Poll: .44 Magnum viable self-defense cartridge, yea or nay?

[Spitpatch]

"...with the proper loads and training it is a fine option."

This is like saying a Lamborghini is a great commuter car with the proper training.

I have met two, yes TWO owners of .44 Magnums in my entire life (64years of shooting...I started late at the age of 4) that could shoot a .44 Magnum handgun with full-house loads very well.

I cannot.

Won one from a guy on a bet against my bow and arrow at 25 yards. Gave it back.

VERY few are physically capable, let alone have taken the time and practice to become proficient defensive shooters with it. VERY many claim to be.

 

[OldBroad44]

The question said with appropriate loads of our own choosing. Full house loads not required.
I found that in my 6" Anaconda I could control loads up to 1000 ft lbs easily with one hand, either hand. And they are fun for me to shoot. Most commercial .44mag bear loads are about 1000 ft lbs. Full-house commercial .44mag hunting loads are about 1100 to 1200 ft lbs. I can only control these with two hands. Don't find them fun to shoot either.

If I can get myself a 629 Mountain Gun and use it as my EDC, I expect to shoot it with .44sp only. I need to be able to shoot my EDC in a car or indoors if needed without damaging my hearing. And .44mag can't do that. And neither can .357mag.

 

[Spitpatch]

The question said with appropriate loads of our own choosing. Full house loads not required.
I found that in my 6" Anaconda I could control loads up to 1000 ft lbs easily with one hand, either hand. And they are fun for me to shoot. Most commercial .44mag bear loads are about 1000 ft lbs. Full-house commercial .44mag hunting loads are about 1100 to 1200 ft lbs. I can only control these with two hands. Don't find them fun to shoot either.

If I can get myself a 629 Mountain Gun and use it as my EDC, I expect to shoot it with .44sp only. I need to be able to shoot my EDC in a car or indoors if needed without damaging my hearing. And .44mag can't do that. And neither can .357mag.

I might apologize for talking about "Full House" loads, but what it said was "proper loads". "Our own choosing" I don't believe was mentioned. The very purpose for the .44 Magnum is Full-House loads (in order to better what was/is possible with the .44 Special). Full House loads (loosely defined as those loaded for the performance purpose of the cartridge) are "proper loads", and for the purposes of killing anything (naked ape in self-defense or otherwise) even more "proper".

.44 Special fans and .357 and .41 Magnum fans take polite and silent glee every time .44 Magnum proponents talk of emasculating their own cartridge.

The proponents of the former three honestly know what they are capable of shooting well and in a pinch.

 

[homeuser6]

i believe that anything a 4" n frame is chambered for is a viable self defense cartridge. to a handloader 44 is just another caliber.

 

[WillametteWill]

If it was good enough for Callahan, it's good enough for me.

Keeping in mind he used, "a light Special" for his load, (per Magnum Force, range scene with the badguy cops)

My very first handgun was a S&W M29 with an 8 3/8" barrel, because, well, see photo above. Young and stupid comes to mind, but I think accidentally it was the best thing I could have ever done for my handgun shooting life. When you learn to shoot this first and well, everything else is much easier.

I quickly began to load my own so I wasn't shooting full-power loads all the time. For me, I realized that since the gun was pointed in the other direction, the recoil was not going to hurt me and I never developed any flinch or anticipation. This mindset has served me well with long guns too.

As for self-defense, a 3" 44 Special was a carry gun for me for a while. One of my favorite guns ever to shoot. With a magnum, I think you are giving up faster follow-up shots and increasing the possibility of over-penetration but I would not say that it is a wrong choice.

Cool poll!

 

[CLT65]

In all seriousness, as much of a .44 magnum fan as I am, the big 44 is clearly not an ideal concealed-carry gun. This is especially true in light of those recent studies of comparative cartridge effectiveness. Surprisingly, the 44 is only marginally more effective than a 9mm, against two-legged attackers (statistically). If it was all I had though, I have no doubt I could use it very effectively, but it wouldn't be ideal.

I have a good friend who carries a S&W model 29 daily, and uses it very effectively on a regular basis, but he deals with cougars and bears. @Tlock knows who I'm talking about.

 

[The Heretic]

My knee jerk response is to think of my only .44 mag revolver, a 329 PD (5-shot).

Very lightweight for any .44 Special/Magnum load.

Not my first choice, but with practice (not fun with any load), and with the proper ammo, it would be effective - until you need to reload.

I would prefer a semi. For a revolver I would prefer my TRR8 (8 shot 5" .357 Mag).

 

[The Heretic]

For me, I realized that since the gun was pointed in the other direction, the recoil was not going to hurt me and I never developed any flinch or anticipation.

Shoot a 329PD with full house bear loads and get back to me on whether shooting a .44 mag can hurt you.

 

[Spitpatch]

This .44 Magnum I can shoot.


Dan Wesson 44, 8" ported barrel, Leupold M8 EER. Built for the Silhouette game, It will outshoot the Ruger Deerstalker.

Self defense? Well, as long as he's at 100m and not running too fast, I think I got this.

 

[CLT65]

Keeping in mind he used, "a light Special" for his load, (per Magnum Force, range scene with the badguy cops)

Ah, movie lore. I remember reading somewhere how some people like to debate whether Dirty Harry used his "light specials" for target practice only, or for day-to-day blowing away bad guys.

It never made much sense to me that he would pack around "the most powerful handgun in the world, would blow your head clean off", but only use weak, neutered ammo in it.

Then again, it is just a movie, and that particular line about light specials was written by a Hollywood script writer, so there is that…

On a personal note, a couple decades ago I bought a beautiful 3" model 29-3, thinking it would be great for carrying while hiking and camping. Great gun, fun to shoot, but I never carried it more than a time or two. Even with the short barrel, it's still heavy and bulky. I bought a .357 model 19 and never looked back.

Then again, I haven't done much hiking or camping, or even walking in the woods in a long time.

 

[BlindedByScience]

I'd never tell anyone what to use or not use for defense, but I can say what my opinion and reasoning is.

I've owned a Ruger Redhawk in .44Mag for a very long time.....like over 40 years. A very early, low SN pistol...and I love it. I've shot the heck out of the gun, and it always makes me smile; a nice, authoritative 'thump' every time. Love it. And I shoot it pretty well. But, the report and muzzle flash are significant, not to mention the blast from the barrel / cylinder gap. I have no doubt that it would incapacitate an intruder, but the flash and noise would be substantial, let alone if in the heat of the event you got a hand or other body part near the B/C gap. Not my first choice.

I have a G17 with a light on it that I think is a better answer. With three mags I have 51+1 rounds ready to go....not six. With the light / laser, I've got options for illumination and aiming. Recoil is far less, no B/C flash to be cognizant of. There's also a suppressed 300BLK handy if it gets that deep.

I certainly won't say the .44Mag isn't suitable for defense, but IMHO there are much better choices.

As they say, one man's opinion.......

 

[WillametteWill]

Ah, movie lore. I remember reading somewhere how some people like to debate whether Dirty Harry used his "light specials" for target practice only, or for day-to-day blowing away bad guys.

Agreed. It does seem like something from a scriptwriter, not Harry Francis Callahan.

 

[The Heretic]

My knee jerk response is to think of my only .44 mag revolver, a 329 PD (5-shot).

Very lightweight for any .44 Special/Magnum load.

Not my first choice, but with practice (not fun with any load), and with the proper ammo, it would be effective - until you need to reload.

I would prefer a semi. For a revolver I would prefer my TRR8 (8 shot 5" .357 Mag).

That said, I have two .44 mag lever action carbines I would feel quite comfortable using for self-defense, as long as I had the room to wield them.

 

[Certaindeaf]

I might apologize for talking about "Full House" loads, but what it said was "proper loads". "Our own choosing" I don't believe was mentioned. The very purpose for the .44 Magnum is Full-House loads (in order to better what was/is possible with the .44 Special). Full House loads (loosely defined as those loaded for the performance purpose of the cartridge) are "proper loads", and for the purposes of killing anything (naked ape in self-defense or otherwise) even more "proper".

.44 Special fans and .357 and .41 Magnum fans take polite and silent glee every time .44 Magnum proponents talk of emasculating their own cartridge.

The proponents of the former three honestly know what they are capable of shooting well and in a pinch.

More than half the time Elmer Keith, the founder of the .44 mag, carried mid-range loads using Unique instead of 2400.

 

[Alexx1401]

That said, I have two .44 mag lever action carbines I would feel quite comfortable using for self-defense, as long as I had the room to wield them.

If I could no longer have my PCC's that would be my first choice. Great round for these little rifles. Easy to roll your own and can easily custom make rounds for both "fun" and defense.

 

[Catfishmoon]

I have never looked at any common firearm and said to myself that it is too powerful to use for my selfdefense.

 

[BlindedByScience]

That said, I have two .44 mag lever action carbines I would feel quite comfortable using for self-defense, as long as I had the room to wield them.

Can't argue with that. I've got a Winchester lever in .44Mag and it's great. As I'm fond of saying, .44Mag is no joke out of a short carbine......

 

[Alexx1401]

More than half the time Elmer Keith, the founder of the .44 mag, carried mid-range loads using Unique instead of 2400.

When he went to them with the idea that was originally what he wanted. A "good to better" 44 special. Ammo companies were worried about doing this due to the many only .44 floating around that they feared would not be able to handle the load Elmer wanted. So the .44 mag was born.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Ah, movie lore. I remember reading somewhere how some people like to debate whether Dirty Harry used his "light specials" for target practice only, or for day-to-day blowing away bad guys.

It never made much sense to me that he would pack around "the most powerful handgun in the world, would blow your head clean off", but only use weak, neutered ammo in it.

Then again, it is just a movie, and that particular line about light specials was written by a Hollywood script writer, so there is that…

On a personal note, a couple decades ago I bought a beautiful 3" model 29-3, thinking it would be great for carrying while hiking and camping. Great gun, fun to shoot, but I never carried it more than a time or two. Even with the short barrel, it's still heavy and bulky. I bought a .357 model 19 and never looked back.

Then again, I haven't done much hiking or camping, or even walking in the woods in a long time.

In competitions perhaps you've noticed that people invariably game the game with their guns and ammunition.. throughout history.

 

[Spitpatch]

I have never looked at any common firearm and said to myself that it is too powerful to use for my selfdefense.

Y'know, when I was humping 10-warhead Minuteman missiles, I was thinking the same damn thing?