44 Mag-255 or 305 grain loadings

[Harmonious Fulmination]

I've ordered myself a S&W 629 5" and a Diamond D Chest Holster. After a situation with a moose I had while x-country skiing in winter, and another experience a friend had with a moose while doing some winter scouting, I've decided it was time to get at least something to have with me when I don't have a long gun (which is usually just when I'm hunting.)
Found some good loadings by Underwood. 255 grain Keith styles at 1350fps and some 305 grain flat nosed hard cast at 1325 fps. Obviously the latter load is the winner when it comes to performance, but I also know that the 629 in this barrel length doesn't compare in size to something such as a Super Redhawk. Are such loads suited to S&Ws? Would the additional recoil of the heavier load be reasonable in this size gun, or might it be argued the more manageable 255 is worth the less power for the same of quicker follow up shots? Whatever I get, I'll have to practice with it.
I have to confess a general lack of experience and knowledge with big bore handguns. But I'm not a noob when it comes to firearms and, being able to competently beat the crap out of myself with various magnum rifles and 45/70 bear loads, have never found myself to be recoil adverse, which is a different fish but I think I'll be fine.

 

[Alaskan Ironworker]

I keep my taurus tracker loaded with hsm 305 grain hard casts. Chronographed at around 1120 fps in the 4” barrel. Its controllable and the taurus is a pretty small gun, though the ports help.

 

[murf]

welcome to thr. those loads should be under the max pressure limit for the 44 magnum. shoot the 305 grain load if you can be accurate with it.

luck,

murf

 

[The Evangelist Cowboy]

Hello,

If I'm correct the bullet weight isn't going to be the determining factor for loading in a smith (other than a considerable OAL that would only lend itself to a redhawk or TC) as long as the pressure is within bounds for the smith it should be fine, Underwood typically puts which guns are fine for their loads if there are limits, the 305 gr has no such warning and there is a review of someone using it in a 629 3 inch gun. The 340 gr however has warnings similar to buffalo bore. I myself have never use Underwoods 305 grain in my Smith's but I have used federals castcore 300 gr. Take that for what you will.

 

[CraigC]

Not going to be a problem unless you shoot 5000 of them. I hold my handloads for N-frames to no more than 1200fps.

 

[The Evangelist Cowboy]

Not going to be a problem unless you shoot 5000 of them. I hold my handloads for N-frames to no more than 1200fps.

For that particular weight, it in general? Curious about that. I dont typically shoot 300 gr. Often I shoot Remington 180 gr load that hits about 1558 out of a 5 inch

 

[CraigC]

In general but really 250gr to no more than 300gr. If I wanna go heavier, I pick up a Ruger.

 

[murf]

also, you can call underwood and discuss you misgivings.

luck,

murf

 

[748]

I found 270gr bullets produced unnecessary recoil in a Ruger super redhawk.
I wouldn't bother loading bigger than 240gr.
But in any 44mag rifle, 300s are great I can shoot those all day.

 

[paul105]

here are some actual chrono results for the 305gr ammo


Buffalo Bore, 305 LBT LFN HC rated 1,325 fps
Underwood, 305 LFNGC Plated (HiTech?) rated 1,325 fps
LabRadar muzzle velocity at 33 deg F Buffalo


S&W M69 2.75" ===> BB 1,195 fps ===> Under 1,147fps
S&W M69 4.25" ===> BB 1,276 fps ===> Under 1,248 fps
Ruger SRH 7.5" ===> BB 1,395 fps ===> Under 1,315 fps

 

[Rod47]

Wondering about having adequate sight adjustment with those heavy bullets.

 

[Riomouse911]

Those 305’s will have seriously stout recoil from a revolver.

Based on your stated need, you may be required to fire two or three shots DA in rapid succession if you’re fending off an aggressive moose that’s closing to antler-touching distance. Recovery from such heavy bullet recoil to get the gun back on target isn’t easy.

If it was me I’d stick to the 240-255 gr loads. These full power loads have plenty of horsepower and penetration to thonk a moose at close range and I have found they are a bit more controllable when firing DA quickly compared to the heavier bruisers in the 4” to 5” 629.

Just my observations, YMMV.

Stay safe.

 

[Harmonious Fulmination]

Thanks for all the advice everyone. Leaning towards the 255 grains loadings. Bullet choice and performance wise they are very close to Elmer Keith's iconic loading, which I feel bears some weight. Plus follow up shots seem relevant. I like the idea of getting a box of both and trying them out.

 

[WrongHanded]

Wondering about having adequate sight adjustment with those heavy bullets.

I have two .44 mag revolvers. Both Rugers. Both get 300gr loads. Both now have taller than standard front sights.

I suppose holdunder would be okay (if the shooter knows the POI at a given range), but not ideal.

 

[paul105]

At the range you will be shooting at a troublesome moose, the POI shouldn't be a problem. If it's more than 8 or 10 yds you are in deep stuff anyway. Here's a couple of targets - 2 3/4" M69 - 300 gr Miss Bullet Hammer, 20.0gr H110 - 10 shots each target -- double action as fast as I could acquire the front sight 7 yds, a bit more deliberate at 12 yds.

7 yards:



12 yds:



Shoot what you are comfortable with.

FWIW,

Paul

 

[sparkyv]

I likes me the MBC 300gr Hammer over 20.0gr H110 in my 629...very much!

300 gr Miss Bullet Hammer, 2