Nick,
I have to disagree with one thing you said unless you qualify it more specifically:
Simply taking a 44 Special load recipe and loading it into 44 Magnum brass will likely result in low pressure.
If you look at the SAAMI drawings, the two cartridges have essentially the same COL. 1.610" for .44 Magnum and 1.615" for .44 Special. They just move the crimp cannelures further forward in bullets intended for the magnum so the COL comes out about the same. This does not allow for a round nose profile (too long) in the .44 Magnum, but for the more destructive flat meplat bullets, it is just dandy. Indeed, you will find some jacketed and some cast designs with two crimp cannelures or two crimp grooves, respectively, so they can be loaded to SAAMI COL's correctly in either cartridge.
The reason the .44 Mag brass is longer is strictly to prevent the higher pressure commercial loads in those longer cases from chambering in a .44 Special revolver too light for them. You might well imagine, for example, that the Charter Bulldog would likely be permanently disassembled by .44 Mag pressures. (We should ask Clark; he's probably tried this.) It's steel is just too thin at the outside edges of the chambers, and its frame would be in danger of distortion even if, by some miracle, the chamber survived what is, in effect, 2.8 times its intended maximum pressure (this is going by the CIP measurement method, which is more trouble to use, but likely has better absolute accuracy than the SAAMI conformal transducer method in this cartridge).
So, the important qualification to making your statement about lower pressure accurate is that you use a .44 Special bullet crimp cannelure/groove with a .44 Mag case. Then the pressure will be lower. The finished cartridge will also exceed SAAMI maximum COL. If the bullet reaches 1.615" COL in the .44 Special case with that crimp cannelure/groove, it will reach 1.740" in the 0.125" longer magnum case using that same crimp location. This is the reason the Ruger Redhawk has a 1.75" long cylinder. It allows the extra long ammo made that way to be chambered without interference, where a S&W m.29/629 won't; the long rounds will protrude from the m. 29/629 cylinders and jam their rotation. Ruger made the long cylinder because the Redhawk is so beefy it has no problem with the higher pressure that extra powder space can be used to produce.
I like my Redhawk a lot for the above reasons and the fact it prints under 2" at 50 yards. But dag nab it, the m. 29 fits and feels better in my hand. Life is full of these tribulations.
A bit of history: Elmer Keith developed the .44 Magnum in .44 Special Cases in a big, beefy N-frame S&W .44 Special revolver. The gun and brass held up to it just fine. When the decision was made to produce what, in effect, is a .44 Special +P+ load, commercially, they went to the longer brass to prevent chambering in less beefy guns, as I described before. But there was no other reason. The .44 Special brass was up to the task just fine. So as long as your gun is up to it, loading .44 Special brass to any pressure level in between Special and Magnum is just fine. Ditto for .44 Mag brass. I prefer to do the latter as lead bullets in the shorter Special brass can allow a lead ring to form where the case mouths end in the chambers. That can prevent a magnum case from chambering before the lead is removed.