullets may be too long to cycle in your lever gun. Some loads are too long for S&W cylinders but work ok in guns with longer cylinders like the Ruger Redhawk.

Point here is you need to TEST before loading up a bunch to ensure proper fit and function. Load 2 rounds in the lever gun tube, (recommend dummies,) and cycle them through the action. If the rounds are too long, you'll know right away..:D

Saw a friend do this with a Marlin .357. He had some long 210gr RN slugs loaded in .357 brass and they were too long. Rifle locked up solid jam and required me taking it apart to get the ammo out.

Also, there may be accuracy issues. Different lever gun .44s just seem to prefer a certain weight range and shoot like crap when you go outside it. Again, something you need to test with your gun to see if it is like that.

Personally, I'd look at 240gr JSP slugs. Not hollowpoints. The extra speed from a rifle barrel may have an adverse effect on bullets intended to open up at pistol barrel speeds. I know this for a fact in .357, and I expect it would also apply to the .44Mag.
 
The recipes for standard length 44 Mag cartridges are the same. The higher velocity observed by Lugerstew in Hodgdon's data is due to the rifle test barrel length being twice as long. But for a 240-grain bullet, the load is the same. A moment's reflection will reveal the cartridge and chamber sizes are the same. The pressures are no different, and since peak pressure occurs within a couple of inches of bullet travel, for any barrel length beyond the chamber of over about 2", the burning behavior of powders will be such that any load that maximizes performance in the 2"+ revolver will also maximize performance in the carbine.

The only thing resembling an exception that I can think of is when you have a gun with a 1.75" chamber as Ruger Redhawk cylinders do. These chambers can accommodate a bullet seating out further, as one with a crimp groove located for 44 Special would do, and thereby allow you to use more powder to reach the same peak pressure, the extra gas from which will keep pressure from dropping quite as fast past the peak, providing greater post-peak acceleration to add to your velocity. But with a tubular magazine, you may not be able to feed those extra long rounds. You'd have to make and try a dummy to see.
 
For jacketed bullets, I would try Speer 270 grain and Hornady 265 grain bullets. For cast bullets, you may find that the groove diameter of your rifle barrel is probably larger than that used in revolvers; typically. 432" versus. 429", so the larger diameter bullets may be needed for decent accuracy. Slug your barrel to find out for sure. Why this was ever done is a mystery to me.
 
44 AMP covered what I was about to waste 15 minutes hunt-and-peck typing; so ignore my post, page-up and read his again.
 
I load for 44 Mag rifle - a 20" bbl Marlin.

I have experienced some struggle getting accuracy from it. But I have had the best luck with Hornaday's 240 grain XTP's. Sierra's 240's come in second. And Speer's 240's are flyers. I still have more testing to do with 240's; and never started my tests with 200's. (I am in loading moratorium right now due to moving - could be a while before I get back at it.)

And I have also had better luck using Alliant 2400 than Winchester 296. This surprises me, but it is what it is. For the 2400, I am within the Hornady manual's charge range. I'd give the charge weight, but it won't be of help to you. If you want to use Hornady's bullets, use their data and you'll find the correct charge weight for you and your rifle. For the W296, I'm over max - which is a load recipe that I have been using for decades (in revolvers) without trouble (and is under published max in older manuals).

I'm with 44AMP: You don't need a bullet heavier than 240 grains. Also, heavier bullets will start to gyrate sooner going downrange (gyroscopic procession due to their length, not their weight).
 
I guess I got lucky. When trying to find a good load for my new Henry 44 Big Boy, I tried several loads. Nothing shot great.
Then I tried the load I had worked up for my Redhawk, 240gr. Nosler HPs and 296 powder. Worked like a charm. If you already have a 44, try the load that works best in that one to start.
 
The Hornady Reloading Manual 8th edition has 44 Magnum data in the rifle section and also in the handgun section ... and Speer Manual #14 does also ... there seem to be some different powders used in the rifle ... but some overlap of powders too ... interesting comparisons if you care to look .
Gary
 
I asked Sierra how they choose which powders go into load development and testing for a particular cartridge and bullet weight combination. They told me the choice is based on a combination of popularity and availability. They admitted they often can't test a powder they want to include just because it isn't available at the time the tests are being run. So powders on the rifle list but not on the handgun list (and vice-versa) may just be a matter of the tests being done at different times and what was available at those times.
 
Something everyone should know, but some don't seem to realize is that no one's data can be complete and include every possible combination of components.

If you ask any of the major sources, 'why didn't you list powder X? (and its a suitable powder) the most common answer is usually "we didn't have any when we did the testing"...

You should also note that the loads tested are most "targeted" to what the majority of the shooting public expects the round to be.

For example, you don't usually find the "cat sneeze" light loads in a magnum cartridge data table. Doesn't mean it can't be done (and safely) just means that the testers didn't waste time and money on something they figured most people wouldn't be interested in. And that those people who are interested in some thing that isn't standard will find/make their own data somewhere else.
 
I don't have a 44 Carbine, but I've got a 45 Colt Henry X. I load Magnum Jacketed Bullets with slower powder than my Blackhawks. I just loaded some 300XTP and 300 Speer (for 454 Casull) to about 1300fps. I think it would be a mistake to have over book loads for the rifle. I'll take the 200-300fps gain and be very satisfied.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top