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

[OldBroad44]

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.

@Spitpatch --
No. The purpose of the .44mag is not to shoot full-house loads. Its to be able to shoot loads that are more more powerful than .44sp up to and including full-house loads, while retaining ability to shoot 44sp. What the "proper load" is is chosen by the shooter and depends on the situation. Its clear that commercial ammo manufacturers of bear loads for SD against bears think that 1000 ft lbs is about right. And I independently figured out, long before the internet happened and I ever heard of bear loads, that 1000 ft lbs is as much as I could handle with one hand with my 6" Anaconda. That's way more powerful than any .44sp or 357 mag or 10 mm. I've never had a 41mag, but my understanding is that it would do just as well as the .44mag with appropriate loads.

As for shooting the 1000 ft lb bear loads in a 4" .44, no thank you. I'lI stick to .44sp in smaller or lighter .44s. I won't practice with a gun unless I enjoy shooting it.

 

[JustSomeGuy]

I've been carrying a 4" model 29 daily for 40+ years. Have used it numerous times on critters as small as coyotes, up to cougar and deer. Never more than a single shot required. Granted, shot placement and bullet selection are vital, but when done correctly, the wound channel is... impressive.

Pulled up a 2011 article by Greg Ellifritz that breaks down some research on "stopping power" of various cartridges. Of particular interest to me, were the number of 1 shot stops. The only ones over 50% in this category were rifles, shotguns, and the lowly 44 magnum.

Throwing Lead

 

[Paolung]

Self-defense against what, exactly?
That said, assuming OP is referring to 2 legged predators, I'd go with 44 Special... that's what I keep my lever action 44 loaded with at home.

 

[OldBroad44]

I've been carrying a 4" model 29 daily for 40+ years. Have used it numerous times on critters as small as coyotes, up to cougar and deer. Never more than a single shot required. Granted, shot placement and bullet selection are vital, but when done correctly, the wound channel is... impressive.

Pulled up a 2011 article by Greg Ellifritz that breaks down some research on "stopping power" of various cartridges. Of particular interest to me, were the number of 1 shot stops. The only ones over 50% in this category were rifles, shotguns, and the lowly 44 magnum.

Throwing Lead

Link:

An Alternate Look at Handgun Stopping Power | Buckeye Firearms Association

by Greg Ellifritz I've been interested in firearm stopping power for a very long time. I remember reading Handguns magazine back in the late 1980s when Evan Marshall was writing articles about his stopping power studies. When Marshall's first book came out in 1992, I ordered it immediately...

www.buckeyefirearms.org

 

[OldBroad44]

Self-defense against what, exactly?
That said, assuming OP is referring to 2 legged predators, I'd go with 44 Special... that's what I keep my lever action 44 loaded with at home.

Yes. OP was referring just to human predators. That's fine if you live in and never stray out of big cities, never hike, camp, fish, hunt. In the years I lived in cities I had to draw my gun in SD three times on humans and none on animals. In the 30 years I've lived in my current home in a residential area a few miles outside Corvallis and near MacDonald Forest I have never had to draw my gun on a bad human. But I did once have to draw my gun on a bad bear. And our neighborhood has both cougars and bears. And in all my adult life while hiking, camping, and in hunting in various mountains and woods I never needed to draw my gun on a human but did need to draw my gun on a surprise bear. So for a SD gun in and around my current home or for woods carry I reject the assumption of needing SD against only humans and want a gun suitable for SD against bad humans, cougars, and bears. And answered accordingly.

 

[Spitpatch]

@Spitpatch --
No. The purpose of the .44mag is not to shoot full-house loads. Its to be able to shoot loads that are more more powerful than .44sp up to and including full-house loads, while retaining ability to shoot 44sp. What the "proper load" is is chosen by the shooter and depends on the situation. Its clear that commercial ammo manufacturers of bear loads for SD against bears think that 1000 ft lbs is about right. And I independently figured out, long before the internet happened and I ever heard of bear loads, that 1000 ft lbs is as much as I could handle with one hand with my 6" Anaconda. That's way more powerful than any .44sp or 357 mag or 10 mm. I've never had a 41mag, but my understanding is that it would do just as well as the .44mag with appropriate loads.

As for shooting the 1000 ft lb bear loads in a 4" .44, no thank you. I'lI stick to .44sp in smaller or lighter .44s. I won't practice with a gun unless I enjoy shooting it.

Avoiding the example of responding out of the gate with a terse one-word negative to all said, I'll choose to take the aforementioned polite and silent glee produced by a .44 Magnum proponent that prefers not to really shoot one.

Any self defense load (expected to be used on animals of any type, including primates) HAS to be the one that is practiced with. If your self defense load (for the woods or the concrete jungle) is a "Bear Load" (whatever that is), that should be the cartridge on which productive, realistic training occurs. Lighter loads should be used for repetitious learning of fundamentals only (and this can be done with a .22 in a similar configured gun).

My position is not against the cartridge itself. It is toward the owners of them that don't shoot them well, believing that they do. Invariably they will defend their choice, immediately followed by caveats of using "light practice loads". I can only explain their strategy in that perhaps they believe more power will somehow make up for less marksmanship. When in the business of killing things, it never does.

Defending one's life, one cannot miss. The shooter needs to be entirely comfortable with the complete outfit chosen for it, including the actual ammunition.

Shooters that have achieved that with a .44 Magnum are extremely rare.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Avoiding the example of responding out of the gate with a terse one-word negative to all said, I'll choose to take the aforementioned polite and silent glee produced by a .44 Magnum proponent that prefers not to really shoot one.

Any self defense load (expected to be used on animals of any type, including primates) HAS to be the one that is practiced with. If your self defense load (for the woods or the concrete jungle) is a "Bear Load" (whatever that is), that should be the cartridge on which productive, realistic training occurs. Lighter loads should be used for repetitious learning of fundamentals only (and this can be done with a .22 in a similar configured gun).

My position is not against the cartridge itself. It is toward the owners of them that don't shoot them well, believing that they do. Invariably they will defend their choice, immediately followed by caveats of using "light practice loads". I can only explain their strategy in that perhaps they believe more power will somehow make up for less marksmanship. When in the business of killing things, it never does.

Defending one's life, one cannot miss. The shooter needs to be entirely comfortable with the complete outfit chosen for it, including the actual ammunition.

Shooters that have achieved that with a .44 Magnum are extremely rare.

Those "mid-range" loads I mentioned are good for everything from prarie dogs to moose. For actively hunting about anything I'd not feel undergunned with them but I'd likely up the power level to max.. it's really not a big deal.

 

[OldBroad44]

Avoiding the example of responding out of the gate with a terse one-word negative to all said, I'll choose to take the aforementioned polite and silent glee produced by a .44 Magnum proponent that prefers not to really shoot one.

Any self defense load (expected to be used on animals of any type, including primates) HAS to be the one that is practiced with. If your self defense load (for the woods or the concrete jungle) is a "Bear Load" (whatever that is), that should be the cartridge on which productive, realistic training occurs. Lighter loads should be used for repetitious learning of fundamentals only (and this can be done with a .22 in a similar configured gun).

My position is not against the cartridge itself. It is toward the owners of them that don't shoot them well, believing that they do. Invariably they will defend their choice, immediately followed by caveats of using "light practice loads". I can only explain their strategy in that perhaps they believe more power will somehow make up for less marksmanship. When in the business of killing things, it never does.

Defending one's life, one cannot miss. The shooter needs to be entirely comfortable with the complete outfit chosen for it, including the actual ammunition.

Shooters that have achieved that with a .44 Magnum are extremely rare.

@Spitpatch -- I always practice with either the ammo I intend to carry or use in the particular gun or something cheaper but closely matching it in ballistics. The 6" Anaconda that was my woods carry gun for a while I both practiced and carried with .44mag. With ammo running about 1000 ft lbs. (Which is way more powerful than any .44sp, .357mag, or 9mm.) So yes, I consider a .44mag a good gun for SD for woods carry, for me at least.

The 629 Mountain Gun I've lusted after for a while -- if I get one I'll both practice with it and carry it with .44 sp. Some people use 44 mag in MT Guns for SD. Maybe they are all or mostly all fooling themselves about being able to shoot them well, as you suggest. I know it wouldn't work for me. Shooting .44 mag in a gun like the Anaconda that had a 6" under lugged barrel and weighed about 50 oz. was fun. Shooting .44 mag in a 38 oz. Mt. Gun with a skinny not underlugged 4" barrel is not my idea of fun. And I already know I won't practice with a gun that isn't fun to shoot.

 

[The Heretic]

Shooting .44 mag in a 38 oz. Mt. Gun with a skinny not underlugged 4" barrel is not my idea of fun.

And a 27oz .44 mag (329PD) is definitely NOT fun.

 

[CLT65]

I used to have a lot of fun shooting full-load .44 magnums. It's a bit of a dilemma nowadays, because I still have several really nice S&W model 29 variants, but shooting them just isn't so much fun anymore. The first dozen rounds or so is fun, but after that, not so much.

I can still bust clay targets consistently on the 25 yard berm, and easily blow up water jugs at 50 yards, but I don't practice with magnum loads much these days. To be honest, I really don't practice at all; my shooting is just for fun. Any practice and/or improvement is just a side effect of recreation.

 

[OldBroad44]

And a 27oz .44 mag (329PD) is definitely NOT fun.

Right. I bought and shot a 22 oz .44sp. Charter Arms Bulldog three times. It tried to twist out of my hand with the first two shots. On the third shot the hammer and some other parts fell off and into the mud. And that was just with over-the-counter .44sp ammo, probably very low power stuff. I took it home and cleaned the muddy parts and put the gun back together and put a few cylinders more through it to make sure it worked. Then sold it. My first experience with a light gun. Memorable!

 

[gclarkso]

I'd use mid-range handloads. Probably a 240 gr Keith style SWC since at that velocity, 1050-1150 or so, JHP's won't reliably expand and will pencil through. A SWC doesn't need to expand to be effective.
Common .44 special loads do about 650 fps out of a 3-4" barrel so don't. If you do though, use a SWC. Most hot .44 special factory loads specifically state what guns they should be shot from.

My .44spl run about 900 fps. I'd be wary to shot 650 fps...

 

[Certaindeaf]

My .44spl run about 900 fps. I'd be wary to shot 650 fps...

Most standard pressure .44 special factory loads are pathetic on all levels, especially out of a 3-4", as one would actually carry for self defense.
Oh and edit to add, if you're talking a 180 going 900 that's perhaps a possibility. However, at that velocity it won't expand. You'd want to use a SWC for effective terminal performance.

 

[Spitpatch]

Most standard pressure .44 special factory loads are pathetic on all levels, especially out of a 3-4", as one would actually carry for self defense.
Oh and edit to add, if you're talking a 180 going 900 that's perhaps a possibility. However, at that velocity it won't expand. You'd want to use a SWC for effective terminal performance.

My father's car gun (in NW Montana) was a 44 Special Bulldog, and he was loading it with anemic (sometimes soft lead) factory loads. He asked me to handload for it (he didn't have the dies).

180g XTP's were selected, loaded toward the 900fps mark (book velocity) and repeatedly tested on water jugs and wet phone books. Textbook expansion without fail (as is usual with XTP's at any reasonable velocity).

He finished a large Black Bear with a broken hip (hit by a car) with one shot. Very impressed and pretty excited when he called me shortly thereafter.

 

[Certaindeaf]

My father's car gun (in NW Montana) was a 44 Special Bulldog, and he was loading it with anemic (sometimes soft lead) factory loads. He asked me to handload for it (he didn't have the dies).

180g XTP's were selected, loaded toward the 900fps mark (book velocity) and repeatedly tested on water jugs and wet phone books. Textbook expansion without fail (as is usual with XTP's at any reasonable velocity).

He finished a large Black Bear with a broken hip (hit by a car) with one shot. Very impressed and pretty excited when he called me shortly thereafter.

I wouldn't count on them expanding. I used to have a couple of Charter Bulldogs too.
Loaded them with the old Lee 320gr SWC over an obscene for that gun charge of Red Dot.

 

[The Heretic]

I wouldn't count on them expanding.

Yeah - not a fan of Hornady XTP bullets/ammo - the tests I've seen are not encouraging.

 

[coop44]

Hit with a 44 you won't likely be hopping back to your feet and running away. Have the 9mm "as good as" folks chimed in yet? No? I'm suprised.

 

[oremike]

Just my .02, worth what you pay for it. My 7'.5" Redhawk is too big for urban concealed carry, Harry Callahan not with standing. I believe this environment is what most people think of when they hear the term self-defense. I'm sure it would work it's just too big for me to conceal comfortably. I do open carry it or other revolvers when in the woods as a survival weapon. By that I mean it will protect, defend and feed me if needed. My 44 Mag Redhawk is the biggest, heaviest handgun I own and I do have other smaller, lighter Blackhawks in .357. 41 and 45 Colt. So depending on my whim of the day, I'll carry what I want, because I can. I do shoot them all regularly preferring bullets that are on the heavy for caliber end of the spectrum and are hardcast lead with a Truncated Cone design.

 

[2506]

Around the ranch as it gets colder, I tend to carry my Blackhawk more often than not. Not a 44, but I load 45 Colt to darn near the same levels and it's (for me) the most accurate handgun in my safe.
It's big, hard to conceal and a bugger to reload if you're in a hurry, but it's comforting to know it will poke a half-inch hole through anything in my neck of the woods stem to stern.

 

[Spitpatch]

I wouldn't count on them expanding. I used to have a couple of Charter Bulldogs too.
Loaded them with the old Lee 320gr SWC over an obscene for that gun charge of Red Dot.

I don't "count on" any bullet to perform. These (as all others I might want to kill something with) were tested.

Then, they worked as tested.

Yeah - not a fan of Hornady XTP bullets/ammo - the tests I've seen are not encouraging.

All tests I have actually done with XTP's are very encouraging, and (as with Dad's "Bulldog Bear") my usage mirrors those results.


Smith and Wesson Model 57 .41 Magnum. 210gr Hornady XTP. 140 yards.