.44 Mag Revolvers?

tjhaile said:
The Mountain Guns are one reason I wish S&W would make 106mm barrels. I like the graceful taper of the "pencil" barrels and you don't need the extra weight of the bull barrel if you shoot mostly .44 Special level loads.

For that matter, I wouldn't mind one with a 5" barrel, either. A 5 inch barreled N frame looks just right and offers a good compromise between packability and sight radius.
Click to expand...


S&W should stretch their 4" to 4.2" like Ruger does. Slim barreled revolvers are nice. I had a 5" Model 27 and like my Mountain gun and I figure that those wheelguns are among the most well balanced I had.

Cerdan said:
Try this for a carry gun, heh heh heh
Click to expand...

Nice gun Cerdan!
 
Last edited:
I just got my PAL ( restricted ) and am looking for the same. I'm leaning towards the SW 629 V Comp but it has a 4 inch barrel - probably illegal because it's under 4.1 inches. I want the shortest barrel allowed and the lightest weight. I'll be watching your thread for more ideas for myself.
 
blue flash: 45ACP does not have the punch of .357mag. to my understanding, the 10MM auto is very comparable to .357mag.

while any of these would be better than nothing, the .44mag is a much better choice, it is capable of putting nearly twice the bullet weight at nearly equal velocity.
 
blueflash said:
I wonder how a .45 acp would do for a side arm for up north. Doesnt it have similar power as a .357 mag. I wouldnt be afraid walking in Bear and Moose country packing a 1911 with 8+1 rounds of 230gr ammo. The only thing I would be afraid of is getting caught, but that would be next to impossible in the remote up north, unless you got caught red handed using it. I still think its not worth the risk of getting caught with our ignorant Canadian laws. I have a friend that has a trappers license in the North Bay area and all he carries is a little .22lr ruger pistol, but leaves a shotgun on the atv rack.
Click to expand...

A 1911 converted to .45 Super would be better suited to wilderness carry than the standard .45 ACP.
 
blueflash said:
I wonder how a .45 acp would do for a side arm for up north. Doesnt it have similar power as a .357 mag. I wouldnt be afraid walking in Bear and Moose country packing a 1911 with 8+1 rounds of 230gr ammo. The only thing I would be afraid of is getting caught, but that would be next to impossible in the remote up north, unless you got caught red handed using it. I still think its not worth the risk of getting caught with our ignorant Canadian laws. I have a friend that has a trappers license in the North Bay area and all he carries is a little .22lr ruger pistol, but leaves a shotgun on the atv rack.
Click to expand...

45 anything is not enough for wilderness carry. It may work for a black bear but to a grizzly, it would just p!ss it off. I wouldn't go with anything less than a 44 Mag and a wheel gun, no autos...
 
The CFOs got together a few years back and decided that pistols would no longer be included on wilderness ATCs. The logic of this decision appears flawed to me, but there it is. A M-25 S&W in .45 ACP could be loaded hot enough to work in the ATC role, but the same gun in .45 Colt would be better.
 
Boomer said:
The CFOs got together a few years back and decided that pistols would no longer be included on wilderness ATCs. The logic of this decision appears flawed to me, but there it is. A M-25 S&W in .45 ACP could be loaded hot enough to work in the ATC role, but the same gun in .45 Colt would be better.
Click to expand...

and pistols are good enough to protect the life of a LEO, but not the average joe who is lucky enough to be approved for carry. go figure, double standards in the government! :rolleyes:
 
Emler Keith tested round nose bullets VS semi-wadcutter bullets of the same weight/speed fired in a .45 Colt revolver on javelinas. Round nosed bullets were almost inneficient, semi-wad were instant killers. I doubt that .45 Auto would be a good choice for wilderness protection.
 
blueflash said:
I wonder how a .45 acp would do for a side arm for up north. Doesnt it have similar power as a .357 mag.
Click to expand...

Kinda already been answered, but a .45ACP is not even close to a .357Mag; you'd not want this for protection from big dangerous animals.

10mm Auto, .357Mag and .45Super though are all very similar.

The .44Magnum destroys everything mentioned above.
From everything I've read over the years... a .44Mag would be the minimum for carry if big bears were a concern and you'll find those who still say that, that the .44Mag isn't even enough :p

...yes, there are a few calibers that destroy the .44Magnum for wheel guns :D

From what I've gathered though a .44Mag pushing a 300gr Cast bullet at anything over 1100+fps is the "range" for dangerous game defense.
 
8ball said:
Emler Keith tested round nose bullets VS semi-wadcutter bullets of the same weight/speed fired in a .45 Colt revolver on javelinas. Round nosed bullets were almost inneficient, semi-wad were instant killers. I doubt that .45 Auto would be a good choice for wilderness protection.
Click to expand...

So is your argument against the .45 auto or against round nose bullets? If the style of bullet loaded in a .45 auto is inappropriate for the job at hand, change it. Round ball wouldn't be my first choice for grizzlies or tweakers, but I see no reason why a .45 caliber 215 gr hard cast WFN or SWC at 1000 fps wouldn't get the job done, in either case.
 
Boomer said:
So is your argument against the .45 auto or against round nose bullets? If the style of bullet loaded in a .45 auto is inappropriate for the job at hand, change it. Round ball wouldn't be my first choice for grizzlies or tweakers, but I see no reason why a .45 caliber 215 gr hard cast WFN or SWC at 1000 fps wouldn't get the job done, in either case.
Click to expand...

Not being reloaders 95% of people will use round nose bullets and anyway IMHO 215 gr. is too slow and too light out of a .45 ACP for wilderness protection. I would be comfortable with 240 gr + SWC and personally I would use 300 grainers SWC in a .44 mag. I like my 1911 but it is not enough for wilderness protection.
 
well, there ARE loads for the 451 detonics and others that closely approximate the 44 mag loads- just change the top end when you want to back to 45acp- and the recoil spring
 
Boomer said:
The CFOs got together a few years back and decided that pistols would no longer be included on wilderness ATCs. The logic of this decision appears flawed to me, but there it is. A M-25 S&W in .45 ACP could be loaded hot enough to work in the ATC role, but the same gun in .45 Colt would be better.
Click to expand...
I know at least one guy who was issued an ATC for a 45 ACP in BC. You have to jump through a lot of hoops but it is possible. I'm in the process now.
 
blueflash said:
I wonder how a .45 acp would do for a side arm for up north. Doesnt it have similar power as a .357 mag. I wouldnt be afraid walking in Bear and Moose country packing a 1911 with 8+1 rounds of 230gr ammo. The only thing I would be afraid of is getting caught, but that would be next to impossible in the remote up north, unless you got caught red handed using it. I still think its not worth the risk of getting caught with our ignorant Canadian laws. I have a friend that has a trappers license in the North Bay area and all he carries is a little .22lr ruger pistol, but leaves a shotgun on the atv rack.
Click to expand...
A friend of mine got busted with a 44 mag and no ATC while fishing on the Stikine River in the middle of nowhere a few years ago. CO's are everywhere when the salmon are running.
 
8ball said:
Not being reloaders 95% of people will use round nose bullets and anyway IMHO 215 gr. is too slow and too light out of a .45 ACP for wilderness protection. I would be comfortable with 240 gr + SWC and personally I would use 300 grainers SWC in a .44 mag. I like my 1911 but it is not enough for wilderness protection.
Click to expand...

A 215 gr bullet could be loaded pretty hot from a .45 acp revolver, but I agree it wouldn't be enough from a 1911.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom