.44 Mag / 2.5" barrel

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
640
Location
Southwest MO
What's the verdict on shooting .44 Magnum out of a revolver with a 2.5 inch barrel? I've been told that shooting the .357 Magnum out of a snub nose does not fully burn all the powder and that for proper burn a barrel at least 3" long is required. If this is true of the .357 Magnum, is it also true of the .44 Magnum as well?
 
I'm sure it would be. No reason not to think so.

Years ago, I was at the local range when a fellow let me shoot his highly customized Model 29, cut down to 2 1/2". First 44 Mag I ever shot. I have no idea what kind of ammo it was, but it was a good shooting gun. I've often wondered what happened to it.
 
There's no doubt that if you put together loads that use faster burning powder that your muzzle velocity would be higher than some of the classic slow powder loads such as H110 and 2400.

And I seem to recall that one of the specialty ammo outfits had a snub nose line of ammo just for this reason.
 
There's no doubt that if you put together loads that use faster burning powder that your muzzle velocity would be higher than some of the classic slow powder loads such as H110 and 2400.

And I seem to recall that one of the specialty ammo outfits had a snub nose line of ammo just for this reason.

If you mean Speer, they have a line of "short barrel" loads, with powders, and more importantly bullets, designed to mitigate the performance hit of a short barrel....somewhat.

To the OP, yes, the 2.5" .44 mag will have less velocity than a longer barrel. Substantially so.
 
I have a 2.5" 44 Magnum, but sadly it's back at the factory getting repaired right now and I didn't have a chance to chronograph any ammo out of it. However I wouldn't say there is any minimum barrel length. Obviously you will lose velocity as the barrel gets shorter, so It's just a trade off.

Ballistics by the inch has tested velocity vs barrel length. http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/44mag.html Of course this data is for a single shot and not a revolver, so the barrel lengths don't compare.
 
What's the verdict on shooting .44 Magnum out of a revolver with a 2.5 inch barrel? I've been told that shooting the .357 Magnum out of a snub nose does not fully burn all the powder and that for proper burn a barrel at least 3" long is required. If this is true of the .357 Magnum, is it also true of the .44 Magnum as well?
edit: Thanks to 1KPerDay, post #9. Slip of the mind about the introduction date of the .357 Magnum. 1934 is the correct date, not the '50s as previously posted.

When introduced the .357 Magnum was a 6" barreled round. Anything shorter than that was just ridiculous. Granted, the shorter barrel would deliver higher velocities than the same gun with a 38 special, but the relative advantage of the magnum over the special grew progressively (and super-proportionally) less as the barrel got shorter.

With propellants (gunpowder) specially formulated for short barrels the magnum does a little better with short barrels than in the '50s and '60s, but Newtonian physics is immutable and even the best chemistry has limits. Longer barrels will give you better ballistics and if you want to wring the maximum performance out of a .357 mag or a 44 mag, you will be better served by the longest barrel you can holster and draw.

It's a trade-off.

Of course, this assumes you are not shooting with so long a barrel that the cartridge runs out of pressure and the bullet starts to slow down before reaching the muzzle. But that would take an extraordinarily long barrel.

Lost Sheep
 
Last edited:
S&W 629-5 .44 mag 2.5" Camfour

This thread needs a picture of a 2.5" .44 magnum.

300 of these pre-lock fixed sight guns were made as a special order for Camfour Distributors. The factory grips were rubber Hogues.

It is not much fun to shoot with these Spegel grips. :scrutiny:

390177500.gif

390177498.gif
 
those are guns made to punish the shooter for not getting a longer bbl. LOL
 
I have done it, using a friend's highly modified S&W model 29.

And I have no thought of ever doing it again!

What I got was a lot of blast and muzzle flash, combined with a wrist that was sore for several days.

.44 Special, yes. .44 Magnum no. :banghead:
 
I wonder if S& W makes a Scandium 44 Mag snub nose?
S&W's "Nightguard" series has a scandium-alloy frame. 2.5" barrel. I've shot one; never again.

With any revolver, the amount of unburned powder varies with each manufacturer. If you look at reloading manuals, they usually show the test firearm, whether a firearm or a test barrel set-up. In the Speer manual, tests are generally done with 6" barrels, so 4" and shorter will have lower velocity, and put out an amount of unburned powder and a lot of muzzle flash.

I own a S&W 629-1, 3" barrel, and it's more than enough.
SmithWessonModel629-1Left.gif
 
There's no doubt that if you put together loads that use faster burning powder that your muzzle velocity would be higher than some of the classic slow powder loads such as H110 and 2400.
This is pure myth. The same powders will always yield the highest velocities, regardless of barrel length. Those "short barrel" loads are marketed as such because they use low flash powders and bullets designed to expand at lower velocities. Not because they use a faster burning powder for higher velocities.

Yes, the .44Mag will run slower out of a shorter barrel but it will still run faster than the .44Spl.
 
I stumbled into ownership of a .454 Ruger Alaskan which is not so far off for comparison since I primarily shoot H-110 .45 Colt loads out of it which are pretty similar to a .44 magnum. With this particular gun (heavy even at snub length, very padded grip), it can be a fun gun to play with. It definitely puts on a lightshow, and is actually quite accurate. It will get you attention at the range which some people like (I find myself sometimes feeling the need to apologize to shooters around me. The first time I shot it at the indoor range, literally everyone else stopped firing, and I turned around to find three teenagers watching through the glass. Owner made a comment about how loud the range was too which I think was intended for me). It is not very practical for anything outside of living somewhere with large, dangerous game (which I do not). With the Hogue Tamer grip, it is not bad with 250-gr loads, but does put a wrenching on your wrist a bit with the 300-gr loads. Still not too bad in the web of the hand. If I'm not mistaken, Hogue Tamers from an X-frame S&W will also fit on a round-butt N-frame which could put the fun back into a range session if recoil is too rough for your hand.

It most certainly will not match the ballistics of its longer-barreled brothers, but that is the tradeoff of the package size. For instance shooting full blown .454 Casull in a 2.5" gun gives you about the same velocity as a .45 Colt shooting Ruger loads in a 7" barrel. Obviously there is a big difference in platform size/portability to get those same numbers. Shooting .44 magnum in a 2.5" gun, I'd expect maybe 1100-1200fps for top loads with 240gr bullets. This obviously is a ways off the 1400fps or so you might associate with the classic .44 magnum load which will need a 7" barrel, but there isn't much else that will get those ballistics without a larger package.

Overall, I am relatively happy this gun accidentally wandered into my life, but I doubt it is here to stay. Depending on what you want it for and why, I might suggest finding a used one and hanging onto it as long as it strikes your fancy. I have a feeling lots of them trade hands on the market from people who think it will be awesome but realize they've bitten off more than they intended once the smiles and giggles have worn away. A 4" gun might be a more reasonable compromise if you are interested in a bit more practicality.
 
My 4" model 29-2 with full power loads is quite a handful, I can only imagine the muzzle flip associated with one that small would be even worse. My 4" is blast to shoot, literally and figuratively, so don't misinterpret this response as not being able to handle the blast..........
 
This is pure myth. The same powders will always yield the highest velocities, regardless of barrel length.


Used to be that a popular experiment with Magnum handgun cartridges would be to take a revolver or barreled test fixture with the longest available barrel; and then with the same ammunition fire whichever while cutting back the barrel 1-inch at a time. A chronograph would record the velocity, and wthout exception velocity dropped as the barrel was shortened.

Same thing has been noticed in many rifles.
 
in a 2.5" gun, I'd expect maybe 1100-1200fps for top loads with 240gr bullets.


If it makes 1,000 fps you'll be lucky from barrels that short. 900-950 fps are more realistic.

This site is not perfect, but can give some idea. Chronograph results I've gotten from my 3" and 4" S&W 629's are slightly faster than what they say I should be getting, but close enough when you consider that different guns are often faster than others.

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/44mag.html
 
A chronograph would record the velocity, and wthout exception velocity dropped as the barrel was shortened.
Obviously. The fact that longer barrels yield higher velocities is unquestionable. What was in question, was whether or not faster powders yielded higher velocities in short barrels and the answer is no, they do not. H110/296 and Lil Gun yield the highest velocities for the .44Mag, whether the barrel is 2" or 20".
 
If it makes 1,000 fps you'll be lucky from barrels that short. 900-950 fps are more realistic.

This site is not perfect, but can give some idea. Chronograph results I've gotten from my 3" and 4" S&W 629's are slightly faster than what they say I should be getting, but close enough when you consider that different guns are often faster than others.

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/44mag.html

If you look at the bottom of the BBTI page, they fire the 240gr Hydroshok in a 3" ported 629 and get 1120fps. They also fire a 3" Bond Defender (which would be equivalent to about a 1.4" barrel in a revolver, though unvented mind you) and get 1069fps. This is also Federal's mildest 240 gr load (not by much though). You should be able to get 1100 fps pretty easily with run of the mill Winchester, Federal, Remington; I'd expect 1200-ish with some Buffalo Bore, Double Tap, etc.

Many people use BBTI incorrectly at first glance. The barrel length is measured the same as a rifle or pistol barrel, from the rear of the breech forward. For a 2.5" .44 magnum, you need to be looking between the 4" and 5" data.
 
You will definitely get lower velocities out of shorter tubes. I own a 4" 629, and IMHO any extra barrel length above 2.5 is good when dealing with the .44 mag. When considering handiness vs functionality, the shortest reasonable .44 mag barrel is 4". In comparison to a 2.5 barrel, velocities are higher, the revolver is easier to hit acurately withdue to increased sight radius, the gun is slightly heavier, which helps reduce recoil, I feel like the 4" is a more natural pointer (which is entirely subjective, I know), and you will barely notice the extra 1.5 in of barrel when carrying it around.

Now, if I owned a 5" barrel I might feel differently...:D
 
Among my favorite handguns is the 4" barrel N frame. I never saw the appeal of going with any shorter barrel in those guns. (But more power to you - if that is something you like.)
 
Besides the guns (which are awesome), that's a really cool collection of old cartridge boxes Cocked & Locked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top