.44 Mag to.444 Marlin.

I think you're thinking of shortening to .44Mag. He wants to extend the Mag chamber to take the longer .444Marlin. That needs a chamber reamer.
 
The 44 Rem mag chamber can be cut out to 444 Marlin by hand without even removing the barrel. There is no need to set the barrel back as the base dia of the 44 RM is .012" smaller than the 444 Marlin so it cleans up the old chamber completely. The rim dia of the 2 cartridges are the same and the 444 has a slightly thicker rim (.003") which probably won't even need to be touched but can be of course when rechambering.

In conclusion.....YES one can chamber the 44RM out to 444 Marlin with no issues what so ever and get a completely clean new chamber.
 
c-fbmi said:
The 44 Rem mag chamber can be cut out to 444 Marlin by hand without even removing the barrel. There is no need to set the barrel back as the base dia of the 44 RM is .012" smaller than the 444 Marlin so it cleans up the old chamber completely. The rim dia of the 2 cartridges are the same and the 444 has a slightly thicker rim (.003") which probably won't even need to be touched but can be of course when rechambering.

In conclusion.....YES one can chamber the 44RM out to 444 Marlin with no issues what so ever and get a completely clean new chamber.
Click to expand...
Agree. Rim thickness at .060- 44 mag to .063-444marlin is the only minor hick-up. Hell if the rifles been used there's probably .003 wear already.
 
Last edited:
Yep Go, it would only be a potential issue were it the other way around. This way one can hand headspace and chances are the original chamber was cut a tad generous on rim thickness just to accommodate all the different brands of brass available for the 44 RM.

Wyrhare............sorry, but I don't understand your thinking, all the critical dimensions are actually larger on the 444 except rim dia. Which means unless the Rem mag chamber is ridiculously sloppy it will clean up 100% during the rechamber to 444.
 
I wanted to do this once and was told it wasn't possible because of chamber pressure but when I checked the 44 mag had a higher pressure then the 444 is that correct or not.
 
The #3 Ruger will handle any chamber pressure generated by any modern cartridge. It's just a plain Jane #1 as far as design and build, with a slightly modified lever and cheapo wood. As far as SAAMI pressure specs go the 44 RM is rated at a max of 36,000 and the 444 Marlin is rated at a max of 44,000.
 
j_06 said:
How does a longer cartridge fit in a chamber designed for a shorter cartridge which you just cut even shorter?
Click to expand...

By rechambering I have done this because USING a 444 reamer without removing a thread left a ring mark on the fired brass. After it was rechambered via 444 reamer
 
Now this has been an early morning learning experience.
44 Rem Mag to Rem 444...
Two interesting cartridges and when it becomes the Triple 4 you can eat right up to the hole !
Would like to see how this project pans out.
Nothing better than some ole fashioned gunsmithing to add excitement to ones day.
Tight Groups,
Rob
 
Raton57 said:
I wanted to do this once and was told it wasn't possible because of chamber pressure but when I checked the 44 mag had a higher pressure then the 444 is that correct or not.
Click to expand...
My Jack First parts catalog shows only SC-3 barrel and S-8 ejector as being caliber specific all other parts are the same. Considering the variety of calibers NO.3 were chambered in pressure would not be a problem.
 
Last edited:
FLHTCUI said:
Now this has been an early morning learning experience.
44 Rem Mag to Rem 444...
Two interesting cartridges and when it becomes the Triple 4 you can eat right up to the hole !
Would like to see how this project pans out.
Nothing better than some ole fashioned gunsmithing to add excitement to ones day.
Tight Groups,
Rob
Click to expand...

Yep, that's what's nice about a big, slow-moving bullet. Last year, I shot a boar with a 45-70. The bullet went in to the front shoulder and into the vitals, out the opposite side of the rib cage. I didn't hit the bone, and I don't think I lost a pound of meat. If it had been shot with a faster-moving bullet, the damage would have been much greater. Sure did a great job of tranquilizing him, too.
 
357Maximum said:
44 Magnum is one of the more uncommon chamberings in the #3 . Unless the rifle is already a beater You will lessen the value considerable .
However it's possible to do as others have confirmed.

357
Click to expand...

X2 a sin to ruin one of the rare #3's. Sell or trade it for a #3 in 45-70 if you want more horsepower.
 
I agree with an earlier posters comment that it will kick like a SOB. I had one in .375 Winchester and recoil was the reason it went down the road. The curved butt plate makes it problematic to even consider adding a decent recoil pad unless you are capable of doing some stock work.

Jim
 
Yup, please don't botch up a rare Ruger. Sell it to someone who appreciates it, and buy a Marlin 444. You'll profit a fair bit of money and get a nice rifle to boot.
BTW, Brownells sell a nice premade pad for the 10/22 that works slick on the #3. It extends the stock by an inch and fits like a glove and uses factory holes. I have them on my #3 in 375 and on my 10/22.
 
Thanks to all for your comments. My favourite rifle action is the falling block. I have a #1 in .458 WM., a 1885 in 45-70. I already have 2 lever action rifles chambered in .44 RM, a repop M-92 and a Win. M-94, as well as a model 29. I have "tons" of swaged .430" bullets that I've swaged over the cold winter months and a falling block in .444 Marlin would be a nice way to send them downrange! I have no desire for a Marlin lever in .444
You all have given me food for thought!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom