200 xtp in 44mag performance

[trekker73]

Hi Fellas, just wondered if anyone had reports of this bullet on game, either in hornady ammo( which runs about 1500fps on the box) or as handloads. 240's seem to be the go-to, but wondering if this bullet would serve too on medium hogs and deer.

 

[Big Bore TX]

Deer and smaller hogs would be no problem at all. Depending on the twist rate of your barrel, accuracy could be a challenge at longer distances. Maybe buy a box and see how well your revolver likes it before going all in.

 

[troy fairweather]

They blow the crap out of deer.

 

[trekker73]

Thanks good to know. I like the trajectory and idea of less recoil

 

[crestoncowboy]

I've used the 200s on big white tail deer a lot. On that size animal I see no difference at handgun ranges. Ive used 180 and 240 cast and 200-240-300 xtp.

 

[wcwhitey]

I hunted for a while with a 180 Grain XTP over copious amounts of W296, 1600+ fps from a 7 1/2 Super Blackhawk. Hit hard, worked but not the greatest penetrator and failed on one occasion on a Whitetail Buck. Went to 240 grain and all was good. I would think the 200 would be a bit better than the 180.

 

[bangswitch]

I'd say 200 grain out of a .44 Magnum would be about like a 210 grain out of a .41 Magnum, and would be more than sufficient to 50, and maybe to 75 yards from a long-barreled (6" or more) handgun. Definitely to 100 yards with a carbine. Does the box state what the test gun was for that 1500 fps? The Hornady reloading manual lists several 200 grain XTP loads as high as 1600 fps, from a 7-1/2" Ruger Redhawk (1 in 20 twist). 1500 fps is a midrange load for the 200grain, Hornady even makes a 180 grain XTP bullet for the .44M. I wish they'd make one for the .41M

 

[sabbfan]

I’ve shot one nice 8 point with 180 XTP hand loads out of my Super Redhawk, I made sure to put it behind the shoulder to avoid heavy bone and it did devastating damage to the lungs. I’d be fine using 200 but now I use 240’s exclusively just in case I need to take a non broadside shot

 

[no.5enfield]

What benefits do a lighter bullet offer in .44s? Flatter trajectory? Less recoil? I've stuck to 240 or heavier since buying my first .44 mag. I've heard the shorter bullets tend to be less accurate as well. Just curious why we even see a market for these.

 

[trekker73]

Why is there a market for light bullets in a calibre? Im bowing out of that from that question.

 

[Big Bore TX]

What benefits do a lighter bullet offer in .44s? Flatter trajectory? Less recoil? I've stuck to 240 or heavier since buying my first .44 mag. I've heard the shorter bullets tend to be less accurate as well. Just curious why we even see a market for these.

Very fair questions. More than anything I think flatter trajectory is a benefit and eliminates math in the field. This would be assuming bullet terminal performance and accuracy isn’t an issue at said distances and game type. Ultimately, I think there’s a balance between lighter weight, flatter trajectory and the heavier bullets with more momentum.

 

[wcwhitey]

In my case I used the 180’s my Ruger had a problem of shooting high. 240’s ran out of adjustment. It was the 90’s and there was barely an internet no information about this common problem. Being a loader I found a combo using the 180s that gave me a very accurate, light recoiling load and shot to the sights. It worked for me on a Doe, worked really well. My buddy wanted a batch So I made up some for him in his Super Redhawk. He shot a very nice buck on one of our trips that took us the better part of the day to track. The 180 failed to penetrate on a shoulder shot. It all worked out, we tracked the deer but a heavier bullet would have done better in my opinion. After that I had the barrel cut and recrowned at 5” and put an Weigand Front sight on. The crown and the sight made the gun a tackdriver and now shoots everything up to 260 Grains (the heaviest I load) really well. Good thing because I did all that when I should have sent it back to Ruger for an easy fix. I just did not know it was a common problem. But I love my SBH in its current form so it worked out.

I guess though It depends on what a person is shooting and why. A 180 or 200 is a great anti-personnel weight. Recoil is much lighter. I never noticed any issue with accuracy. Trajectory would be better in a carbine situation. The 180s great for getting to expansion velocity out of .44 Special as well. I learned my lesson though, for hunting I favor heavier bullets. In fact I predominantly use lead gas checked bullets for my heavy Magnum hunting loads. 429244 to be exact.

A pic of what it looks like now.

 

[Rodfac]

The 200 gr XTP is a good CC load for .44 spl and mag revolvers. It's one that I use in my M69 Smith and have had no problem with accuracy...~2" @ 25 yds from a rest nor expansion. Expansion in water (swimming pool) has been just fine down to 1000 fps, and easily attained even in .44 Special level loads.

That said, I'd be hesitant to use it on white tail deer as I feel it's under penetration would be a problem. For hunting deer here in KY, I rely on the 240 gr XTP for both Marlin Carbine and my .44 revolvers. Best of luck, Rod

 

[Hookeye]

I killed deer w 180 jhp on max charges of 296. 75 yards and in, double lung em. It would exit.

200s did same. Deer were under 150# dressed.

6, 8 3/8 and 9.5 bbls.

 

[Seedy Character]

I like the 200 gr XTP. Accurate, less recoil.

Have taken 1 deer and 1 hog.
Now, I stick to 240 gr.
The 200 gr are for HD.

 

[1-12 INF (M)]

Deer are pretty tough critters compared to humans. For hunting, I'd go with a good JSP or JHP in 240. Or similar weight cast.