Are they the same? One of the things these simple comparisons assume, is that everything is the same. I am going to say that the unknown unknowns are greater than the known unknowns. Some known unknowns: What are the steels used? What are heat treatments? What are the forcing cone angles?. I learned this from a S&W customer rep, that the 44 Mag had a different cone angle than the 44 Spl. Somehow that makes a difference, but I don't remember if the cone difference is due to pressure considerations or not. How many over pressure rounds will these take till the cylinder ruptures from metal fatigue? This post, on another forum, it is worth looking at the fatigue curve, and the blown up Ruger pistol. Fatigue Life of 4140 steel http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?150409-Ruger-om-44-convertible&highlight=convertible What this guy showed in his post that you could expect to blew the cylinder of a Ruger Blackhawk in 650 rounds with overpressure loads. You can look at the curve and decide for yourself if the over pressure loads are all that over pressure. More known unknowns: What are the design limits of these pistols, or any pistols for that matter? Today with CAD programs engineers could draft up a dimensional model and see the hoop stresses in the cylinders, and the stress concentrations at the cylinder notches, and make good estimates as to the strength and fatigue lifetimes. I would love to see something like that. But, I don't have that and neither does anyone I have ever read advocating hot loads. I really think the unknown unknowns out number the known unknowns, but since I don't know what they are, I can't be certain. Now, if someone will take one of these things, load up 250 L bullets with 17.5 grs 2400 and fire 5000 rounds without a failure, I would then have great confidence in the ability of the pistol series to withstand that pressure. Making lifetime endurance conclusions on 500 over pressure rounds is insufficient for me to copy the behavior. I remember the in print Gunwriter George Nonte evaluating the first issue of the Charter Arms Bulldog. George measured cylinder thickness, compared against other pistols, made conclusions that the Bulldog would handle Keith loads just fine. His analysis was fallacious and it shows how little he knew about his subject matter. He did not know the materials or heat treatment in the other pistols, he did not know the materials and heat treatment of the Bulldog, and he did not know the design margins of the Bulldog. When I called Charter Arms, they had seen lots of blown cylinders from owners who had copied Keith loads. Pushing the boundaries may result in nothing, or it may result in something. Acting out of ignorance and pushing the boundaries is far more risky than being ignorant and not pushing the boundaries. And really, does more mean more? What exactly are you getting when you bump up pressures above that of the standard cartridge. Does the wound channel get larger and deeper? By how much?