.44 Magnum vs .45 ACP/AR

[Hurryin' Hoosier]

Just wanted some opinions on the recoil of a .44 Magnum (say, a 6" barrel S&W) versus the recoil of a .45 revolver with .45 ACP or Auto Rim ammunition. I've fired the latter (a Colt version of the Model 1917) but have never fired a .44 Magnum. Is there much difference?

 

[AFDavis11]

Yes, quite a bit of a difference. Bullet weight is important too. You can shoot .44 Special out of a magnum. I'd say the recoil feels 4 times as intense.

 

[huntsman]

to me .45acp fired out of a metal gun is a joy to shoot the .44mag was not, Shooting BB +p .45C is less intense than .44 mag I used to own.

 

[Hurryin' Hoosier]

Hmmmm. Maybe I'd better think more along the lines of a .357 Magnum. All I do (hopefully) is target-shooting.

 

[mongoslow]

full house .44 mag in a redhawk ain't bad, get it in a lighter blackhawk or one of the light carry magnums it will let you know you have something in your fist, it's not for the timid or recoil adverse in those platforms. .45 acp is not even close to being in the same ballpark. 230 grain +p in a G36 is mild compared to a full house mag in somthing like a blackhawk or tuarus tracker

 

[Deaf Smith]

Just wanted some opinions on the recoil of a .44 Magnum (say, a 6" barrel S&W) versus the recoil of a .45 revolver with .45 ACP or Auto Rim ammunition. I've fired the latter (a Colt version of the Model 1917) but have never fired a .44 Magnum. Is there much difference?

Well the 1917 Colt weighs a bit less than a 4 inch S&W .44 Magnum, but not a real lot.

.45 ACP 230 gr. slug at 850 .vs. a .44 240 at 1250 fps.

In momentium that .44 is 80 percent more.

Thus the .44 will kick almost twice as much (and the blast will also be twice as much.)

I have a 629-1 .44 4 inch and a 3 inch 625-1 in .45 ACP.

The .45 is much easier to shoot and it's a tack driver.

The top one is a 629-1 Moutian Revolver and beside it is my 625-1 .45 ACP.

Now if you get the .357, you can use .38s and they are pussycats (and yep, I have 'em to.)

Of those I prefer a older S&W 686 4 inch or Ruger GP-100 (but I hate the long underlug barrels.)

Up to you.

Deaf

 

[HighExpert]

If you really want to experience .44 mag recoil, try it in Taurus Tracker. .357 weight frame with a 5 shot cylinder. It will make a believer of you quickly.

 

[BCRider]

Does the phrase "Like night to day" mean anything? Yeah, there's a difference.

I've got both a 1917 in .45ACP and a couple of .44Mag revolvers. I can shoot the 1917 pretty much non stop. The .44Mags if loaded with top end loads I can shoot about 12 to 18 rounds and I'm done for the day. I reload so I tone them down to just under the starting loads for proper .44Mag but at the top end or a little over what is listed for .44Spl +P loads. Even those are more kicky than a .45ACP from the 1917. But at least I can shoot them without my hand and wrist telling me to STOP! ! ! !

 

[deadin]

My first 44 Mag was a Ruger Super Blackhawk and my experience was the same as BCRider, a couple of cylinders full and I was done. I couldn't even drop the hammer on a known empty chamber without flinching. I figured I was just a wimp and 44 Mag was more gun than I could handle.
A couple of years later I came up with a S&W Model 29 and could shoot 50+ rounds through it with no problems. All had to do with the grips. My hand just couldn't control the spade handle on the Ruger and it would twist/rotate in my hand. The M29 directed the recoil more straight back, and that I could handle.

 

[dickydalton]

Well the 1917 Colt weighs a bit less than a 4 inch S&W .44 Magnum, but not a real lot.

.45 ACP 230 gr. slug at 850 .vs. a .44 240 at 1250 fps.

In momentium that .44 is 80 percent more.

Thus the .44 will kick almost twice as much (and the blast will also be twice as much.)

I have a 629-1 .44 4 inch and a 3 inch 625-1 in .45 ACP.

The .45 is much easier to shoot and it's a tack driver.

The top one is a 629-1 Moutian Revolver and beside it is my 625-1 .45 ACP.

Now if you get the .357, you can use .38s and they are pussycats (and yep, I have 'em to.)

Of those I prefer a older S&W 686 4 inch or Ruger GP-100 (but I hate the long underlug barrels.)

Up to you.

Deaf

I could be a nice guy and take that nasty 629-1 off your hands, if you wish.
heh, heh
It would compliment the original Mountain Revolver that I have and love.

 

[Deaf Smith]

And that is why folks in my S&W 629-1 I handload 240 gr LSWC at 900 or so fps for most of my shooting.

If I go deer hunt I have DPX 225 gr .44 magnums and the gun is sighted dead on at 25 yards with this load.

But like I said, load the big .44s down for most of your needs and if need be, you can load it up!

Oh, and my 625-1 eats .45 Supers all day (but DON'T EVER USE THEM IN A 1917!))

I could be a nice guy and take that nasty 629-1 off your hands, if you wish.
heh, heh
It would compliment the original Mountain Revolver that I have and love.

Well dickydalton,

I have TWO of them! Or actually I have four 629s.

Two are regular 629-1s, 4 inchers, one a fancy 'presentation' model, and the other my working gun below.

And two of them are mountian guns. One a 629-1, as shown well above, and another is a 629-4 I think. Has the 'enhancements' and still flash chromed hammer and trigger.

Deaf

 

[au_prospector]

I watched an elderly man once

plant the rear sight of a .44 magnum revolver into his forehead...

He was with his son at an outdoor range in the area. Claimed he had never fired a .44 magnum as his son simply handed it to him and said "aim it at that can, pop." It was not pretty. He had to sit down for quite a while and keep a handkerchief on his forehead to stop the bleeding.

I inherited short barrel Super Blackhawk. Im still trying to cure my flinches and yips with it. Yet, I am addicted to the noise, recoil, and thump of it all.

This is NOT my HD gun.

 

[dickydalton]

And that is why folks in my S&W 629-1 I handload 240 gr LSWC at 900 or so fps for most of my shooting.

If I go deer hunt I have DPX 225 gr .44 magnums and the gun is sighted dead on at 25 yards with this load.

But like I said, load the big .44s down for most of your needs and if need be, you can load it up!

Oh, and my 625-1 eats .45 Supers all day (but DON'T EVER USE THEM IN A 1917!))



Well dickydalton,

I have TWO of them! Or actually I have four 629s.

Two are regular 629-1s, 4 inchers, one a fancy 'presentation' model, and the other my working gun below.

And two of them are mountian guns. One a 629-1, as shown well above, and another is a 629-4 I think. Has the 'enhancements' and still flash chromed hammer and trigger.

Deaf

Alas, I only have 2 29/629s at this time, due to cancer costs in 1983. I sold 2 29s back then but kept my 629 6" from the first run of those and still have one of the first run of 3000 Mountain Revolvers made. They, the first run of Mountain Revolvers, were all 629-2s so which run used the 629-1 frame?

 

[JeeperCreeper]

I have a .45 LC/ACP Blackhawk Convertible, that I shoot both .45 ACP and hot loaded .45LC out of. The .45LC are on par or spicier than a .44mag depending on load.

Nonscientific guesstimate out of the same gun:
.45 ACP is about a 4/10 on the recoil scale
.45 LC factory is a 5/10 (just for comparison)
.45LC (basically .44 mag power/weight) is about an 8/10.

So basically, I would guess about at least double the recoil... at least

 

[Iggy]

You would probably get more shooting and enjoyment out of a .38/.357 magnum.
It don't take much horsepower to shoot paper, and the smaller caliber will be more conducive to accuracy.
Much cheaper to shoot too.

 

[huntsman]

I have a .45 LC/ACP Blackhawk Convertible, that I shoot both .45 ACP and hot loaded .45LC out of. The .45LC are on par or spicier than a .44mag depending on load.

+1 after trying .357, .41, .44 mags I've settled on a Blackhawk .45 convertible and am truly pleased, it's a fun gun a woods gun and a hunting gun.

 

[SDGlock23]

Yes the Blackhawk .45 Colt/ACP convertible is one of, if not THE best deal in revolvers. I have the 4 5/8" version and it will shoot everything from basic .45 230gr FMJ to 330gr hardcasts doing 1300 fps. It's an incredible value for the money and covers everything from plinking to big game hunting.

 

[StrawHat]

Hmmmm. Maybe I'd better think more along the lines of a .357 Magnum. All I do (hopefully) is target-shooting.

If you are interested in target shooting/plinking, a good revolver in 38 Special will serve you well as will a good target revolver in 45 ACP. Both are still available from S&W. I would avoid the 357 Magnum as the revolvers are usually more expensive and I have not found them to be as accurate as revolves set up for the 38 Special.

Yes, you can shoot the 38 Special from a 357 revolver but that is the only advantage in my opinion.

A good 45 ACP revolver is a joy to shoot! Recoil is easily managed and the holes fall on top of each other in the target.

Either cartridge is a reloaders dream. Brass is plentiful and inexpensive. Powder charges are small and lead bullets are easily found or cast.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Alas, I only have 2 29/629s at this time, due to cancer costs in 1983. I sold 2 29s back then but kept my 629 6" from the first run of those and still have one of the first run of 3000 Mountain Revolvers made. They, the first run of Mountain Revolvers, were all 629-2s so which run used the 629-1 frame?

I'll have to dig them out of the safe!

One has a rear sight that is square at the front of it, and the other has the newer rounded one that is drilled and tapped for a scope on the frame (and awful rubber grips I just HATE.. one day I'll spring for $150 and get some real nice S&W wood RB grips.)

Older one here...

and newer one with the rubber grips.

Deaf

 

[urbaneruralite]

If it's just targets, .32 Longs. There's some fine S&W revolvers at low prices.

Now on the .357 vs .44, it really depends on the gun. My first exposure to a .357 was a K-frame. That is likely why I hate .357s so much. No use for them at all. My first .44 was a Super Blackhawk. It just rolls right back nice and easy. if you let it.. Then a 8" 629. Just a push. Big heavy guns make the .44 a pussycat compared to a light .357.

 

[joem1945]

I shoot both a .44 mag and 1917 colt or S&W in .45 ACP. The super blackhawk can be a handfull but put on some Hogue decellerator grips it makes a world of difference.

 

[dickydalton]

I'll have to dig them out of the safe!

One has a rear sight that is square at the front of it, and the other has the newer rounded one that is drilled and tapped for a scope on the frame (and awful rubber grips I just HATE.. one day I'll spring for $150 and get some real nice S&W wood RB grips.)

Older one here...

and newer one with the rubber grips.

Deaf

That "older" one at the top isn't a Mountain Revolver, though it probably is a 629-1. it has the full diameter barrel.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Well actually the 'older' one I was referring to is upside down. Hence the rubber grips.

That's the mountain revolver.

Deaf

 

[Deaf Smith]

Ok. I checked. I have the 629-2, Mountain Revolver and the 629-3, Mountain Gun, with the 'enhanced' package.

Deaf

 

[savit260]

Yes , a world of difference between a full house 44 Magnum and 45 acp.

If you reload, you can load the 44 Magnum from mild to wild. 44 Special levels all the way up to the fire breathers.

If you are buying factory ammo, the 45 acp is going to be much more economical.

I have both 44 Magnum and 45 acp revolvers, and typically load the 44's in the 1000-1100fps w/240gr bullet, which is snappier than a 45acp, but still very pleasant to shoot.

Every now and then I'll load up some top end loads just for giggles. Nice to have that kind of flexibility.