Ruger GP100 in 44 spl.

Why not a 41 Magnum?
Is the max pressure for 41MAG that much more than 357MAG?
Click to expand...

Pressure may be similiar but what about surface area of the case? Area times pressure will equal load, and I suspect, the additional load of a 41 Magnum cartridge exceeds whatever limits Ruger wants to stay within.
 
Blackpowder chamfer smooths out the face/side of the cylinder

It bevels the edge a little bit to facilitate holstering the weapon.
 
It's all about the $$$$, they'd wouldn't be able to sell enough of them. Like when you find something you like at Walmart, if they don't sell millions they discontinue it. What ever it is. It's why Colt doesn't make Pythons any more.
 
Sad fact is that revolver calibers are waning in sales (except for the .38Spl). Auto calibers are more readily available. A GP100 in 10mm/.40S&W would sell better than one in .44SPL.
 
Sad fact is that revolver calibers are waning in sales (except for the .38Spl). Auto calibers are more readily available. A GP100 in 10mm/.40S&W would sell better than one in .44SPL.
Click to expand...

I'd be all for a 10mm or 45acp GP100 except that I don't want to deal with moon clips, and the warping that comes with them. If they could put their clever engineers into making a reliable ejecting method for auto cartridges, I'd buy that just as easily. I'd have faith in that, they did make an excellent plastic revolver.
 
15675eu.jpg


Rossi Model 720 44 Spl. Built on a "D" size frame 3 inch barrel

4liybo.jpg


Rossi 44 Mag ..Built on a Taurus compact frame 2.5 inch barrel

jkjfxt.jpg


Charter Bulldog 44 Spl. Frame size just slightly bigger than a J frame....21 oz.... 2.5 inch barrel

I don't see the question as "Can they do it" ? but..."Why don't they do it" ?

The 44 Spl. is a great round ....for Two legged and Four Legged predators !!!
 
http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...57767_757751_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y

If you think is would be so hard to do then you haven’t seen the S&W 69. 5 shot 44 magnum L frame.
And as others have put it so well, all the other guns manufactures that don’t seem to have a problem building mid framed revolvers in 44 special.
Another claim is sales. Have you seen the prices of 44 caliber guns recently or how well the Bulldog is doing.
I have been writing Ruger customer support every other week begging for just that gun and surprisingly I get an answer every time. Mostly that they are considering new designs but with sales as they are they can't add to their already over book production.
My suggestion if you think this is a valid idea and would be interested in one use the location below and request one. Takes several minutes, that’s all.
http://www.ruger.com/footer/contact.html#
 
Sad fact is that revolver calibers are waning in sales (except for the .38Spl). Auto calibers are more readily available. A GP100 in 10mm/.40S&W would sell better than one in .44SPL.
Click to expand...

For the reloader at least, the 44 Spl wins in my view, because I wouldn't need moonclips, and the round shoots more or less like 45 ACP, which I like best.
 
A .44Spl or .41Mag would have to be a five-shot. I'd be all over either one. I never would've thought there was enough market but S&W's new 69 might prove me wrong. GP's are good guns, new S&W's are of no interest.


Even if it were true that the .44 Spl had more "stopping power" than the .357 Mag, it definitely doesn't have "far more". Studies of handgun shootings have determined that there's not a whole lot of difference between calibers when it comes to how many shots it takes to end a fight.
Click to expand...
Elmer Keith figured out 80yrs ago that the .44Spl with his loads was a much better killer than any .357Mag load. It ain't all about paper ballistics.
 
44flattop said:
Elmer Keith figured out 80yrs ago that the .44Spl with his loads was a much better killer than any .357Mag load. It ain't all about paper ballistics.
Click to expand...
Elmer Keith wasn't shooting people, he was shooting much larger animals that required much deeper penetration. "Stopping power" generally refers to people. And when it comes to the ability to stop a person, there's not a whole lot of difference between the common handgun calibers.
 
44flattop said:
Better is better and deer aren't much different from people.
Click to expand...
Deer are very different from people in many different ways. But that doesn't really matter; we're only talking about people here. And my whole point is that the .44 Spl doesn't have "far more stopping power" against people than the .357 Mag does.

Remember, "stopping power" isn't about velocity, energy, penetration, wounding potential, or any of that; it's simply about results. And studies of handgun shootings show that there's very little difference between the common handgun calibers in terms of actual results. Here's one of those studies.
 
Deer are not able to shoot back last time I checked. Both are mammals but after that it all goes out the window. Deer can take allot of punishment, most often though they don't know where it came from, total different state of mind to a predator with a deadly goal.
 
I dearly love my Charter Arms Bulldog in .44 Special. I like shooting .44 Special rounds in my Model 29. The caliber is a perfect combination of big-bullet stopping power and easy-to-handle light recoil.

That said, Ruger is probably a long way from making a GP100 in .44 Special. Heck, I'm still waiting for Ruger to replace the Security Six (and S&W Model 19) snubbies with a GP100 with a 2.5" barrel and fully adjustable sights, also a GP100 with a 7 chambered cylinder would be nice, and a Redhawk in .357 Magnum with an 8 round cylinder is long overdue given that S&W and Taurus already offer high-capacity large frame .357 Magnums.

Whatever Ruger does right, it has for some time now missed the bus on innovation. Its little .380 LCP was stolen outright from KelTec, and the influence of other models from other companies are readily apparent in some of their other firearms. Forget modern metallurgy - Ruger offers nothing with titanium or scandium. Even its piston-driven AR rifle has all been done before by others. Ruger may last forever resting on its laurels, and I hope it does, but it's a shame a company that started out so creative now has a cloudy crystal ball.
 
I just noticed that the S&W M69 is a .44 magnum, not just a Special. Now that is very interesting! A 5-shot L-frame .44 mag with 4.25" bbl. that is on my short list. And adjustable rear sight.

I would still like a 3" GP100 5-shot .44 Special.
 
If Ruger offered a 5-shot 44 Mag in its GP-100 frame I'd buy one in a heartbeat. I'm patiently waiting for the new S&W 69 (L frame) to become available.
 
Got lucky... Just picked up the first Model 69 the LGS has ever seen. Seems like a really handy little big bore.

This is the second new Smith I've bought in the last month or so, and the triggers on these new guns are really, really good right out of the box. I'm looking forward to shooting it.

Will probably reserve my powerhouse 44M loads for the Redhawk.

I think Ruger is missing out by not offering something similar.
 
I've never really seen a big bore revolver, even short barreled versions, that I didn't think was a little big and bulky for CCW. I too considered .44 spl, but was turned off by the size of those guns chambered for it. I carry a 5 shot .38 snubbie, and wouldn't want anything larger for CCW.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top