why was the 44 special created

[Slamfire]

I presume you mean 'simulant' instead of 'stimulant'...

Even so, I actually laughed at that phrase.

Exceptionally well put.

Freudian slip!

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

It is an evolution of the .44 Russian, the invention of smokeless powder and the invention of the S&W New Century. S&W wanted a cartridge with improvements for their new revolver. Gotta love a Triple Lock!

Bingo, the correct answer.

I was wondering this the other day. My guess was that the .44 Special just became a natural progression from the .44 percussion revolvers

Nope. Smith and Wesson never made any percussion revolvers.

Let's look at a little bit of Smith and Wesson History. For the first 40 years or so of existence, S&W made what are called today the Tip Up revolvers.

Here is a photo showing the three different sizes of Tip Up revolvers shown with a K frame Model 14 for size comparison. From top to bottom, largest to smallest, the Tip Ups are the #2 Old Army, #1 1/2, and the tiny #1. Both the #2 and the # 1 1/2 fired a 32 rimfire cartridge, the little #1 fired what we would call today the 22 Short.






This photo of a #2 Old Army shows how the Tip Ups worked. To load, a catch at the bottom of the frame was activated, allowing the barrel and cylinder to Tip Up, hence the name. The cylinder was then pulled off the frame and loaded, then popped back into the frame, and the barrel was swung down and locked in place. To reload the sequence was the same, but fired cartridges would be shoved out of the chambers with the rod under the barrel.






The Tip Ups were very successful, and because of the Rollin White patent that S&W controlled, no other American company was legally able to make cartridge revolvers until the patent expired in 1869. Which must have driven Sam Colt nuts, because he could not make any cartridge revolvers to sell to the Army during the Civil War. This must have doubly annoyed Colt because White had been an employee, and when Colt showed no interest in his design for a cartridge revolver, White patented it himself. Colt died in 1862, but missing the opportunity to make cartridge revolvers must have driven him nuts, in my humble opinion.


Anyway, the Tip Up designs were not very strong, and were never produced in a caliber larger than 32. S&W experimented with a 44 caliber design, but decided the design was not strong enough for a 44 caliber Tip Up, and never produced one. The #2 Old Army was very popular with Union officers, many bought the revolver with their own money. Although not as powerful as a 44 caliber percussion revolver, they were much quicker to reload.




Before the White patent expired in 1869, Daniel Wesson was sure all the other revolver manufacturers would have a cartridge revolver waiting in the wings, so he designed a radically new cartridge revolver. The American Model was the result of his work. (This is not actually an American Model, it is a 1st Model Russian, but on the outside they American Model and the 1st Model Russian were identical.)






The American Model was the first S&W Top Break. Unlike the Tip Ups, the barrel swung down to reload.






I'm cheating a little bit here, this is a New Model Number Three, but as with all S&W Top Break revolvers, extraction and ejection of spent cartridges was automatic upon opening the revolver. S&W was light years ahead of Colt in this regard, because all of the single action cartridge revolvers they introduced required empties to be ejected from the chambers one at a time through the loading gate, and reloading was also done one at a time through the loading gate.






Not to belabor things too much, but many of the large frame Top Break Smiths were available chambered for a variety of cartridges, but 44 Russian was always the most common chambering. There were five separate #3 large frame Top Breaks built; the American Model, the Russian Model, the Schofield Model, the New Model Number Three, and the 44 Double Action. For my money, the New Model Number Three was the best of them. This one is chambered for 44 Russian, the most common chambering of this model.

Driftwood has plenty of period ads, one of which was a S&W ad comparing various cartridge penetration in wood. Interesting that the 45 Colt was excluded. There were no velocities given, just penetration in wood, and as I recall, the 44 Special was a winner!

Slamfire may be referring to this page from a reprint of the 1900 S&W catalog. At the time, S&W was not chambering any of their revolvers for 45 Colt, that is why it is not included. And 44 Special had not been invented yet, that is why it is not included.






Smith and Wesson had been building double action Top Break revolvers since 1880, but in 1896 they built their first double action revolver with a swing out cylinder, chambered for 32 S&W Long, followed in 1899 by the 38 Special Military and Police model of 1899.

In 1908, the 44 Hand Ejector 1st Model, also known as the New Century revolver was introduced. Because of the unique 3 position lock up of the cylinder, this model has forever been known by the popular name Triple Lock.

This nickel plated Triple Lock left the factory in 1915, the last year of Triple Lock production.






For many years, the Triple Lock was my Holy Grail revolver, I wanted one, but could not find any I could afford. I have several of them now, this one is my favorite. It left the factory in 1907, and has a very low serial number, under 200. Hardly any blue left on it, and the grips are very worn, but I got it for a song, and it still locks up as tight as the day it left the factory.






OK, lets talk about the 44 Special cartridge for a moment. A friend asked me once, what is special about the 38 Special? Nothing I replied, it is simply a 19th Century marketing term. The same with 44 Special. Smith and Wesson developed the 44 Special in conjunction with the Triple Lock. As with the 38 Special, which S&W also developed, most S&W 44 Special revolvers were marked 44 S&W SPECIAL CTG. (CTG simply means cartridge).






However my worn old blue Triple Lock is simply marked 44 S&W CTG. I think it was Roy Jinks who told me the 44 S&W SPECIAL CTG die had probably not been made up yet.






According to Roy Jinks in The History of Smith and Wesson, 44 Special was originally loaded with 26 grains of Black Powder, 3 grains more than the 44 Russian loading. A 246 grain bullet was used, and penetration was through nine pine boards, each 7/8" thick. I do not have the numbers handy, but I seem to recall 44 Special is roughly 1/10" longer than 44 Russian. Of course, at some point 44 Special began to be loaded with Smokeless powder.

Why did S&W not chamber the Triple Lock for 45 Colt? The Standard Catalog of Smith and Wesson reports that the Triple Lock was chambered for 44 S&W Special, as well as 44 Russian, 44-40, 455 Mark II, and 38-40. It is reported that 23 were chambered for 45 Colt. Many times, old Triple Locks are rechambered today for 45 Colt, but only a few were originally chambered for the cartridge.

Left to right in this photo, the cartridges are 44 Russian, 44 Special, 44 Magnum, and 44-40. The dimensions for 44 Russian, 44 Special, and 44 Magnum are identical, except each later iteration is stretched a little bit longer.






The factory price of a Triple Lock was $21. Sales were slow, and after making 15,375 production ceased in 1915. One of the complaints about the Triple Lock came from England, where it was claimed the shrouded mechanism under the barrel could be fouled with mud in the field.

44 Hand Ejector 2nd Model production began in 1915. The third cylinder locking mechanism was gone, replaced by a simple spring loaded lug under the barrel. The price was reduced from $21 to $19, mostly because of eliminating the cost of making the third latch mechanism. This 44 HE 2nd Model shipped in 1921. Notice the simpler spring loaded latch under the barrel.






One of my favorite 44 Special revolvers is this 44 Hand Ejector 3rd Model, sometimes known as the Model 1926 Hand Ejector. Texas based S&W distributor Wolf & Klar had received requests for a 44 Special revolver with a shroud under the barrel, and S&W complied. This one was carried by an officer during WWII. It has been refinished in nickle plate, which was not done by the factory, as witnessed by the nickel plated hammer and trigger. Still it is one of my favorites. Notice the shroud under the barrel, but there is no 3rd latch.






This 44 Hand Ejector 4th Model is also one of my favorite 44 Special revolvers. It shipped in 1955.

 

[Slamfire]

Slamfire may be referring to this page from a reprint of the 1900 S&W catalog. At the time, S&W was not chambering any of their revolvers for 45 Colt, that is why it is not included. And 44 Special had not been invented yet, that is why it is not included.

Corporations pathologically loathe each other, and won't promote other companies names or products unless that is the only way to make profit. Even then, they hate it. Still, S&W did make a 45 caliber revolver for the Army, but apparently they were only advertising the "American or English" 45. Was that the 455 Webley? Which would be again, another competitor, so the customer has to guess at the name.

In 1908, the 44 Hand Ejector 1st Model, also known as the New Century revolver was introduced. Because of the unique 3 position lock up of the cylinder, this model has forever been known by the popular name Triple Lock.

OK, lets talk about the 44 Special cartridge for a moment. A friend asked me once, what is special about the 38 Special? Nothing I replied, it is simply a 19th Century marketing term. The same with 44 Special. Smith and Wesson developed the 44 Special in conjunction with the Triple Lock. As with the 38 Special, which S&W also developed, most S&W 44 Special revolvers were marked 44 S&W SPECIAL CTG. (CTG simply means cartridge).

You did not expressly mention which was the first 44 Special revolver. What year was that introduced?

 

[wcwhitey]

Corporations pathologically loathe each other, and won't promote other companies names or products unless that is the only way to make profit. Even then, they hate it. Still, S&W did make a 45 caliber revolver for the Army, but apparently they were only advertising the "American or English" 45. Was that the 455 Webley? Which would be again, another competitor, so the customer has to guess at the name.



You did not expressly mention which was the first 44 Special revolver. What year was that introduced?

Watch that video I provided the link for. They give the whole history of S&W and Colt Military Revolvers. The politics behind it and the contracts that were awarded with production numbers. Yes the British did buy and use .455 chambered revolvers from both makers in WWI as did Canada for both military use and domestic security. The first order was actually commercial Triple Locks re-chambered from .44 Special to .455, pretty blue and all.

 

[wcwhitey]

@Driftwood Johnson was that 3rd Model special order with the ejector shroud the same as used by the legendary Lawman Jelly Bryce?

 

[Jim Watson]

S&W did make a 45 caliber revolver for the Army, but apparently they were only advertising the "American or English" 45. Was that the 455 Webley?

No, that is the .450 Adams. I don't know what American round it would take, maybe .45 Schofield.

You did not expressly mention which was the first 44 Special revolver. What year was that introduced?

Variously reported as 1907 or 1908.

A friend asked me once, what is special about the 38 Special? Nothing I replied, it is simply a 19th Century marketing term.

An Internet Expert opined that it was like the .32 Winchester Special, meant for smokeless but usable with black. Sounds to me like a chance agreement of nomenclature from two different companies.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

You did not expressly mention which was the first 44 Special revolver. What year was that introduced?

Whether I mentioned it or not, the first revolver to chamber the 44 Special round was the Triple Lock. Known officially as the 44 Hand Ejector, 1st Model, or the New Century.

The 44 Special round was developed specifically for the Triple Lock.

Sources vary as to when, some say 1908, some say 1907.

Roy Jinks (the official S&W historian) assured me this one shipped in 1907. It is chambered for 44 Special, despite what is marked on the barrel, so I am going with 1907.






Here is another photo, showing the third latch protruding at the bottom of the ejector rod shroud.







Here is a treat, a Triple Lock Target Model. notice the tiny screw to adjust the rear sight for windage. There is another screw on top to adjust it for elevation. Note the pinned Paine front sight. This one shipped in 1913. Note the barrel marking is 44 S&W SPECIAL CTG.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

An Internet Expert opined that it was like the .32 Winchester Special, meant for smokeless but usable with black. Sounds to me like a chance agreement of nomenclature from two different companies.

Since the 38 Special was developed in 1899, and originally loaded with Black Powder, I don't think that logic carried over to S&W.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

was that 3rd Model special order with the ejector shroud the same as used by the legendary Lawman Jelly Bryce?

I do not know anything about Jacob Aldolphus Bryce. I looked him up today but I do not know what type of revolver he used.

According to SCSW the 44 Hand Ejector 3rd Model, the one with the shroud under the barrel, was produced from 1926 until 1941. That is why it is sometimes known as the Model 1926. SCSW says this model was usually available as special order only and was not cataloged until 1940, when it replaced the 44 HE 2nd Model (the one without the shroud). Interestingly enough, the 2nd Model was cataloged from 1915 to 1940. There were 4,976 3rd Models produced, 17,510 2nd Models were produced.

My 3rd Model shipped in 1929, and I believe I mentioned earlier that it was carried by an officer in WWII. Somewhere I have a very beat up holster that came with it.

 

[wcwhitey]

I do not know anything about Jacob Aldolphus Bryce. I looked him up today but I do not know what type of revolver he used.

According to SCSW the 44 Hand Ejector 3rd Model, the one with the shroud under the barrel, was produced from 1926 until 1941. That is why it is sometimes known as the Model 1926. SCSW says this model was usually available as special order only and was not cataloged until 1940, when it replaced the 44 HE 2nd Model (the one without the shroud). Interestingly enough, the 2nd Model was cataloged from 1915 to 1940. There were 4,976 3rd Models produced, 17,510 2nd Models were produced.

My 3rd Model shipped in 1929, and I believe I mentioned earlier that it was carried by an officer in WWII. Somewhere I have a very beat up holster that came with it.

He had a 3rd Model .44 Special. Said to have used a ThreePersons holster. Just curious! I love the look of the shroud with the thin N frame barrel. When you showed the nickel gun this is what I thought of. From the American Rifleman.
https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/profile-jelly-bryce-oklahoma-gunfighter/

 

[trekker73]

So who would the main market have been fellas? Say the first 100 shipped would it be 20 cops, 20 target shooters, 60 regular folk or different ratio?

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

So who would the main market have been fellas? Say the first 100 shipped would it be 20 cops, 20 target shooters, 60 regular folk or different ratio?

I have no information on who were the purchasers of the 44 Hand Ejector, 1st Model (Triple Lock).

I can tell you that around 6,000 Triple Locks were chambered for .455 Mark II, and the great majority of these were shipped to the British Government during the First World War. Most of these were sold as surplus after the War, and many were converted to 45 Colt.

Regarding 44 Special Target Models as pictured above, again I have no figures for how many of these were manufactured. SCSW says they are scarce, what ever that means.

Without any figures for who was buying the Triple Lock chambered for 44 Special, I would have to guess that the great majority of the 15,375 made were sold to private individuals.

Here is something you may find interesting:

A number of years ago, I bought what I thought was a 44 Hand Ejector 2nd Model. I had been looking for a 1st Model (Triple Lock), but could not find any I could afford. I got the 2nd Model for a good price and was pleased to finally have a 44 Hand Ejector of any sort.








But some of the markings on it puzzled me. A Smith and Wesson revolver of this vintage should have had the serial number stamped on the flat of the underside of the barrel. Instead, this diamond was stamped there.






There was a strange marking on the left side of the frame that I did not recognize.






And there was a little crown stamped on the underside of the butt.






I had the revolver lettered, and was surprised to find it had not left the factory as a 44 Hand Ejector, 2nd Model. Instead, it shipped in 1916 to the Canadian government and was in fact a 455 Mark II Hand Ejector. At some point it had been shipped back to the factory, and converted to 44 Special. The diamond shaped marking on the bottom of the barrel was stamped at the factory to indicate the revolver had been modified, fitted with a 44 Special barrel and cylinder. The odd marking on the side of the frame is the Canadian Broad Arrow, similar to the British Broad Arrow, but surrounded by a C, for Canada. The little crown on the bottom of the butt was a proof mark stamped there by the Canadian Government.

Interesting history, at first I was disappointed it was not a 44 Hand Ejector 2nd Model, but I have grown to like this old revolver a lot, just as it is.

 

[Slamfire]

I am not convinced that the stated reason for the creation of the 44 Special was due to "improvements" in smokeless powders, or really had anything to do with smokeless powders, rather S&W created a new cartridge that the use of, required the customer to buy a new pistol.

I scanned several articles on the 44 Russian. The first is a 2002 April Handloader article and a August 2017 Guns Magazine article. The first traces the history of the 44 Russian from period advertising and catalogs. As a base line, with a 246 grain bullet was tossed 750 fps with 23 grs of black powder. There are 235 gr and 255 grain factory bullets, 115 grain gallery loads. Standard smokeless full power loads (assuming same velocity as black powder) and smokeless gallery loads were introduced in 1896. The 2002 author found the earliest published velocities in a 1918 Winchester catalog. The 44 Russian pushed a 246 grain bullet 680 fps, the 44 Special 755 with the same bullet. The Russian pistol had a seven inch barrel the Special a five inch barrel. However, the 1954 Winchester catalog, both rounds are pushing the same bullet to 755 fps.

The 44 Russian case is approximate one inch long, the 44 Special one and an eighth inch. As a comparison, the 45 ACP is about 0.9 inches long. There was, and is, plenty of case capacity in the 44 Russian.

Hatcher in his Textbook of Revolvers states 5.5 grains of Bullseye pistol powder with a 246 bullet to 750 fps in 6 inch barrel but does not provide a pressure. Phillip Sharpe has a large reloading section with the 44 Russian, and one load hits 1010 fps with a 200 grain bullet and SR80, an obsolete smokeless powder.

We know the both Unique (1898) and Bullseye pistol powder were being used prior to 1900 Oldest 38 Special Powder Still In Existence

And both of these powders are still on the market. So someone today can test the statement that the 44 Russian cartridge does not perform well, or will not push a 246 bullet to 755 fps with either powder. The historical record shows that Bullseye can, and did. Examining my 2017 article, the author is easily pushing a 255gr lyman 429251 to 722 fps in a Colt SAA with five grs of Universal. Universal is supposed to be a close copy of Unique.

What I am lacking is pressure data. I would be interested from those who have pressure calculating programs, what the computer says is the internal pressure generated when Bullseye Pistol and Unique are used to push a 246 grain bullet to 755 fps in a 44 Russian case. And if the pressure is less than or equal to the pressures of a standard 45 ACP round, which was chambered in the new N frame revolvers, than any pressure concerns about the 44 Russian and smokeless powders are not warranted. Smokeless powders were available to push the same bullet to the same speed as the 44 Special. Of course with a larger case, handloaders are able to push the bullet faster, but reloaders were not, and are not, S&W customer.

By moving the market to a new cartridge, S&W obsoleted hundreds of thousands of old revolvers, probably got money from ammunition companies from licensing deals on the new ammunition. So, I am going to claim it was more profitable for S&W to introduce a new cartridge than to keep using the old. And any claims about the change over being needed because of smokeless powder technology are specious, to keep the customer base happy. Customers really don’t like finding out changes are nothing more than planned obsolescence designed to increase product churn.

One should always be skeptical about Corporate pronouncements when it comes to product changes. It surprises me that literally millions of people believe Apple Corporation statements. After a new iphone model is introduced: the previous model of iphone immediately receives a software download which slows the speed of the data processor. Apple claims this is to “save the costumer’s battery”. Millions of customers believe that Apple is looking out for them, and that Apple is not a nudging them to buy a new $900 iphone. I don't know if Apple continually slows every older model each model iteration, to "help battery life" to the point that the oldest models are non functionally slow. They could be doing this, but not that it matters in the long run. Apple Cultists do not think think the lack of Apple support for iphones six years and older is any form of planned obsolesce. In fact, they love it.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

I have already stated that according to Roy Jinks in The History of Smith and Wesson, 44 Special was originally loaded with 26 grains of Black Powder, 3 grains more than the 44 Russian loading. A 246 grain bullet was used, and penetration was through nine pine boards, each 7/8" thick.

See the page from the 1900 S&W catalog stating that at that time 44 Russian was loaded with 23 grains of Black Powder and 256 grains of lead and penetration was through 7 1/2 pine boards.

I grabbed some modern 44 Russian brass made by Starline and they are measuring .960 long. I did the same with some 44 Special brass, and they are coming out 1.15 long, The delta is .19, or slightly over 3/16".

Plenty of space for 3 more grains of Black Powder.

I tend to agree with you, creation of the 44 Special cartridge had more to do with making a fancy new cartridge for Smith and Wesson's fancy new Triple Lock than anything else. The third latch of the Triple Lock was completely unnecessary, as has been demonstrated for many years with all the S&W revolvers that only secure the cylinder assembly in two places, the front and the rear. It has been speculated that the reason for the third latch on the Triple Lock was because S&W wanted to demonstrate their manufacturing prowess in being able to design and produce such a revolver. Indeed, when Triple Lock production ceased in 1915 the third latch was discontinued with the 44 Hand Ejector 2nd Model. Smith and Wesson never built a revolver with the third latch again.

I am not aware of the history of exactly when 44 Special began to be loaded with Smokeless powder, but Unique is a good bet because it has been around so long. I have loaded 44 Special with American Select, Trailboss, Clays, 231, and Unique. Sorry I have no pressure or velocity data. I have only loaded 44 Russian with Black Powder, approximately 19 grains of Schuetzen FFg. Bear in mind that modern solid head 44 Russian brass does not have as much case capacity as the old Balloon head cases. Again, I have no pressure or velocity data for my Black Powder 44 Russian loads.

Anyway, I tend to agree with you that S&W probably created the new 44 Special round in conjunction with their new revolver because they wanted a fancy new cartridge for their fancy new revolver. As I'm sure you know, any revolver chambered for 44 Special can also fire the shorter 44 Russian round, just as any revolver chambered for 44 Magnum can also fire the shorter 44 Special round.

I don't know if I agree with you about S&W obsoleting all the old 44 Russian revolvers.

Here is a photo of a box of Smokeless 44 Russian ammunition in my cartridge collection. 246 grain bullets, sorry, no idea of what type of powder is inside them. I also have no idea when this box was made, but I'm betting sometime after 1907.

 

[CapnMac]

You see, people and animals, are just like wood, so the more penetration in wood, the more lethal the round. The logic is irrefutable. Especially late in the 19th century. Today we know, the true index of lethality is penetration in plastic milk jugs filled with water. That is because milk jugs can be plucked out of recycling containers on recycle day, and are easily filled with water. Used to be the gold standard was wet newspaper and wet phone books, which used to be the trash at the curb, but no longer. I remember stacks of newspapers and phone books, all tied into a bundle with string, on the curb at trash day. Them was the days! The shooting community has smoothly and seamlessly moved from wood penetration (requires a table saw, drills, and screws to make the wood tissue stimulant) to wet newspaper/phone books, to plastic milk jugs filled with water. Tissue stimulant technology advances one garbage can epoch after another.

LoL. Highlight of my couf-afflicted day.

(Primary organic ingredient in ballistics gel is discarded livestock hooves leftover from meat production, to carry the "trash" analogy forward.)

 

[trekker73]

Driftwood, reckon they would still fire

By the way I recognized the emblem on the side of that revolver being Australian by birth. Its the chookyfoot (chicken foot) or as you say broad arrow on military equipment in the commonwealth countries. Also covered the uniforms of the convict colonists

 

[kBob]

Some folks liked the .44 Special so much that when S&W stopped making the Model 24 that they took a Model 28 and had it bored out of cylinder and barrel and the barrel relined for .44 Special.

Hope y’all can make out the barrel markings.

-kBob

 

[joneb]

So Harry Callahan would have something to shoot.

Notice the shot placement on the target, I find it of interest these were belly shots.
Nothing will put you down faster than a belly shot.

 

[Remington1911]

Notice the shot placement on the target, I find it of interest these were belly shots.
Nothing will put you down faster than a belly shot.

In the circle, I think that is what they are going after.

Not really the scope of the thread, but it is interesting to see how police training has changed over the years. I remember reading about the newhall shooting and one of the things that came out way the officers saved their brass, they are getting shot at and took time to drop the brass out of their revolvers into their hand and put it in their pocket. This was how they trained, so when the "real deal" came up this is what they did.

Just in my time, we have moved from standing still and shooting a set target to having to move while shooting, and having the target move as well. In "real life" you are not going to stand squared up at a bad guy standing square to you and start shooting. You are going to be in a "not normal" position. Your training should reflect that.

I can see how a 1970's movie would have a nice circle center mass to shoot at.

 

[wcwhitey]

It’s hard to say “why”.

In the circle, I think that is what they are going after.

Not really the scope of the thread, but it is interesting to see how police training has changed over the years. I remember reading about the newhall shooting and one of the things that came out way the officers saved their brass, they are getting shot at and took time to drop the brass out of their revolvers into their hand and put it in their pocket. This was how they trained, so when the "real deal" came up this is what they did.

Just in my time, we have moved from standing still and shooting a set target to having to move while shooting, and having the target move as well. In "real life" you are not going to stand squared up at a bad guy standing square to you and start shooting. You are going to be in a "not normal" position. Your training should reflect that.

I can see how a 1970's movie would have a nice circle center mass to shoot at.

We used to use the canvass carpenter aprons they give away free at hardware stores. One pouch for empties and one for fresh rounds.
To add some historical context to this thread the Triple lock was one of the first handguns to give a full ergonomic grip. Prior to that many handguns even the new revolutionary autos were all geared to Calvalry use, tended to favor left hand use and a traditional saber bent wrist hold. Early swing out cylinders even opened to the right. This was because standard dicta was the saber was used in the right hand. Grip frames tended to mimic sword handles and angled for the “on guard” bent wrist and bent elbow pose. Around WWI although still one handed handgun shooting was beginning to evolve more into a Bullseye push the gun out there stance. It would be quite a while before shooters starting using two hands.

 

[kBob]

Some of the large departments actual taught and expected those “belly Shots” in the 1970’s and some trainers even taught shooting for the hips to “put a man down”

Unfortunatly despite “common knowledge” neither statistically “puts a man down” as well as a high center mass shot.

Then the low shooters argued that belly and hips move less than the upper center mass and so are easier to hit. Then the high guys argued that it evened out as again it takes more hip and belly hits to do a stop.

It was fun to watch.

Dr. Fackler trained and encouraged training to hit high center mass. He made up some anatomical drawings and showed us that the belly shot had the least chances of hitting a support structure, and least chance of hitting a vessel that would lead to rapid blood loss.

He then did the hips and showed that the major vessels were hard to hit there as well and that the thigh bones at the hip made up a surprisingly small portion of the target and that the vessels were even a smaller target. He showed how the hip itself was actually a fairly light latice work and, as a combat trauma surgeon, that bullet hits to the hip usually simply holed a part rather than breaking it owing to the material of the hip.

Sure if what I see is a hip peeking around a corner ( it happens, folks get cover for chest and head and forget about other parts) I would shoot for that…. A hit beats NO hit.

Same thing, if say I go to ground and am looking under a car or stricture and I can see up to just below the rib cage, I would go for belly shot because again A hit beats No hit.

Given a target showing mid thigh to top of head like the old FBI and such…. that high center mass 5V ring looks right to me.

I see very few hunters going for a gut “belly”shot… because they seldom put a game animal down right “there”

I see very few hunters going for a hip shot on game…. because no one wants to spend the day and half the night tracking wounded game.

Oh sure quartering shots on deer and such are often taken through the hips or shoulders, but the actual target is still the heart lung area and any “anchoring” by breaking bone that might occur is a plus and those shots give one something to aim at.

Am I “corrrect”? Who knows? But I just described how I figure it and why I think high center mass.

Your milage may very.

-kBob

 

[kBob]

Damn we are drifting over a fictional character in a movie.

Sorry.

You may have noticed my modified M28 .44 Special is loaded with Silver tips. When it was available I liked a .44 Special version of the old “FBI load” LSWCHP. When all I have is some big honking LSWC large metplat hand loads I do not feel particularly under armed with the .44 Special.

The strangest thing in that gun was when it was being used as a house gun in a Quadraplex apartment in a neighborhood of such it was loaded with Glaser Safety Slugs. I actual shot some against dry wall and those .44 Specials broke up, the few I shot at paper targets broke up when they hit the solid parts of the card board target backer for that matter.

What loads make your Special .44 Special sing for you?

There, back on track….

-kBob

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

Some of the large departments actual taught and expected those “belly Shots” in the 1970’s and some trainers even taught shooting for the hips to “put a man down”

Unfortunatly despite “common knowledge” neither statistically “puts a man down” as well as a high center mass shot.

Then the low shooters argued that belly and hips move less than the upper center mass and so are easier to hit. Then the high guys argued that it evened out as again it takes more hip and belly hits to do a stop.

It was fun to watch.

Dr. Fackler trained and encouraged training to hit high center mass. He made up some anatomical drawings and showed us that the belly shot had the least chances of hitting a support structure, and least chance of hitting a vessel that would lead to rapid blood loss.

He then did the hips and showed that the major vessels were hard to hit there as well and that the thigh bones at the hip made up a surprisingly small portion of the target and that the vessels were even a smaller target. He showed how the hip itself was actually a fairly light latice work and, as a combat trauma surgeon, that bullet hits to the hip usually simply holed a part rather than breaking it owing to the material of the hip.

Sure if what I see is a hip peeking around a corner ( it happens, folks get cover for chest and head and forget about other parts) I would shoot for that…. A hit beats NO hit.

Same thing, if say I go to ground and am looking under a car or stricture and I can see up to just below the rib cage, I would go for belly shot because again A hit beats No hit.

Given a target showing mid thigh to top of head like the old FBI and such…. that high center mass 5V ring looks right to me.

I see very few hunters going for a gut “belly”shot… because they seldom put a game animal down right “there”

I see very few hunters going for a hip shot on game…. because no one wants to spend the day and half the night tracking wounded game.

Oh sure quartering shots on deer and such are often taken through the hips or shoulders, but the actual target is still the heart lung area and any “anchoring” by breaking bone that might occur is a plus and those shots give one something to aim at.

Am I “corrrect”? Who knows? But I just described how I figure it and why I think high center mass.

Your milage may very.

-kBob

Could it also be that in early 20th Century policing the idea was to bring in a live suspect to stand trial as opposed to a corpse whose family could be paid off not to incite a riot?
Asking because I'm not a cop, never was one, just seems like when I was a kid the focus was on bringing in a live suspect, even if wounded, but that's changed since "the war on drugs" and the "FBI Miami Shootout."

 

[Slamfire]

Anyway, I tend to agree with you that S&W probably created the new 44 Special round in conjunction with their new revolver because they wanted a fancy new cartridge for their fancy new revolver. As I'm sure you know, any revolver chambered for 44 Special can also fire the shorter 44 Russian round, just as any revolver chambered for 44 Magnum can also fire the shorter 44 Special round.

I don't know if I agree with you about S&W obsoleting all the old 44 Russian revolvers.

Well it is strange the S&W created a new, stronger revolver, and a cartridge with more powder capacity, and then kept 44 Russian ballistics. Smith and Wesson missed an opportunity to create a revolver and cartridge equal to, or exceed the power of a 45 LColt. Of course this is hindsight bias, but the 44 Special tossing a 240 grain bullet at 1000 fps is a very powerful and potent round. Instead, the factory round trundles at 750 fps.

Well those 44 Russian revolvers stayed around long enough for ammunition companies to continue to list 44 Russian ammunition till the 1950's. You would know, did anyone make 44 Russian revolvers after the 44 Special was introduced? Once S&W walked away from the 44 Russian, it was only a matter of time till the round went on the ash heap of history. It has been resurrected due to the current Cowboy Action Movement. That does not mean the 44 Russian will have "legs" once this fun fad phase fizzles, such as such fads as "Walk and Draw" competitions. That may be a shame, as Mike Venturino claims the 44 Russian is an inherently accurate round, better than the 44 Special. In one article Mr Venturino showed a ranson rest target with the 44 Russian at 25 yards and it was one hole. I don't know if that was typical of more than one firearm example or not, as such accuracy could be due to the throat and barrel dimensions of one firearm. For example, my five screw S&W M1917 has large chamber mouths (might be 0.456 or more) and because of that, will never shoot as well as my match 1911's. I do think any 44 Russian will be a hard sell beyond the Old West romanticists, because any 44 Special can chamber a 44 Russian, but the interchange is not backwards compatible.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Smith and Wesson missed an opportunity to create a revolver and cartridge equal to, or exceed the power of a 45 LColt.

I may or may not have stated this earlier, but it has been reported that 23 Triple Locks were chambered for 45 Colt. The great majority, 13,753 were chambered for 44 Special. 1,226 were chambered for 450 Eley, all for shipment to Great Britain. A few special order Triple Locks were chambered for 44 Russian or 44-40. A few special order Triple Locks were chambered for 38-40, and believe it or not, 22 Long Rifle. Another chambering was 455 Mark II, although I have no numbers on that. These too were shipped to Great Britain. After being surplussed out many of the 450 Eley and 455 Mark ii Triple Locks were converted to 45 Colt. And as you saw in my example above, Many of the 445 2nd Model Hand Ejectors were also converted to 45 Colt. Mine was converted to 44 Special. I suspect the limited number of 45 Colt Triple Locks was simply because S&W wanted to concentrate on 44 Special, and probably did not want to 'celebrate' Colt too much. But the Triple Lock was certainly capable of firing the 45 Colt cartridge.

You would know, did anyone make 44 Russian revolvers after the 44 Special was introduced?

My collecting activity centers mostly on Smith and Wesson, I have not looked into what any other manufacturers may have done regarding revolvers chambered for 44 Russian.

Of the five separate large, #3 Top Breaks that S&W made, the New Model Number Three was cataloged as late as 1912. This one is chambered for 44 Russian, the most common chambering of this model, and it shipped to Japan in 1896.






Th 44 Double Action was cataloged up until 1913. The one at the top is a target model, with a windage adjustable rear sight. It shipped in 1895. The one at the bottom was reblued at some point, and I had an old coin substituted for the original front sight. It shipped in 1881. Both are chambered for 44 Russian, the most common chambering of this model.






It should be noted however that although these two models were cataloged into the beginning of the Twentieth Century, all frames had been made by 1898, so they are all classified as antiques by the BATF. I suppose S&W, who never threw anything away, was just cleaning up old stock by cataloging these models until 1912 and 1913.