P. Plainsman
Member
The .44 Special is an interesting cartridge. If I won the lottery, the Freedom Arms Model 97 that I would purchase on the following day would be chambered in .44 spl, I think.
My question is about some more down to earth guns. What are people's opinions of the .44 spl defensive snubbies?
Taurus and Charter seem to be the only producers of these beasts (and actually, the Taurus 445 is marked "not in production" on the Taurus website). The concept is an appealing one: a fat, slow cartridge in a small wheelgun that leaves a big mark. I am always curious to hear about the Taurus 445 snubs, in particular. They are good looking and intriguing guns.
But one hears different things. Some say the cylinder size makes these fiveguns too big to be concealed. Some say that their accuracy is bad. Some say recoil is distracting out of the small frame, and prevents quick follow-up shots. And some report that the .44 spl slug is very slow as it emerges from the short barrel -- enough so that the big punch suggested by the gun's concept fails to materialize. These gripes suggest that one would do better sticking with the classic .38+P or more recent .357 snubbies.
What's the scoop? I don't have a vested interest here: as I said, I find the little .44s intriguing. Just wondered what those with experience think of 'em.
My question is about some more down to earth guns. What are people's opinions of the .44 spl defensive snubbies?
Taurus and Charter seem to be the only producers of these beasts (and actually, the Taurus 445 is marked "not in production" on the Taurus website). The concept is an appealing one: a fat, slow cartridge in a small wheelgun that leaves a big mark. I am always curious to hear about the Taurus 445 snubs, in particular. They are good looking and intriguing guns.
But one hears different things. Some say the cylinder size makes these fiveguns too big to be concealed. Some say that their accuracy is bad. Some say recoil is distracting out of the small frame, and prevents quick follow-up shots. And some report that the .44 spl slug is very slow as it emerges from the short barrel -- enough so that the big punch suggested by the gun's concept fails to materialize. These gripes suggest that one would do better sticking with the classic .38+P or more recent .357 snubbies.
What's the scoop? I don't have a vested interest here: as I said, I find the little .44s intriguing. Just wondered what those with experience think of 'em.