What is your planned use?Looking at a Super Redhawk in both models. Recoil does not matter, any good or bad experiences?
What is your planned use?
How much fun are you looking for? Depends on whether you handload or not. If you don't, the .44 is going to be cheaper to shoot. If you do, it doesn't matter. Or how much recoil you're accustomed to. If you've never shot a .44 or anything bigger, the .454 may be a bit much. You say it doesn't matter but it always matters.
Comparing the .454 to the .44 in standard loadings, the .44 gets a 300gr to 1400fps, the .454 gets it to 1700fps. The gets a 355gr to 1250fps and the .454 gets a 360gr to 1500fps. However, for a Redhawk one can utilize Brian Pearce's +P+ .44Mag data where we get the same 300gr to 1500fps and a 340gr to 1400fps. All the added velocity gains you is range. Either chambering will be accurate and either will take the biggest bears with the right bullet.
Just for fun?Just a fun gun for target use. Maybe a bear gun if I ever get the chance LOL
Then I'd pick the one that called to me the loudest.I've shot both, I have actually shot .44's with more recoil than some .454's. Weight/barrel length make some big differences. I do reload or I wouldn't even think about a .454. Just more or less looking for a big gun to play with, or use if I ever go into bear country as a backup. Not a big pistol hunter either, or snubby big bore guns. I do know that smaller .454's like the Alaskan do tend to be more problematic with bullet creep anyways. Thanks
Comparing the .454 to the .44 in standard loadings, the .44 gets a 300gr to 1400fps, the .454 gets it to 1700fps. The gets a 355gr to 1250fps and the .454 gets a 360gr to 1500fps. However, for a Redhawk one can utilize Brian Pearce's +P+ .44Mag data where we get the same 300gr to 1500fps and a 340gr to 1400fps. All the added velocity gains you is range. Either chambering will be accurate and either will take the biggest bears with the right bullet.
Something that always stuck in my memory from physics class was Mass + Velocity = Energy.
Meaning, the faster you can propel an object, the more kinetic energy it imparts on impact.
Strictly speaking, in terms of energy, you are correct. However, if shooting similar weight bullets in two different cartridges, where they both pass completely through your intended target, where does that extra energy go? It goes into displacing air and hitting whatever is behind the target.Granted, I am in no way a ballistics expert.....but this is something that has always confused me (speaking to the bold). So, understand that I'm sincerely asking trying to understand and not trying to dispute or argue.
Something that always stuck in my memory from physics class was Mass + Velocity = Energy. Meaning, the faster you can propel an object, the more kinetic energy it imparts on impact. For example,it's why a .357 Magnum hits "harder" than a much larger .45 ACP round (provided the round stops inside the target and not pass through) following this logic.
Am I wrong? Or are you just not trying to get "to technical" with your description of the .44 vs. .454 round?
Strictly speaking, in terms of energy, you are correct. However, if shooting similar weight bullets in two different cartridges, where they both pass completely through your intended target, where does that extra energy go? It goes into displacing air and hitting whatever is behind the target.
A 44 and 454 will both make large wound channels, and pass through large and dangerous animals. The 44 will kill NA animals dead. Will the 454 kill them deader? No. But the added velocity means flatter shooting and more range capabilities for down range velocities.
I think there is merit to the notion that increased velocity could mean less bullet deflection with heavy bone, but the sectional density on the same weight bullet in a 44 verses a 454 will be higher in the 44. So momentum and penetration will likely be a wash in both, and becomes irrelevant when the bullet passes completely through.
As far as temporary cavitation, well faster and bigger may increase that............ but will that kill? Most of the hunters I've spoken to state that permanent wound cavity and penetration are what matters. So the bottom line is that energy becomes pretty irrelevant when it comes to killing power. If a 44 will kill efficiently with heavy bullets, what will a 454 get you? More range is the answer in practical terms.
Craig made this assertion to me several years ago regarding the 460 Magnum. The more I've studied ballistics and the more I talk to folks like him and other handgun hunters, the more I see the merit of their assertion.
Part of what you're describing IS wrong, and the rest of what you're describing isn't technical enough... Kinda ironic...
If this is what sticks out in your memory, you either have a terrible memory, or had a terrible physics teacher. Kinetic Energy = 1/2 Mass * Velocity ^2... Maybe it was your gym coach?
This part is true at least, as velocity increases, kinetic energy increases as a power factor - V doubles, KE quadruples. This relationship unfairly favors high velocity cartridges. There are a lot of other things going on there too, however, the sectional densities are very different, so how the momentum is transferred to the recipient is very different. The 243win has a pretty similar Kinetic Energy to the 454 Casull because of its blistering speed - even slightly more than 454 when comparing some loads. However, one is a viable choice for hunting ANY game on the face of the planet, while one struggles to manage ethical kills on anything over about 400lbs. Kinetic Energy doesn't tell the whole story.
The reason the .357mag "hits harder" is that it also has more momentum - not just more KE - and generally has better built bullets, meant for taking game larger than 2 legged perpetrators. Newton's law isn't about conservation of energy, it's conservation of momentum, and for good reason...
In terms of the 44mag vs. 454 - you're talking about similarly constructed bullets of similar weights and relatively similar Sectional Densities, so you're really only talking about a difference in speed. So the only difference in performance upon impact is speed... If I shoot a block of gelatin with a 243win and a 454C, there's no combination of impact ranges which produce the same results on impact. I can never make the 243win produce the same wound channel as the 454, and vice versa. Similarly, you can never really get the 45acp and the 357mag to match up - they're too dissimilar from a ballistic standpoint. The 454C and 44mag are not so - a guy can shoot a block at 50yrds with the 44mag and ~225yrds with the 454C, which matches the impact velocity and bullet weight together, so the only difference is a slight shift in SD, which is a difference in 0.23 vs. 0.21... The visual and objective differences between the two impacts and the two wounds will be similar to the difference between two shots of each... Almost identical, as much as two wound cavities can be identical... So the 44mag and 454C are more like the 30-30 vs. 308win, or 30-06 vs. 300win mag - give the slower one a shorter range than the longer one and the results on target will be identical...
As I said in my first post, my 454's won't kill any animal my 44's can't kill, but the 454's can do it from farther away.
Energy doesn't really tell the story, especially with handguns. Hydrostatic shock, or whatever you want to call it, does not begin to appear until somewhere over 2000fps. With hardcast bullets or non-expanding solids, you will see little to no difference in wound channels above 1300fps. So all you really gain with velocity above that is a flatter trajectory. You can actually begin to lose penetration if the added velocity starts to overtax the bullet, which happens often with cast bullets. More deformation = less penetration.Granted, I am in no way a ballistics expert.....but this is something that has always confused me (speaking to the bold). So, understand that I'm sincerely asking trying to understand and not trying to dispute or argue.
Something that always stuck in my memory from physics class was Mass + Velocity = Energy. Meaning, the faster you can propel an object, the more kinetic energy it imparts on impact. For example,it's why a .357 Magnum hits "harder" than a much larger .45 ACP round (provided the round stops inside the target and not pass through) following this logic.
Am I wrong? Or are you just not trying to get "to technical" with your description of the .44 vs. .454 round?
Sorry to disagree thats an old wives tale. The only reason the progenitors of the myth that theres really no difference bw 1300 and 1700 fps quite honestly didnt use the right bullets and its all based off of hardcast lead where velocity gains are not shown to enhance wounf channel much just deform the nose profile. With solid copper slugs the wound channels open up from the start of the increase of velocity and continue on up. There is no dead zone as some have postulated. Get into the chest cavity of a human hit with a 357 and then with a 9mm and tell me theres no gain in wound channel. There is a huge difference i can assure you and both are well below the threshold of 2000fps. To make the example
More extreme take a solid copper solid of the same type and run it out of a 45 colt at 1100 fps and then a 454 at 1725 fps and then again at 2000fps out of a 460 and tell me theres no difference. This is one of the biggest myths with nooooo truth behind it.