carbine/revolver combo

[Dr.Rob]

I voted for .44 mag... only because I want an 1894 Marlin CB. They certainly are fun to shoot. But I'd draw the line at taking anything bigger than an elk with it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm certain you can kill an elk with a .44... but if I'm elk hunting I'd likely be carrying a lot more gun.

 

[MBane666]

Voted .44, cause that's my own choice.

Have been inadvertantly accumulating .44 carbines for a while now--20-inch Winchester M-94 SRC from 1970 (first, year available, I believe), Legacy Arms carbine (EXCELLENT buy and super smooth little gun!), Marlin 20-inch Cowboy (needs a trigger job, but most accurate carbine I own) and an old Winchester Trapper 16 1/2 inch that has served yeoman duty as the Official Bedroom Gun (with 9 240gr JHPs).

.44 handgun battery includes a blue S&W M-29 I bought new in, like, 1973 and have shot the living crap out of, a newer M-29 stainless and a host of Ruger single actions.

I believe the .44 is the single greatest handgun cartridge ever designed. From puff cowboy loads to serious thumpers, it's got it all...

Michael B

 

[stevelyn]

.357 for the combo. Otherwise I agree with Manlicher, anything larger should be a .22 to go along with the larger caliber carbine.

 

[Kamicosmos]

.44 Mag.

My combo is a Redhawk and Marlin 1894

 

[4v50 Gary]

44 Magnum. Because that's what I already have (in addition to .357 Mag combo lever/revolver).

 

[mainmech48]

I voted for the .357 combo, as that's what I use. IMHO, it offers the best all-around combination of 'handiness' and versatility. I can carry a 4" K-frame Smith or a 4 3/4" SA on my hip, plus the 5 3/4# Rossi all day long without feeling overloaded.

FWIW: Taurus/Rossi makes M-92 clones in both .454 and .480 Ruger now. If the idea of a 4 1/2# revolver and a 6 1/2# carbine that'll thump the Whee! outta whatever's on either end appeals to ya, there ya go!

 

[tulsamal]

FWIW: Taurus/Rossi makes M-92 clones in both .454 and .480 Ruger now. If the idea of a 4 1/2# revolver and a 6 1/2# carbine that'll thump the Whee! outta whatever's on either end appeals to ya, there ya go!

Yup, and I want one! I would probably "hardly ever" fire full .454's out of it but it is nice to know the capability is there. It's like a lot of people buy .357's and then shoot mostly .38's. So if your answer was ".45 Colt," I would argue that a Rossi .454 and your choice of .45 Colt revolver would actually be a more flexible alternative. Of course you could buy one of those new "snubby" Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan's if you just have to have "full capability" in both!

You can read about the M92's in .454 here: http://gunblast.com/Paco_Legacy_454.htm

Gregg

 

[cookekdjr]

I voted "other" because I'm currently infatuated with the Winchester Ranger Compact in .357 and the .357 Taurus Titanium Tracker (although I'm also a fan of the .357 Ruger Vaquero).
If you live in Alaska, I can see you picking .44 mag instead. But looking at the ballistics of buffalo bore's .357 loads (in anything) and regular loads in a carbine, I'd feel safe with the .357 combo anywhere else.

 

[twoblink]

Ruger GP100 + Timberwolf 357 Pump combo..

 

[cookekdjr]

"I voted "other" because I'm currently infatuated with the Winchester Ranger Compact in .357 and the .357 Taurus Titanium Tracker (although I'm also a fan of the .357 Ruger Vaquero).
If you live in Alaska, I can see you picking .44 mag instead. But looking at the ballistics of buffalo bore's .357 loads (in anything) and regular loads in a carbine, I'd feel safe with the .357 combo anywhere else."
Just saw that Taurus makes the Titanium Tracker in .45 Colt (and with fixed sights, too). So, replacing the Ranger with Winchester's trapper .45, my answer is still "other", but .45 may be the way to go instead of .357. With the right loads, its an Alaska combo, too.

 

[Ohen Cepel]

I have the Marlin in .357 and several revolvers in the same. Great caliber that I love.

I'm looking at another .44 and like the .454 However, not sure I'll go that route unless the need really shows itself.