The 44-40 as a hunting round

John Y Cannuck

RichPoorMan<br>Super Moderator
Moderating Team
Rating - 100%
15   0   0
Thought I'd share my experience with the old round, and see what falls from the arm chair.

I first went to the field with my '92 Winchester about ten years ago. It took most of two years to come up with a load I considered accurate enough to hunt with, and when I did, it floated along at a leisurely 900fps.
Velocity kills eh? well I guess those should have bounced off. But they didn't.
I used the cartridge as a 'dogging gun' round, and only on pushes that were in heavy cover where my shots would be very close.

I had finished the first half of the push, climed a ridge, and parked my butt, to wait for my heart to settle down. (this was pre-operation)
As I sat there, I watched a doe come out from cover into an open stand of beech, some 200 yards away. I looked down at the old gun, figured the angle for the shot, took aim and ... NOT!
I patiently waited, and watched the doe, figuring a way I could get closer, when she walked around a bush, and turned towards me. I raised the old rifle to minimize movement as she got closer, and waited. She began to climb the ridge. Closer, and closer, passing just below me, I thought, keep going up, it'll save me dragging, but she began to turn away, and at 50 feet, I shot her through the lungs. She flopped over at the shot, wedged against a tree, kicked about twice, and lay still.
The 215 grain Winchester bullet made a nice 44 cal entry, and, not much bigger, two exits, breaking one rib, I presume was the secondary projectile.

Last year, I took the old rifle to field again, this time, to sit in a dense grove of cedar with a heavy deer trail for the afternoon. Didn't get that far. On my way in, I heard a small noise, and was quite surprized to see a small black bear aproaching down an ancient logging road that appears and disappears in the thick bush. He too just kept coming. I made like a tree, but got my rifle ready, and tracking him. By this time I had worked up a more powerful load that was fairly accurate, at 1600 fps, it was a tad more reasonable.
I shot him at the base of the neck, as he approached dead on straight towards me. He made not a sound, just flopped over. He was still breathing when I aproached, so a head shot ended the game.

Try as I might, I could not find the danged bullet. Until later, at home when I bit a piece of it.

From what I gathered, the old round works just fine at close range. There are some caveats however. Don't expect miracles from it. Pic your shots if you intend to try it.
Remember that in days of old, the round was used on every game animal in North America, with varying levels of success to both the animal, and the shooter. Times were different.

Today, it's a deer and BLACK bear round, and to be used with care for those. Expansion is not great unless you hit bone, you are much dependent on caliber size for the damage done. Penetration at close range isn't bad for the game intended.

In a time of magnums, and super velocity, it's a revelation to hunt the old way. You know going out that the long shots are not going to happen. You need to get closer. Guile, and stealth are your friends.
 
Kill my first deer with my grand father 44-40 Winny 1873... Only shot one round thru that rifle that i keep preciously in my safe this one and my Savage 99 250-3000 are my 2 oldests rifles ( 1887 for the 44-40 and 1916 for the 250-3000 ) ... JP.
 
Use a good round within its intended limits and you'll almost always be satisfied. There's life in the old gal yet - and will be for many years.
 
John Y, I have to tell you my 44-40 story. I grew up in the boon docks of bushland Saskatchewan, where every settler had a gun and lived on wild game. I became good friends with two veteran trappers, one of whom told me this story, about their earlier experiences. Early trappers, for some reason, always seemed to have a rifle that was barely adequate for big game. One of these fellows was up grading from a 32-20, which he said was the lightest calibre one should use for moose, and bought a 44-40.
So the two old friends went out in the winter to try out his new moose gun. They made a blaze on a green spruce tree for a target and the owner took a shot at it. The other fellow went to the tree, then started to laugh heartily.
"What's the matter," said the owner, "did I miss the tree?"
"No," the other fellow replied, "The bullet bounced out of the tree!"
 
John Y, I have to tell you my 44-40 story. I grew up in the boon docks of bushland Saskatchewan, where every settler had a gun and lived on wild game. I became good friends with two veteran trappers, one of whom told me this story, about their earlier experiences. Early trappers, for some reason, always seemed to have a rifle that was barely adequate for big game. One of these fellows was up grading from a 32-20, which he said was the lightest calibre one should use for moose, and bought a 44-40.
So the two old friends went out in the winter to try out his new moose gun. They made a blaze on a green spruce tree for a target and the owner took a shot at it. The other fellow went to the tree, then started to laugh heartily.
"What's the matter," said the owner, "did I miss the tree?"
"No," the other fellow replied, "The bullet bounced out of the tree!"

Not funny, probably factual.
I have not fired the rifle purposely at a hard tree like an ironwood, but I think chances are good it would ricochet. I know of one hunter that used a 30 US carbine that found out his rounds wouldn't penetrate the 2" ironwood.
Thankfully, game is not made of wood, or my bear would likely have been a tad pissed off when I shot him. :)
 
A friend police officer told me that it was not unusual in the 60 to see a bullet of 38 sp bounce off a car windshield... JP.
 
I got my first deer using a Uberti Yellowboy in 44-40 WCF. According to many, it killed more deers than any other calibre since it's creation.
 
My first deer was in the late 60's with a Model 92 rifle in 44-40. I'd bought it as my first deer rifle from a neighbour for $75. Although a full length rifle & magazine, I only ever loaded 5 factory Winchester rounds in it ... IIRC, it would hold something ridiculous like 14.

On the last run of the first opening day, a little, buck came out to me in front of a hound, straight on at about 60 yards. Put two into him center chest then he whirled perpendicular and ran about 30 or 40 yards before piling-up. No chance for a 3rd shot. No real complaints with performance, dead is dead, but over the winter I had a local gunsmith turn a thread off the barrel, rethread & re-chamber to 44 Mag.

Back then, 92's were fairly abundant ... not the collector interest in them that there is now. Seems quite a few 92's were converted back then. The same rifle took a few more deer and a bear until I sold it for an '86 in 45-70.
 
I shot a nice whitetail buck with mine, using a home converted 94 Winchester and a warm handload. At 75 yards I expected the bullet to drop more so I aimed high and hit higher then I expected., just under the spine. He dropped in his tracks and was dead when I got to him. I'll never forget the sound of the bullet as it rattled through the forest after penetrating the deer.
 
I got a seagull wet once when I was a kid. Pop said to see if I could hit it.
Near as I can remember, close to a hundred yards.
Pulled the trigger, saw, heard the bullet hit the water in front of the gull.
Sqwak and off it went.
Pop laughed and said to aim a little higher next time.
Still can recall it after all these years.
 
When I hear experts talk against using any of the old rounds, preaching how incapable they are I think back to when they were new. I'd love to see the same guys on their soapbox a hundred years ago yelling how the .44-40 is unethical and only the .45 Colt should be considered the minimum cartridge for deer sized game. :p
 
To hear some people talk, deer and moose have apparently all been fitted with ceramic armour and boosted with steroids of late. According to such folks, if you take anything smaller than a .375 Ruger deer hunting, you're not only mad, but you've also probably got a very small weenie.

The reality is that placement is almost everything. For short ranges, the .44-40 is as capable of putting Bambi on your plate as a .50 BMG.
 
werent there 2 44/40 rounds one for revolvers one for rifles bet only the one for revolvers is factory loaded now
 
werent there 2 44/40 rounds one for revolvers one for rifles bet only the one for revolvers is factory loaded now

Welcome to CGN.

I doubt that there were specific rifle and pistol loads for the .44-40, although there was probably published data for both handgun and rifle velocities. The whole point back in the day was to provide a cartridge which could be used interchangeably between rifles and handguns, so only one type of ammo needed to be purchased and carried. While the concept proved attractive on the surface, it didn't take folks long to realize that if you could do it with a pistol, why did you need the rifle?
 
Not sure about the .44-40, but there certainly were different ones for rifle and pistol in .38-40. The former were for use in Winchester 92s and such that could handle the higher pressures. The ammo companies stopped making the hotter ones because too many bozo's kept trying to use them in old black-powder era pistols.
 
yes im sure it was the same for the 44/40 kinda like a +p load nowadays im guessing wonder where you can get that +p loading information
 
in the black powder era, there were a lot of variable loads out there.

But the usual load, I think it went about 40 grains of BP in the old balloon head case, good for 1200fps or a bit more more from a rifle, and was used in both rifle, and handgun. It may have been close to 1000 fps in some handguns, but bore diameters were terrible as to consistency in the old guns, and accuracy generally wasn't that great.
That load has quite a smack to it in a handgun by the way.

I've seen 44-40 shot in a modern handgun, accuracy there, at least from a rest, is very good.
 
If you expect to shoot .429"-.430" bullets in your modern .44-40 revolver, it might pay to have the cylinder throat reamed to match. This also presents the problem of the neck thickness not allowing cartridges with .430" bullets from chambering in factory chambers. The neck section of the chamber will have to be reamed as well. Ammo that is loaded for use in such a modified gun should not be used in a unmodified rifles or revolvers.
 
I have shot a couple of deer with my 44-40. About comparable to using a bow and arrow or a muzzle loader with roundball. 44 hole in and 44 hole out. While they definitely will kill, they depend very much on good shot placement --- much more so that a 270 or 30-06

cheers mooncoon
 
You guys are selling the 44-40 short!
Just look at the history of the cartridge, taken from an older issue of Cartridges of the World, by John Amber.
And yes, there were loads for each of rifle or revolver loading, and here they are.
I can not vouch for this loading information, I am only showing what is in a book. Use extreme caution, start low and build the load up to suit you and your firearm.
44-40.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom