is the .44 still Special?

J

JERRYS.

New member
I say yes, most definitely.

in light of the latest guns coming out in .44 caliber, the most common recommendation is a good Special round, even in Magnum guns.

now, I say this because the latest offering seems to be aimed at the (relative) light weight and compact revolvers, such as the S&W 69 and the GP100. toss in the only other production [D/A] 44 special, the Charter Arms Bulldog and you see why the .44 Special round has gained some popularity.

I do not mean cowboy action shooting or hand loaders trying to find that just right load, I mean factory ammo that in the past was quite absent but now is abound.

I've always been a bit of a traditionalist and I like SWC LHP for revolvers such as the old 158gr. "fbi" load in .38 special. now I see, in addition to the old Federal 200 gr. SWC LHP, there are offerings from Buffalo Bore and Underwood that really make this caliber worthy of a second look for self defense.

I purposely left out hand loading because of civil litigation and or criminal issues issues that some states might or will levy even against a clear case of self defense.
 
I have never shot a reall 44 Special but have loaded many 44 Special loads in 44 mag brass. I like shooting that power level and fully understand why so many like it. If I were in the market for yet another gun I would have one of the new Ruger GP-100s as quick as possible. The dies I load with are Lee 44 Special dies because I had hoped to find a 44 Special way before now. I wanted one of the Clint Smith Thunder Ranch model 24s but it just never happened.

Glad to hear factory ammo is more common. It wasn't for a long time.
 
I think ammo choices are still holding it back. Is there a factory range load that isn't really expensive compared to even 38spl? If there was, I'd be more apt to consider one, but not being a reloader, I just don't see it.
 
I like mine (M24 S&W 6-1/2") and my wife likes hers (M21 S&W 4")
We use a 265 grain Keith SWC and 8 gr of Unique most of the time. It is a load that covers almost every task we'd want to use a handgun for out here where we live. It is SUPER accurate in our guns too.
 
The nicest 44 Special will have left-hand rifling and cost more than I can afford. But a Blackhawk is nice enough at a third of the price of the Colt.
 
I find it to be very, VERY special....

262378060.jpg



Had that one for going on 20 years now, an S&W 24-3. Previous owner had it set up to do Bullseye. The single action trigger is just magical.
 
Pathfinder45, I'm talking about the caliber/round .44 Special, not the guns, though the latest guns seem to give the caliber a small revival of sorts.
 
All of my 44 Special revolvers are older models but I like them fine.

This one shipped in 1955 and can still get it done.

standard.jpg
 
Last edited:
I was bitten quite hard by the .44 Spl bug. At one time I owned 6 of them, mostly N framed S&Ws but a Taurus 445 and a Charter Arms Bulldog.

Only ones I have anymore are a 4" 24-3, a 624 4" and 6.5". Haven't shot them in a few years now as I started shooting rifles again. I seem to go back and forth between rifle and pistol which might be weird but that's me.

In those N frames I like a Keith style 250 gr LSWC at 950 fps or the same bullet for a max of 1100 fps.

Good to hear there are some more choices in factory ammo though, that was why I sold off the Taurus. I only used factory ammo in it and wasn't thrilled with selection or price.
 
As a Single Action guy, I never thought much about the cartridge. I always loaded .44 Mag down to .44 Special velocities. Then Ruger introduced the medium frame .44 Special Flattop and I picked up a couple. Quoting Taffin "Victory at last" :) . Never looked back. Grand o' cartridge. Shoot the Skeeter load to good affect. Now I rarely shoot any .44 magnum downrange. A Bulldog or Sheriff for concealed. Just picked up a Talo .44 Special GP-100.... Yep, the .44 Special is still special. Not as special as the .45 Colt, but still right up there.
 
Probably should add that like rclark I like the Spl so much most of my mag loads are the same velocity as the Spl. Kind of got that way from a friend that shoots mostly .45 acp, he always said the .357 and .44 mags are loud, obnoxious cartridges. He's right and my hearing shows it after many years.
 
I consider the 44 Special, when handloaded, an excellent round. There is no doubt in my mind that S&W wanted to sell a round and pistol ballistically equivalent to the 45 Long Colt, but, not have a S&W pistol chambered in 45 Long Colt. While there are differences in factory velocities, when handloaded, there is very little difference between a .429 240 Lead bullet traveling at 850 to 900 fps, and a .454 255 Lead bullet traveling at 850 to 900 fps. Both rounds are an outstanding combination of power, accuracy, without having excessive recoil or blast.

Skeeter Skelton's writings sold me into the "romance" of the 44 Special. I am glad I took advantage of the price dip when the Model 24's and M624's were reintroduced in the 1980's. The local gun store was clearing them out for $250.00 because they were not selling. The Gunstore owner said it was the worst business decision he had made. Except for a few, the vast majority of buyers wanted the 44 Magnum, because it could fire 44 Specials and 44 Magnums, and could not see a reason to own a pistol that only fired 44 Specials.

Those who thought this way were wrong, in my opinion. For the vast majority of shooting, I don't want the weight, recoil, muzzle blast, of a 44 Magnum, and I don't need the power that comes with that round. The 44 Special should make an outstanding anti personnel round, with its big bullet and low recoil. Just like the 45 Long Colt.

I am glad to see more 44 Specials on the market, maybe I will finally find some empties in the trash, or on the ground, at the shooting range.


zsol9tc.jpg


yUR0Ati.jpg


bpEpMCT.jpg


jCqNekV.jpg
 
"There is no doubt in my mind that S&W wanted to sell a round and pistol ballistically equivalent to the 45 Long Colt, but, not have a S&W pistol chambered in 45 Long Colt."

The .44 Special was, as first loaded, ballistically equivalent (almost identical) to the earlier .44 Russian, and never rose to the power levels generated by the .45 Long Colt.

There's some speculation that S&W went to the longer case because the shorter .44 Russian case wasn't making the transition to the newer smokeless powders very well.

Others have disputed that and said it was to give the same power level as the Russian but with lower chamber pressure as well as to offer a "new, modern, cartridge" with their New Century revolver.

Power levels generated by the .44 Russian/Special are, however, in line with those of the .45 S&W.

Along with the .44 Special, the New Century was offered in .44 Special, .45 S&W, .450 Ely (apparently on Canadian contract), .455 Webley for the British and, reported, fewer than 50 were manufactured in .45 Long Colt.

By the time the New Century was introduced, S&W had developed the reputation as being "The .44" company, just as Colt had the reputation as "The .45" company.
 
Slamfire said:
The local gun store was clearing them out for $250.00 because they were not selling. The Gunstore owner said it was the worst business decision he had made. Except for a few, the vast majority of buyers wanted the 44 Magnum, because it could fire 44 Specials and 44 Magnums, and could not see a reason to own a pistol that only fired 44 Specials.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of people that think this way. For me, I have no need of magnum level performance. I do admit I load my Spls to somewhere between the Spl and Mag. But I do not need a .44 mag load and venture to say many others don't either.

I do own a few .44 mags but in all the years I've owned them they have never seen a magnum load.
 
Always has been, always will be. Sure, you can shoot them in 44 mags but if that's your only exposure, you're missing out on a lot.
 
I do enjoy a 44spl and have a few guns that shoot it just fine. My Rossi 720 was the first 44spl I ever shot, a friend had gotten it from his father when he passed but was not interested in the gun because he wanted a 44 mag. Thay revolver has been down many a mile in a good holster. My other is my S&W 296 and with a good set of grips is ok to shoot, great to carry but with the wrong grips is not to pleasant lol.

I also regulate my Ruger 1958 3 screw flat top to 44 spl's only, no need to beat up this gun. It has a special spot in my collection.
 
I just ordered some 240 semi-wadcutters. I've been shooting 200 cast and JHP, but I guess I need to try the "Skeeter" Skelton load. No rest for the wicked.
 
The .44 Special was, as first loaded, ballistically equivalent (almost identical) to the earlier .44 Russian, and never rose to the power levels generated by the .45 Long Colt.
Click to expand...

That is true, but the consumer of the era had no independent means of testing velocity or advertising claims. You could infer that a round propelled by 23 grains of blackpowder was less powerful than one propelled by 40 grains, which was the charge for both the 44-40 and the 45 LC, but in this advertisement, the 44 Russian is claimed to penetrate more wood. To the consumer, this would be an indication that the 44 Russian is a more powerful cartridge.

This is from a Driftwood Johnson post:

catalogillustration44singleaction02cropped.jpg


catalogillustration44singleactioncropped.jpg


S&W did not design their top breaks to take the longer 45 LC cartridge, and don't even mention it in their advertising. They did claim their pistol and round were designed for target shooting and hunting, which is not a lot of information about ballistics other than diameter.

8nwkjdowu6lg7t.jpg


Maybe the marketing campaign and original intent about this round can be found in the Congressional Record, but I am going to claim, that S&W offered this cartridge and pistol to compete with the Colts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top