44Magnum The Most Versatile Handgun Caliber

savit260, that's an awesome carry setup!

It is the most versatile handgun cartridge for a reloader, such as myself.

My personal experience and opinion........the 44 Magnum makes the 357 obsolete. I sold every 357 I owned due to the fact. I just never took a 357 out any longer when I had the option of shooting a 44 Mag. Plus tayloring the power levels according to the gun I wanted to shoot it in, being a reloader.

I still love my S&W models 14, 15, & 36, 38 Specials for target shooting and carry but a 357 just does nothing for me any longer.......and I find the boom of a 44 more appealing than the annoying and painful "crack" of a 357.

I carry this 44 Magnum on occasion.

savit260, that's an awesome carry setup!

Click to expand...

Thanks! The gun is a Alan Harton Ruger 50th Anv. Blackhawk and the holster is a Simply Rugged. They work together great.




Same holster only with the 45 Colt BH in it.

I shoot a .32 magnum but my vote for most versatile would be the .357 magnum. It is the .30-06 of the handgun world.

Don't confuse BIG with versatile.

Everything in life is a compromise of some sort. Handgun cartridges are no exception.

To the .460 fan... I gotta say 'meh'. I've shot a .460, will probably shoot another someday. I'm not going to get into the very real recoil/self-damage issue, instead skipping straight to the fact that the smallest .460 revolver is like a 2x scale chief's special. It's comically huge and a five shot. You can't realistically concealed carry that, at least not around here. My reaction to shooting a .460es (X-frame snubby) was to run out and buy a .454 Ruger Alaskan.

To the don't confuse big with versatile I say don't confuse size with power. If a single cartridge can be loaded to hunt rabbits and elk, and do a fair job at both, that's versatile regardless of the size.

To the premise of .44 as the most versatile, I'm kinda on board, with some ifs and buts. The main but is that the title actually extends to large-bore cartridges in general. .44 mag, .45 colt, I guess even .41 though I don't have any experience there. The chief if is that it mainly applies to hand loaders. These guns all tend to be far more accurate than the people shooting them, and they can be loaded mild or wild as needed.

I wouldn't trade my .454 Alaskan for a .44 version. The size and weight are very similar (the .44 is an ounce heavier, the length is identical) and my .454 can run from mouse belch cowboy loads up to full house .454 that are nothing to sneeze at...I've read reviews claiming 240gr bullets run ~1600fps out of that 2.5" barrel). I find it to be surprisingly accurate though it takes a fair amount of self control to shoot more than a few cylinders of full power loads well. I wouldn't feel under or over gunned facing down anything from a bullfrog to a ... I don't know, something big.

However...how much actual loss is there in going to a .357? Enough to really make a fuss over? I certainly don't know enough to claim that my hand cannon is really a better choice than a .357. It was just my choice. Life is too short for fanboiism.

From a power standpoint I don't see any difference between the versatility between 44 mag and 45 Colt. In similar size frames you can get similar power.
But if you're looking for versatility from a power standpoint 460Kodiak makes a valid point the 460 wins hands down and if you reload the 500 would have much the same capability since you could load down to the 50 special.

The .4s loose out for versatility when it comes to platform as 357s go from 5 shot snubs to 8 shot N frames and many places in between.

Yes the 44 Mag is very versatile but so are many others, words like most and best in the gun world are just so subjective.
Besides much of the versatility is going to come from the mind of the shooter anyway.

My reaction to shooting a .460es (X-frame snubby)

Click to expand...

Agreed. The snub 460 is idiotic in my opinion. You have to be losing a huge amount of velocity with that short of a bbl, which defeats the point of the 460 all together. My 5" already throws out a fire ball the size of a basketball, so that tells you right there that aside from noise and flash, the 2.5" 460 gets you nothing. Sorry to any snub owners who like theirs. It just doesn't seem worth the price to me.

You know I think the bottom line is that any magnum cartridge revolver is quite versitile in that you have options when shooting them. I enjoy shooting all of them, and since I've been out in the woods thinking about this thread, I realize........ it doesn't matter which is the most or least versatile. It is all a matter of what YOU want the gun to do.

460Kodiak said:

Agreed. The snub 460 is idiotic in my opinion. You have to be losing a huge amount of velocity with that short of a bbl, which defeats the point of the 460 all together..

Click to expand...

I wouldn't say idiotic (about the .460es). It probably doesn't lose as much as you think. One review claims a particular 300gr XTP .460 load chronos about 1500fps from the .460es, vs 1750fps from a longer barrel. Similarly, a magazine review I read on the ruger .454 snub claimed it loses about 14% of muzzle velocity and 29% of muzzle energy when going from a 7" revolver to a 2.5". Honestly, dropping 250fps, or 14%, or whatever, isn't a huge deal at these masses/speeds...it's still hotter than a hot .44mag from a long barrel.

Yes to your ending thought though.

Great topic. I've offen said to myself that the .44 mag is the most versitile cartridge that I have hand loaded for until I started doing a lot more carrying and hand loading for the .357. Now for me in my world of day hikes and city living the S&W 686+ with seven rounds in a 3 inch barrel has to be MY most versitile handgun.

Well, if one looks at published reloading data, for every cartridge either caliber will accept (.357 and .44) the .357 is king, as far as versatility in loads, bullet types and weights, and powders usable.

I love my Redhawk in 44 mag. It is a 5.5 bbl. But I would have to go with my Ruger GP100 4in over the big 44. I believe the 38/357 mag duo top the 44special/44mag duo.

Hunting I give the nod to the 44. Other then that, the 357 wins hands down as more versitile.

Seems to me almost like this is two separate discussions.

One being "Diversity of Platform Size"... (not the subject of the thread title) Yes. ,357 is going to win this one... from a J frame to a Redhawk, you cover a lot of ground.

Two being "Most Versatile Handgun Caliber" (direct from the title of the thread) which IMO is talking about the performance , low to high of the cartridge. Seems to me that 44 Russian to Heavy bullet full house Magnums cover a bunch more ground than 38LC to full house .357 Magnum does in velocity , energy (low to high) and range of projectile weights.

For a reloader experimenting with a handgun cartridge......the 44 Mag wins, no comparison.........sheer fun.

"Versatile" is relative, isn't it? For general all around use up to but NOT including deer, I'll take a .357 over a .44 any day. For hunting deer up anything the size of elk, I'll take a .44....SPECIAL. If I can't kill it with a 260 gr bullet @ 1200+ fps, I'll carry a rifle.

35W

Wow hard one. I solved this about 2 years ago. I carry 2" 357 Mag rhino as my backup. I carry either 44Mag or 45 colt for primary on handgun hunts. Depends on what I feel like.

I can do more with the 44 mag for loading up or down depending on game need by using 44spc and those light bullets (anything 200 grains and below0.

I would pick 44, but love 357 also! But 45 colt is a favorite!

When in Doubt default to Elmer! 44

I wonder if carrying a heavy frame gun with mild custom reloads and touting it over a ..357 is just a way of taming recoil. Personally, I would consider the weight and bulk for carry purposes.

savit260-Nonsense ! That's a 44 Mag Blackhawk and carrying it is a piece O cake.

Click to expand...

It works for you but carrying it that high would require a short barrel or some real contortions while drawing, possibly sweeping your body with a double action..

Nonsense ! That's a 44 Mag Blackhawk and carrying it is a piece O cake.

Click to expand...

Maybe it works for you, but that grip rubbing and digging into my ribs would get extremely uncomfortable pretty quick to me.

I've found something like a .357 J-frame tucked in below my ribs to be much more of a "piece of cake" for me to carry. The cylinder diameter and frame size of a .44 just don't work for me.

Most versatile doesn't mean best.

The most versatile pocket knife is a Swiss Army Knife. It'll open cans, bottles, remove philips and slotted screws, cut paper, saw branches, and cut things, too. Is it the best knife? Of course, a good multitool does even more than that!

I keep a Wenger Tradesman in my pocket just for that reason. But when I go hunting or into the field, I also carry my Benchmade because it is a better knife.

I owned a 44 Special once - it was a good revolver. I prefer 45acp in autos so it shows I'm fond of big bores. But my Ruger Police six is just the perfect size and in the swamps, if 6 rounds of .357 won't cut it...well, .357 does cut it so I don't worry. In my neck of the woods, the .44 Rem Mag does nothing at all better than the .357.

There just two guns I carry into the woods 44 mag. and 45/70 both hit like a freight train.

It works for you but carrying it that high would require a short barrel or some real contortions while drawing, possibly sweeping your body with a double action..

Click to expand...

And this would be the same reguardless of caliber so I'm not understanding your point.
44s and 45s come in shorter lengths.

I've found something like a .357 J-frame tucked in below my ribs to be much more of a "piece of cake" for me to carry. The cylinder diameter and frame size of a .44 just don't work for me.

Click to expand...

Might carry nice but I'd rather not have to try to dig the grip out from under my belt when I need it in a hurry. You ever time your draw from that rig?

Quote:
I think the .45 Colt can be shot by men and women comfortably, in a range of guns and certainly a range of loads in the larger frame guns, primarily Ruger. It is also well suited to a lever rifle. Once you get away from the stereotype cowboy loads with lead bullets, there are some intriguing possibilities.

Click to expand...

And what exactly keeps you from doing so in a .44Mag? Did you actually read the OP and look at the loads used? Two of the loads were in the moderate 1050-1150fps range

Click to expand...

Frame size and overall weight. The .44 is a big, heavy gun, whether you need it or not. The .45 Colt, generally not so much.

Quote:
It works for you but carrying it that high would require a short barrel or some real contortions while drawing, possibly sweeping your body with a double action..

Click to expand...

And this would be the same reguardless of caliber so I'm not understanding your point.
44s and 45s come in shorter lengths.

Click to expand...

It is not "regardless of caliber", because heavy calibers need some barrel length to be manageable. What barrel length do you like?

RealGun said:

Frame size and overall weight. The .44 is a big, heavy gun, whether you need it or not. The .45 Colt, generally not so much.

Click to expand...

I can get a .44 mag revolver that is 6.5" long (overall) and weighs under 2 pounds fairly easily. How does the .45 compare? I haven't seen many small .45s but that may just be bad luck.

The .44 is a big, heavy gun, whether you need it or not. The .45 Colt, generally not so much.

Click to expand...

Any 45 Colt that isn't built on the same size frame as a 44 mag isn't going to be capable of handeling the loads required to put it on even footing with the 44 Mag.