I'm in the market for my first .44MAG revolver

[USMC_2674]

What are some good options?

I will be using it primarily for carrying around in the woods (bear protection)and for deer hunting. I usually carry a Marlin Guide Gun in .45-70 as well, but would like a pistol just because I can

I normally carry a glock or browning high power for CCW, so this is my first foray into revolvers since an old Security Six I used to shoot years ago.

Price isn't "important"... if there is a reason to buy a $1000 pistol instead of a $400, then I am willing to spend the money.

I'll be reloading for it and will probably pick up a level action in .44MAG as well someday.

I am not a fan of the looks of the blackhawk, redhawk, etc, but could be convinced... I basically know nothing about revolvers.

Thanks and Semper Fidelis,

Kent

 

[Marshall]

Either of these would be a good choice. Or, your basic 4" 629.


Mountain Gun

Mountain Gun

4" Redhawk

 

[critter]

I have had a Blackhawk Bisley and a Redhawk. I settled on one which is my favorite and is the only .44 I now have. Took a nice whitetail buck with it at 65 yards a couple of years ago.

It is a Ruger Blackhawk Hunter model in stainless with a Bisley grip. It will outshoot any other .44 I have had. It is not too big or heavy to carry with a good holster either. That grip handles recoil best for me.

The 240 grainers (JHP's) loaded over a nice dose of H110 is what I hunt with. If I had bear or some larger bugger to have to deal with, I would use some 300 gr LFN hard cast over more H110. My gun shoots them like a laser!

Be sure to give them a look.

 

[Cosmoline]

If you're shooting the heavy stuff, I'd suggest a Bisley or Bisley-Vaquero. My 5.5" B-V is by far the most pleasant revolver I've shot with the heavy loads.

 

[markmc753]

I have a Taurus 444 ultralite that I got as a backpacking gun... I have been pleasantly surprised by its trigger, manageability and accuracy.. Given its light weight, I was expecting follow-up shots to be a real bear... not so. If you plan on extensive backwoods carry you might want to check it out

 

[hanno]

Another vote for the 629. It was good enough for Harry...

 

[gb6491]

If you're shooting the heavy stuff, I'd suggest a Bisley or Bisley-Vaquero. My 5.5" B-V is by far the most pleasant revolver I've shot with the heavy loads.

+1 on the Bisley Vaquero. I've been very pleased with mine.

You will probably be pleased with any of the makes/models already mentioned; the 44 is just a superb round
Regards,
Greg

 

[Fear Night]

629 all the way

 

[dirtdog]

4 inch Redhack gets my vote

Is over built and will last forever .

 

[Neophyte1]

.44's

USMC_2674: Sir welcome to the .44's My vote is always Ruger; so with my un-biased opinion, let me share,

You already reload, you don't need anything more. I know nothing about the SW's .44's rifle and handgun you rock. Barrel length with the handgun; hunting 7.5" carry about for critters 4.5"-5" Practice will make your difference
Follow up when you can. Thanks

 

[loud-mouth shnook]

Just thought I'd share my earliest experience in case it'd be useful to you:

My first entry into a .44 mag. was a Ruger Super Redhawk 7.5". Of course it was a tank. Great revolver. At about the same time, my brother-in-law picked up a .44 mag. Vaquero 7.5". On our first trip to the range with them, I fired about a box of 240 gr. JHP's through mine and my brother-in law did the same with his. Then we traded off.

My Super Redhawk bucked with some authority (.44 mag., fer crissake.) and when I fired the same load through his Vaquero, it felt like a grenade going off in my hand compared to the SR. The ol' SA plowhandle was designed to roll in the hand IIRC and roll it did. Big fun.

So if you're new to the .44 mag., a DA revolver will generally be a less stout-recoiling proposition in relation to a single action, in case that bears consideration.

I've been shooting a S&W 629 Classic DX 6.5" for the past few years and I doubt that I'll ever see any reason to change.

Good luck with whatever you decide on getting and be safe.

 

[jetman]

I've got to place my obligatory Colt vote! You can't go wrong with an Anaconda

 

[MachIVshooter]

If you're mostly gonna carry it, my vote is for the S&W mountain gun. Otherwise, model 629.

 

[BMW2]

I've got a 629 and have no complaints, although I think if I had it to do over I would go with the Redhawk. If you are going to shoot it a lot I think the Redhawk will hold up better over time. When I bought my 629, Ruger didn't offer the Redhawk in a 4 inch. As far as a Taurus goes, well just hold one. I know a couple of guys who own them and they are a good gun but the Ruger or Smith definitely feel more solidly built.

 

[earplug]

As you already carry a single action semi auto for defence, your Browning HP, I would look towards that type of action. During a high stress moment like a bear attack having one weapon platform would be nice.
Check out the 460 Rowland round on a high quality 1911 platform.

 

[BMW2]

True and along those lines a 10mm might not be a bad way to go either. Although I think there is less reason for concern going from an auto to revolver than the other way. After all just pull the trigger is pretty easy to remember in a high stress situation.

 

[Confederate]

I have to say I like the longevity of the Redhawk, but I think using one spring for two functions was a horrible mistake. Thus, if I were going to bet my life on a gun, it would be the S&W 629, but not one with the full underlug barrel. I'd get the old version or the Mountain Gun version.

I'm convinced the perfect barrel length for many outdoorsmen is five inches, yet for years all revolver companies have avoided 3-inch revolvers and 5-inch revolvers. Why? Because that's the way it's always been and even Bill Ruger didn't have the foresight to change it. Sure the Redhawk came out with a 5-inch barrel, but I also notice they've been very rare for years. When I wanted one, the only caliber they were available in were .41 magnum.

But 6-inchers are fine, too. If you can still get ahold of a stainless or Blue .44 mag Astra, they're pretty good guns and you can get them a shade under $300.



The Astra .44 mag (above) and the S&W 629. Both are gorgeous
guns, but the Astra can be had for a song...if you can find one. It
will take standard N-frame Pachmayr grips. They shoot about the
same and they're both pinned and recessed.



The 629, I think, will always reign as king of the .44s.

 

[welshgrouser]

Have you looked at this S&W
Model 329PD - HIVIZ- Scandium alloy frame with a Titanium cylinder--26oz.

I dont own one (i've got a 44 and 460 among others) but I think it's the coolest gun smiths made since the 500/460's. I'm sure it's a serious thumper w/full bore ammo.

If I didnt have kids I'd have one.. If you want protection you have to carry it... Light means you'll probably carry it. lots of $$ though for a .44.

 

[Fear Night]

Have you looked at this S&W
Model 329PD - HIVIZ- Scandium alloy frame with a Titanium cylinder--26oz.

Great idea for last resort defense, but I can't see a 26oz .44 Mag being very fun to practice with. If you really wanted last resort defense, I'd say go with one of the .460/.500 bear survival guns. .44 Mag is pretty limited against larger bears.

I love the way those PD series of guns look, I almost bought the .45ACP version. Even chambered in the .45ACP, I read about the recoil being unreasonable with anything other than plinking ammo. Every screw would work loose after 50 rounds and one guy even reported the wooden stock cracking after shooting some +Ps. Pretty much the consensus is that your first mod must be a Hogue grip (but my whole thing is that I loved how the wooden grip looked).

My 6.5" 629CL is 49.5oz for comparison. Kicks like a mule with hot loads.

 

[StrawHat]

Couple of suggestions.

If you want a 44 Magnum, I would suggest the M29 Mountain Revolver. 4" skinny barrel keeps the weight down but still is heavy enough that shooting it is not a problem.

(If you need to shoot a 26 oz revolver to save your butt you will never know you fired it. Practicing with that same revolver will not be fun.)

If you are going to reload, why choose the 44? The same revolver in 45 Long Colt, weighs less and throws more lead. Heck even the black powder ballistics of the Colt round are impressive and they can be improved quite a bit with intelligent reloading recipes. So can the 44.

Your nickel, your choice.

Advice is free and worth it!

 

[Virginian]

I'd vote for a Ruger old Vaquero in 44 magnum or 45 Long Colt, Stainless, with a 4-5/8" barrel. If 'whatever' got past that 45-70, you are probably only going to need the handgun to shoot yourself anyway. The Ruger noted is reasonably easy carry, not a lot of snag points, looks good, and will put six strong 44s or 45s whereever you can place them.

 

[wanderinwalker]

Another vote for a S&W 629. Find a nice, clean used one and you're in great shape. The only reason I suggest used is because: a) It'll save some $$ b) it won't have been used much (or will be obviously worn) and c) I don't like the looks of that pimple on the side of new S&Ws !

I would suggest a 4" in either the Mountain Gun or even the standard heavy barrel. Mine is a 6", which is great on the range, fine in a night stand, and fun to carry in the woods for, oh, an hour. It's not so much the weight, as the length gets in the way of anything.

As to loads, you can brew up fun plinking ammo with 240gr LSWCs at about 1000-fps. Still more muscle than most common handgun rounds and pleasant to shoot in a full-sized .44. Need more gas, just pick a bullet you like and go to full-power loads. Admittedly, my .44s don't see much full-house ammo, as it is way more power than I need.

 

[trbon8r]

I would say look for an older pinned and recessed Model 29-2. The workmanship completely blows away anything made today. With some careful shopping these guns can still be had for pretty reasonable. I recently paid $750 for mine in mint unfired original 1977 condition. It's not unfired anymore. I took care of that last weekend. Collectors might have a stroke at the thought of shooting an unfired gun from that era, but that's what they were made for. I will use it as an occasional shooter and enjoy the heck out of it.

Here is the model 29-2 pictured with the 27-2 .357 Magnum I recently bought. The .357 was a steal, 99% condition, with the presentation case for $500.

 

[Hawk]

For bear repellant and hunting I'd look hard at a Freedom Arms.

In double action, the various flavors of Redhawk get consistent good reviews. I don't care for the looks but that's subjective.

So much for hearsay, of the one's I've owned:

Anaconda - built like a tank yet pretty (again with the subjective) but it's discontinued. That never gives me a warm fuzzy and I probably shoot it less due to that. It doesn't help that one of the top Colt 'smiths is so buried he closed his waiting list. Add that to my miserable luck with Pythons and Colt's are probably best left to the collectors.

Smith 29 - worked well for me - comfortable to shoot, seemed more svelte than the Anaconda. I missed my 29-2 so much I caved and bought a 29-10 with a lock. So far, so good, knock on wood and all that.

Super Blackhawk - ouchie. My hands and Ruger's grips don't get along. A big old honkin' set of aftermarket grips cured it but looked like an abomination.

 

[Hawk]

I would say look for an older pinned and recessed Model 29-2. The workmanship completely blows away anything made today.

Sometimes. Sometimes not.
My 57-no dash was a steaming heap.
Fuff diagnosed its problem as being assembled during the Vietnam era when QC evidently sank below what it is today or what it was before.

Buying pinned and recessed with the expectation that the QC didn't suck probably requires a copy of the SCoSW or post here so someone can verify when it was made, followed by a check-out.

Purchasing 'nam era pinned and recessed over the 'net is a crap shoot.