.44 Magnum vs .45 ACP

[Buzzcook]

Both rounds will leave large holes in whatever they hit. The main difference is shot placement.

Odd how that always seems to be the case.

 

[Lost Sheep]

Thanks for asking our advice

does the .44's 11% (ive heard) less "meplat" make a difference?

And thanks for asking the most important question, "Does it make a difference?"

I have never seen anyone asking the 44 vs 45 vs 40 vs 9mm question, ask that question in the beginning.

So, you deserve the definitive answer. Here it is: Sorry, it is a matter of opinion.

The only opinion that matters is the opinion of whoever catches the bullet. If it hurts enough to make whoever stop doing whatever, then it is enough.

The .45 ACP has a good track record. If you have a short-barreled 44 and no 45 available, that load you found seems to have essentially equivalent ballistics, except for being 11% smaller in frontal area; I am counting on no expansion of any consequence. I opine that the 44 may transfer impact less suddenly than the 45, but I am getting out of my depth to go further than that.

I would choose whichever gun I can shoot better under pressure, as shot placement will trump an 11% effectiveness difference by a LONG shot.

Lost Sheep

 

[Deaf Smith]

Well arentol, the guns may be 'tested' at 4 and five inch but lots of people pack 3 inchers. A 4 inch .44 magnum isn't really all that short and a 5 inch 1911 kind of drags when packing the 100 degree Texas weather.

And while they tested speer ammo there is lots of other ammo out there (DPX, while hugely expensive, is awful good.)

But I would not worried to much if all I had was my S&W 3 inch Lew Horten 24, .44 Spl. with DPX (or a S&W Backpacker .44 magnum loaded the same way.)

Deaf