44 Mag barrel length ?

i tend to prefer the shorter barrels myself. unless you are using it for hunting (and even then), shortening to 5" won't cause any ill effects other than a little velocity loss. the actual amount is arguable, and generally specific to the barrel in question.

if you are looking for something a bit handier, i say go for it.

Would depend on the cost of the conversion. I tend to prefer barrels 4-6" myself, but it might be cheaper to trade for a 5.5" version than modify.

Being a sentimental person myself, and where you mentioned this was your dad's gun, I would keep it and make the modifications. I think 5 inch would be a great length. I also had a 7 1/2 inch Redhawk at one time, but I just could not warm up to the long barrel. 6" is about as long as I want go now. I think you would be wise to keep this particular gun. wyatte

It's better all the way around.

Chop the sucker and have a Weigand interchangeable front sight installed. Maybe slabside the barrel to cut a bit of weight, looks cool too.

Since it was your dads gun, I would leave it as is. Your dad bought a 7.5 inch for a reason. I would buy another .44 Mag.

I started with a 4 inch Redhawk. I love that gun.! But I learned I needed a longer barrel to hunt with. So I bought a 7.5 inch Blackhawk Bisley Hunter. I have a 5.5 inch a Redhawk on order if it ever comes available again.

You can't have enough .44 Mags..! It's my favorite handgun caliber.

Ya, I have one of those SRH with a 7-1/2" barrel. I wouldn't mind something a bit shorter, but I have had such great results while hunting with that set up, that I personally find it very difficult to want to change anything. But, if I had a sentimental attachment to it, beyond just liking it, I would very likely just have it modified to my liking.

GS

I kept my 7.5 and put a scope on it. Then I started buying shorter barrel 44's but not another 7.5.

I like the long sight radius hunting, I think it makes a difference.

Good thread
Actually, before chopping it perhaps one should ask what is the optimum length of barrel for .44 magnum? With chopping it you will lose some velocity and if not done exactly right accuracy will deteriorate as well. At what what barrel length you attain best combination of velocity, energy and accuracy, this is what you need to ask and may be some ballistics expert here can elaborate or answer. Personally, all technical data aside, 5-3/8" is good size.

...what is the optimum length of barrel for .44 magnum?

Click to expand...

About 18".

It's a very good option. Hope they have one.

They don't do that any more.

Nope, Ruger doesn't sell parts like cylinders and barrels. Even if they did, you're money ahead to just shorten what you have.

CraigC said:

About 18".

Click to expand...

What are levels of v and ftlb do we get with 18" compared to 19" and 17"?

There are no absolutes. Variations between individual guns not withstanding, velocities 'tend' to 'usually' peak 'around' 18". That is, usually around 300-400fps faster than typical revolver velocities.

I don't concern myself with ft-lbs.

^I notice lot of people say that do not concern with ftlb. Why not? Is the amount energy applied on target import as much how fast projectile is moving?

I have a 4" SS Redhawk in 44 Mag. I personally like the shorter bbl length. It gives me more then enough accuracy out to 20-25 yards. Ideal for hunting, probably not. But my main use is carrying as a side arm while out bumming around the desert and mountains. Just my two cents.

How many .44 Mags does CraigC own and what are the barrel lengths.?

I respect CraigC's opinion. He always responds with very intelligent, logical and reasonable responses. My point is, he has numerous .44 Mags. So why not more than one .44 Mag.? If it is a funds issue, I understand. I just see it as a sentimental thing.

I hunted and shot with my dads 7.5 inch Redhawk for years. I begged and borrowed it a lot. But if I inherited it, I could not modify it at all.

Thanks! Five revolvers (4" - 7½") and two rifles (both 20"). To me, velocity is not as much of a concern as sight radius. A good 4" sixgun is as short as I want one but it is no less effective on game than a 7½". While a 200fps difference might look impressive on paper, critters don't read ballistics tables.

Why not?

Click to expand...

Because energy is a poor gauge of a cartridge's effectiveness on living tissue. Especially when it comes to big bores. It is a number that places far too much importance on velocity, which is the most rapidly diminishing factor. It places less importance on weight and zero on diameter. Energy doesn't kill. Blood loss due to tissue damage is what kills.

CraigC said:

About 18".

Click to expand...

Hahaha..... yep... and thats the reason I have a nice lever to go along with it....