Which load's gonna beat up my .44 Mountain Gun more? Expert opinions sought.

[Hand_Rifle_Guy]

There's 2 directions to go with violent .44 Mag loads. I have a 629-4 Mountain Gun I bought new for $450 a few years ago. It's never been back to the factory, I even have a now-expired one-year free servicing coupon. I didn't use it as the gun had had only 600-ish rounds through it at the time, and it ran perfectly then. "'Tain't broke, don't fix it!"

About loads:

One is the 300-grain loads from the likes of Garret. These heavies move out at some 1150 fps or so. These are well-known to beat the crap out of N-frames with a lot of use. I've shot all of 1 box of these through my gun, and they are a handfull. The gun likes 'em fine, accuracy-wise, and the recoil is bad.

On the other hand, there's those insane Remington Yellow-box 180-grain softpoints rated at 1600 fps out of a 4" barrel. These things are VIOLENT. Tremendous face-slapping muzzle blast. HUGE fireball. Recoil is WORSE, a wrenching, stinging slap to the palm of the hand. These loads scare people at indoor ranges. I usually shoot about 12 of these, and then shift to a different gun. The gun loves these loads, and shoots them with admirable accuracy and flat trajectory.

So far, my Mountain Gun is holding up well. It's digested 200+ of the 180's, and about 1000 standard 240-grain/1250 fps loads and seems to show no particular wear, and has displayed no problems. Trigger-pull's getting better.

Some considerations:

K-frames failed to withstand a steady diet of hot .357 Mag 125-grain loads, leading to the developement of the L-frame. Knowing how the 300-grainers are documented to beat up N-frames, and that the fast lightweights hammered K-frames, I wonder whether the hot 180's (The .44 Mag equivalent to the hot 125 .357 load.) might pound on my Mountain Gun the same way.

Against this is the fact that my gun is apparently the first generation to receive the N-frame beef-up mods designed to address wear issues raised by the Sillhouette community about 629's with heavier barrels than the Mountain Gun. Do the strengthening mods and late-model metallurgy successfully address the wear issues enough to render the whole question moot?

The 180's are my favorite load to run through the Mountain Gun. They elevate it to Hand Rifle status, and I love the "what in Samheck are you shooting?" factor that the violent blast and recoil brings about in observers.

But I don't want to beat my gun to death. It's skinny barrel has Elmer Kieth's "magic balance", and it handles like few other guns. If it's not up to the task, I'll get a Redhawk that I KNOW will withstand what amounts to abuse to a turn-of-the-century-vintage designed N-frame. I'll save the Mountain Gun for standard-level loads and .44 Specials that the N-frame was originally designed for. I recognize that different guns have different roles.

 

[Pappy John]

YOWZA!! I wish I could help you out with advice on your revolver, but you've already been much more adventurous with your choice of heavy loads than I've been with my 29-8 MG, so you're telling me more by letting us know that your 629 still lives after those Garrett loads than I could tell you from my more moderate loads.

I'm shooting mostly a 250 gr Keith type bullet at much slower speeds.

I thought they felt pretty snappy at 1050 fps. Pretty heavy leading too, so I backed them off to the neighborhood of 900 fps and they're nicely accurate and comfortable to shoot for extended sessions.

I only shoot real fast .44 stuff in hunting loads (a 240 gr XTP @1350) and already had a Redhawk for that purpose before I picked up the MG. Its 7.5" barrel soaks up the recoil a lot more comfortably and I don't worry about anything loosening up on that puppy.

I do like that Mountain Gun a lot....just not for the heavier stuff.

By the way...what grips are you using? Use gloves?

 

[mec]

That really is a testimonial to mountain gun durability. I've been doing like handrifle guy and sticking with relatively mild loads.

Right after the Endurance package came out in that Classic DX in the wooden box, I was standing around the Custom Gunsmith table at an NRA show. One of them was saying that a customer just sent him a DX that he had been using to shoot ( famous gunwriter's] 300 grain loads and the revolver had rattles and looseness all the way through it.

I have a 1977-78 vintage NM Super Blackhawk with noticeable endshake from shooting fast 240- 259 grain loads and 300 xtps loaded like the gunwriters said was ok several years ago. I had the endshake corrected but it came back within a couple of boxes of 300 xtps in the the mid to high 1200s.

 

[Gordon]

The 'endurance ' mods certainly will help. Having a skinny barrel has almost NOTHING to do with longevity . This said: now that you know where the 300Garretts hit save them for Bear country. Same with 180 HV loads, save them for defense. Same with 240-250's at 1350fps, save them for hunting. Get a 220-250 grain flat point mould and shoot as much as you want at 1050-1100fps for FUN and Practice. Or load 240 precast plated bullets behind enough Lil gun to reach 1200-1300 or buy equivalent factory loads like Rem. Mid range 240 magnum load. With these gun should go 30000 rnds before rebuild.

 

[Jim March]

If you enjoy shooting "psychofodder", you need something stamped "Ruger" on the side. Or Dan Wesson.

 

[Old Pa]

Heavy jacketed bullets will kill off both ends. Go to hard cast lead bullets and some of Keith's old loads for everything target and practice. A competent pistolsmith can also extend your gun's forcing cone, which will help with everything.

 

[Hand_Rifle_Guy]

I'm still waiting for Mike Irwin, and Ala Dan to weigh in. I'd like to hear from C.R. Sam, too, but he'll be with us when he can.

Of course, any and all opinions/thoughts/criticisms/"You're nuts!" 's are welcome also. The more the merrier.

Note Before: I left out that I'm not a reloader, YET, but I have a press (Old school Herter's single-stage.) dies, and supplies. What I lack is appropriate workspace. And a good scale. As soon as I move, I shall be annoying in my quest for good load info. Onwards to the questions at hand,


FWIW, I don't shoot many of, or plan on many more of, the heavy 300-grain loads. They cost too dang much, and I don't take the Mountain Gun to the mountains, so I don't expect to need it for bears.

Another FWIW is the fact that the Remington 180-grain JSP's are standard-pressure factory loads. They're violent to shoot, but apparently are nothing special, pressure wise. I absolutely WILL NOT use them for self-defense. They definitely would over-penetrate, and I regard them as hunting ammo. (I, however, do not hunt. They're just super-plinkers. At $20-$25/box, I don't plan to shoot a LOT of these either, but I always buy more.) I would be much more likely to load Specials for SD, for all the reasons that Elmer Kieth talked about in "Sixguns", mostly control and repeat-fire considerations.

That's one of the primary reasons I bought a 4", tapered-barrel N-frame in the first place rather than a standard heavy-barrel configuration in a longer barrel length. Elmer referred to a critical balance that allowed very rapid recovery of sight-alignment. The gun seems to bounce back into place easily, almost by itself. This balance is what he attributed the ability to hit a thrown 2-gallon can six times before it hit the ground. In my experience, he's RIGHT. Standard heavy-barreled N-frames feel very muzzle-heavy to me. That's good for soaking up recoil, but that's not an issue with the 240-grain "regular" mag load in the lighter configuration, at least for me.

What I find interesting is that no-one but me ever talks about the Remington-UMC loads for ANYTHING. Hunting, abnormal wear 'n tear, violent recoil, effectiveness, nuthin'. No-one ever confirms or comments on my impression of these rounds. What, are these things some kind of secret? No mention of 'em in gunrags either. Remington-UMC Yellow-box stuff isn't really PREMIUM ammo by an informal product-review-article "feel" I've gotten. It doesn't have fancy bullets, or anything. But these are the single most "psychboomer" load I've ever shot in a .44 mag, and they're just "normal" loads by any standard I can determine, hence my question. I'm trying to determine if these rounds qualify as abusive or not.

By comparison, "regular" 240-grain 1250-fps loads are pussycats to shoot, and I've found no exidence to support the idea that this sort of load is hard on the modern N-frames, including my own gun. Hot 125's used to do things like cause lock-up and timing problems, forcing-cone cracking, severe end-shake, screw migration, that sort of thing. The solution proved to be a heavier gun with thicker metal at the key points. .44's don't suffer quite the same set of ills, but the 300's were notorious for "causing excessive wear", and inducing misfunctions. I don't know if hot 180's in .357 mag would do the same things the hot 300's do in .44 mag, but I've never read of such. Perhaps they would, and that's why we don't have the 1500-fps 158-grain loads anymore. People BUILD those type of loads, but save 'em for Rugers or N- or L-frames. (Note: Even early-series Rugers are MUCH beefier than K-frames. Mas Ayoob has a 150-series fixed-sight Police Service Six that he called an "indestructible gun". It's never needed servicing, no matter what pseudo-reasonable loads he's run through it over the years. I have one of those. It shoots right to point-of-aim with 158's. I like it a bunch better than my GP-100, which seems HUGE by comparison. More of a .44-sized gun by my lights. GP-100's should be compared to N-frame M-27/28's, not L-frames.)

Hmmm. It's a tricky question. More input, please.

Oh yeah, grips. Factory open-backstrap Hogues, which work fine without gloves for the 240's but I have been known to get the gloves out for the 180's. 180's are TIRING to shoot, also. More so than 240's.

Leading hasn't been any sort of issue for me. All the lead loads I've shot have been in the 240-grain LSWC @ 1000-ish fps class, and the gun has digested about 500 of these. These, along with 240-grain FMJ-SWC's, are my standard practice loads. I save the 180's to scare people.

'Nuther Note: The ONLY gun I have that compares to the Mountain Gun with the 180's, recoil-wise is my stainless Taurus Tracker in .41 Mag. There are very few low-pressure loads available for the .41, so I've never tried any. Stock PMC standard-pressure 210-grain JHP's in a medium-frame gun like the Tracker are a HANDFUL even with the porting, and I'm pretty impressed with the cushioning ability of the Ribber Grip. Without that 1/4' of rubber across the back of those grips, the Tracker would be BRUTAL. How people can shoot the titanium .41 mag guns, much less the titanium SNUBBIES, is a bit beyond me. I guess that grip is mighty good.

'Nuther Note the second: The Mountain Gun with the 180's is a hair worse on the palm than my ADC Model-8 8"-barreled derringer in 7.62 x 39, known anecdotaly as The Monster, which weighs all of 20 ounces. I think it's a factor of bullet weight. The derringer runs a 123-grainer at a guestimated 2000 fps.

'Nuther Note the third: The Ruger SRH in .454 Casull, with either 300's @ 1800 fps, or 260's @ 2000 fps, is ALSO milder to shoot than the Mountain Gun w/ 180's. Just so you know. Dunno how much the SRH weighs, though.

 

[yesterdaysyouth]

i've shot a couple hundred of those umc 180 out of my 29-2 and before long it was time for some endshake bearings....

i hand another box or jhp 180's that i got with the gun, i forget what they even were but they were ALOT hotter than those umc loads...

i just figured all the recoil and powder blast was normal, it is a 44 mag...
either way im gonna start loading special in magnum brass for plinking, and use 10g. of universial clays behind a 200gr. xtp for things that move...

 

[Jim March]

Sidenote: for self defense with a 44Maggie, Proload has a "warm 44Spl in 44Mag cases" load using Gold Dot projectiles and calls it their "tactical lite". Exact specs:

200grains @ 1050fps from a 4" tube (490ft/lbs energy).

http://www.proload.com/shoppingcart/default.asp?show_cal=17

I suspect this is the best you could possibly load if CCWing that sucker. And it would be VERY difficult for a DA to call you a "Dirty Harry" when the energy level involved is on par with most police 40S&W fodder:

http://www.proload.com/shoppingcart/default.asp?show_cal=11

 

[Hal]

I'm no expert so take it FWIW.

Heavy jacketed bullets will kill off both ends. Go to hard cast lead bullets and some of Keith's old loads for everything target and practice.

'bout sums it all up.


RE: Lack of info/interest about the 180 gr. .44 loads.

'cause they pretty much suck as far as being usefull for anything is my guess.

I suspect this is the best you could possibly load if CCWing that sucker.

Maybe, maybe not.
Here's the specs on the Federal Hydra Shok in .44mag:

Muzzle 25 Yds 50 Yds 75 Yds 100 Yds

1180 1130 1080 1050 1010 - velocity

740 675 625 580 550 - energy

 

[Gordon]

Hand Rifle Guy: I agree with pretty much all you said EXCEPT you think 180grain HP load would be over penetrative in Humans. Actually exactly the opposite is the case with the Rem and Fed load both loseing their jackets and fragmenting in 8" or less of calibrated balistic gelatin. The 240XTP at 1250fps is about right with 12-14" permanent crush zone. Also the reason you are getting so much recoil ect. from those firebreathing 180's is that yes, these loads like 125grain .357mag factory loads, were designed and calibrated for max. velocity out of shorter tubes. The Federal 180's I chrono out ot my 4" 629 approach 1600fps(1700 out of 8 3/8" mod 29). Thats alot more real horsepower than the usual 240 at 1300fps or less in 4" , therefore more recoil!

 

[Hand_Rifle_Guy]

Gordon, the Remington 180's are soft-points, not hollow-points. Are SP's as prone to the violent expansion/fragmentation as the HP's are? I dunno.

And while I'm leery of .44 mags for SD in general for their over-penetrative abilities, (Not to say that your info's wrong. I'm not informed too well on latest-model expansion/penetration specs.) my primary objection to their use for SD is their repeat-fire controlability, or lack there-of. The Mountain Gun balance factor works better with the standard- to medium-velocity loads a lot better. 6 shots into a thrown target before it hits the ground is a powerful endorsement. I like the notion of those loads that Jim March mentioned.

I don't OBJECT to the recoil, per se, (Hand_Rifle_Guy LIVES for recoil! I custom-ordered The Monster! $700 is a LOT for a derringer!) and I'm aware of why it's there, I just don't want to kill my gun. I really like that Mountain Gun, but I don't WANT to have buy another expensive revolver if I don't HAVE to. Well, maybe I do, I rather like 5-1/2" Redhawks.

Yesterdaysyouth, you have presented a report that confirms my worries. However, the 29-2 predates the endurance mods, but you also describe what amounts to "normal wear" for old-school S&W maggies. They get to go back to the factory for a bit of maintenance every so often as a part of typical performance, at least in the early-generation guns.

Somehow, I can't help but find that just a bit disappointing. If a company produces a product for a specific purpose, the product should be able to hold up to typical use without failure, or the company should have spent a little effort re-engineering the product to withstand such use before releasing it to production. Maybe the endurance mods are the answer to this, but after-the-fact fixes are not reputation-enhancing, and are bad for business.

That takes me straight to the Ruger camp, but I don't like Rugers quite as much as I do Smiths, (For balance and appearance reasons.) which is why I got a Smith in the first place.

Hal, do you suppose those JSP's wouldn't work well for hunting? They shoot VERY flat, and are nicely accurate in my gun. After that, the only way to beat 'em would be to have a heavier, premium grade bullet, but then you're giving up some range. Large-caliber through-and-through penetration is the historical standard of performance for hunting ammo, and an exit wound is desired for tracking purposes. It's an academic question, however, as I don't hunt, although I may yet. I freely admit you could be right, as I don't have any practical experience, I just read and shoot a lot.


I didn't search out the Rem-UMC loads on purpose, I just found 'em by accident one day, and looked up the ballistics after I shot 'em the first time to find out what these bombs were about. I expected stout recoil out of the Mountain Gun when I bought it because of the skinny barrel, and what I'd read about 'em. An opportunity to acquire one of these limited-release revolvers arose, so I siezed it. The first handgun I ever shot was an Old-Model Blackhawk, serial # 1002! This gun was LIGHT for a .44, and had violent recoil wih standard 240-grain loads, so I thought I knew what I was getting into until I fired those 180's for the first time. Like I said, these loads scare people. Regular 240's DO NOT, even the new shooters I've introduced to them.

But will these fire-breathing loads accelerate wear on my late-model prize to the point of ridiculous? The jury's still out...

 

[Mike Irwin]

Sorry, HRG, not going to be weighing in on this one.

I don't have a .44 Mag., and have little to no experience with the loads that you're referencing, so anything I say on that subject would be a wild donkey guess.

 

[Hal]

HRG,

180 gr .44mag loads have always had very disappointing ballistics. Poor sectional density means they don't penetrate well and poor ballistic coefficient mean they shed velocity quickly. Combine that with being overbore for the caliber and it comes down to all show, and little go.

@ 100 yards, the 180's lose ~ 500 fps. @ 150 yards they drop like the proverbial brick,,@ 200 yards they have nothing left. Early shilloet(sp) shooters found this out in a hurry. Lot's of them tried the 180's because of the flat tracjectory out to 100 yards. They did pretty well. The problems came with the 150 and 200 yard targets. The 180's just ran out of steam.

yes, they do shoot very flat, but only out to 100 yards. After that they act like a badmitton birdie. It makes range estimation critical.

As far as soft points in a handgun caliber go, they've also always been a poor tradeoff. JSPs are supposed to offer expansion but as you can see, with a velocity spread of ~500fps within 100 yards, ain't no way you'll get any controlled expansion.
(yep, just checked the tables for the 180s @ 25 yards they lose ~ 200 fps - -that's way too much of a spread to compensate for.)
Compare that to the 240 gr which only loses ~ < 200 fps @ 100 yards.

If you want to shoot 180 gr loads, stick to the .41mag with em. If you want to shoot 300 gr and above, step up to the .45 calibers or the .480 Ruger. The .44mag's sweet spot is 240 - 265 gr. 180's are too light, and 300's are too heavy. Elmer Keith pretty much worked all of this out way back when he designed his Keith bullets.

 

[Stainz]

If you are defending yourself against four legged critters, the 180gr-240gr .44 Magnums of various styles may be warranted. I don't think you can beat the 200gr GDJHP CCI Blazers in .44 S&W Special for defense against unarmoured two legged predators. I chronographed mine from my 629MG and got 870fps; 840+fps from my 3" 696; and 795 fps from my 2.5" 296. The Speer GD opens up well at these lower speeds and is a great protective round. The fact that a local sports chain, Academy Sports/Outdoors, sells them - even on a Sunday or at night - for $12.99/50, of course, has little to do with my favor for them (yeah, right!). Seriously, I reload - and still like plinking with those Al cased rounds. I can hit a 12" round plate at 100yd 2-3 times out of 5 even with that fixed sight 296 (Okay... from sandbags!) with those rounds - better than my reloads! They are a controllable handful in the 296, fine in the 696, and pussycats in that 629MG.

When I need 'emphasis', I have my reliable - and first DA revolver - Ruger SRH in .454 Casull. It will reliably launch wimpy ~200 ft-lb 'Cowboy' loads in .45 Colt up to >2100 ft-lb .454 Casulls, when necessary. Some say it is the ugliest revolver they've seen - but I like it. With my 2X28mm Weaver H2 atop, I can place five of six 260gr .454's in less than 1.5" group at 50yd, my best ever revolver shooting. The slow rifling, designed for the faster .454's, doesn't yield the best groups in .45 Colt 'Cowboy' loads, however. I never worry what goes in that cylinder's bores!

Now... what does that have to do with the 629MG? I love mine - and feed it accordingly. With those square-butt conversion grips (S&W #21991), a la my 625 MG, it is a handsome revolver in the Keith-era style (Yes, I think he would have liked SS for a working firearm!). With use, it has become a smooth revolver - one I wouldn't even notice if it's cylinder bores were shorter - .44 S&W Special size. I really have not launched many .44 Magnums from mine, it is that 'special'. In their defense, S&W (800 #) does agree - if your .44 Magnum ammo came in a commercially offered boxed form, it will work in the 629MG. I am more respectful - or timid. Mine will last!

Stainz

 

[John Ross]

HRG: If you don't want to get into handloading, find yourself a custom loader (with an ammo mfr's license) and buy a quantity of appropriate ammo for your gun. Kent Lomont (208) 756-6819 can maybe help. Be advised not to ask for "samples" unless your idea of a sample is 1000 rounds. Kent has the old Super Vel ballistics lab and pressure gun set up at his place.

For extended shooting you want cast bullets. My standard load is 25-296-250 Keith for 1450, but I've started shooting 28-WC680 for 1250 because leading is nonexistent and accuracy is even better. My experience is with longer barreled M29s but I have shot over 100,000 of this load through several guns. Endurance in the lighter MG may be a bit less due to sharper recoil shaking things up more but I bet you will have shot many times the cost of the gun before work is needed.

Talk to Kent and get his advice.

JR

 

[Hand_Rifle_Guy]

Good information, Hal, thanks. I don't shoot past 100 yards, typically, so I was unaware of the trajectory shifts.

Hmmm. 150-200 yards seems like loonnng range for handgun hunting. Eh. More "book larnin'." If I go hunting with the Mountain Gun, I'll stick to the heavier bullets. But I'M not gonna shoot that far out. I'm a pretty good shot, but I couldn't reliably count on making good hits at that kind of range without a rifle. 100 yards would be it, and preferably closer. I can keep all six on a pie plate with iron sights at 100 yards on a good day, so that's as far as I'd want to push it. No scopes on any of my handguns, you see.

Mike, go buy a .44. You're depriving the world-at-large of your expertise. For shame.

Stainz, I like you thinking. It's pretty close to my own. I want my MG to last too, but I LOVE those thumpers!

Mr. Ross, I DO want to handload, rest assured, at the very least to save money! My current housing situation makes that a bit problematic, though. However, I do have access to a good commercial reloader that provides reasonably-priced loads of exactly the type you specify. One of the only benefits of living in such a large metropolitan area is that EVERYTHING is available here, pretty close by. Does this outweigh the miseries of living in a socialist miasma? Not by a long shot.

With the number of rounds you have fired downrange, your experiences are just what I'm fishing for. Thanks for your input. I shall have to give Mr. Lomont a call.

Note to self: Get off butt and read the man's books. Tired of listening to other folks rant about how good they are, and desire to join them.