why was the 44 special created

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.




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.

View attachment 1087012




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.

View attachment 1087013




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.
If you look at the video in my original post the narrator states that Britain bought the first 666 directly from Smith and Wesson commercial inventory on a rush order, they were .44 Special quickly re-chambered for .455. They were also a nice commercial blue in finish. Follow up orders followed. Triple Lock system was found troublesome in the trench environment. The Triple Lock also failed US Military trials for the same reason. An improved simplified model was requested which became The Second Model. They were dull military finish as provided to Britain in .455.
Not 100% sure but Canada continued to order S&W Revolvers for various outfits. I have heard that .45 Colt was favored along the US Border as .455 was favored in the Northern Territory. They did seem to prefer US Revolvers as they did ship quite a few Webleys to Britain to backfill during WWI preferring the US Revolvers. Simpler supply as it took quite a few years for Britain to catch up on their own Webley production.
WWI caused many countries to put into service weapons that they would not have even considered before. That in a nutshell explains the proliferation of Spanish Ibar region production of copies of anything serviceable.
 
Last edited:
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

Sorry about that, I know this place has little tolerance to fun little useful bits of info and history like what I posted.

The Dirty Harry post was also in fun, and I am not sure many people know he shot 44spl
 
I neither care nor wonder why the 44 (extra) Special was created. It has, since about 1961, been my favorite cartridge.
Fifteen guns or more in this chambering have passed through my hands. Charter Arms on the small side to a S&W Target on the big.
I’ve loaded everything from pure lead hollow point 429421 up to Elmer’s 18/2400,which is now reserved for the 29-2 and three screw Super. Favorite outdoors, non hunting gun, a 624 4” with my hollow points followin two shot caps. There isn’t much I haven’t tried in the special 44.
 
Marketing.

If you want to load it heavy .44 Special in a strong gun (or .44 mag) is what you want.

But if your only intention is for moderate/light loads .44 Russian is more efficient.

I reload .44 Russian for DA .44 spec. revolvers.
 
I wonder what kind of smokeless they used in 1907 that took a longer case. Bullseye was common by then and it sure didn't.
Velocity of .44 Special was not appreciably greater than .44 Russian.
There was black powder .44 Special, too.
That is correct. However that was done by agreement of the various cartridge manufacturers to prevent some clue deficient consumer from loading the new rounds into a Russian chambered revolver (the chambers for the Russian chambered revolvers were not as restrictive as they might be) and blowing things up.

The late Elmer Keith demonstrated quite well the potential of the round.
Chevelle SS said:
My understanding is that it was created for the Smith New Century, the first N frame, also known as the Triple Lock. Smith probably wanted to continue the success of their 44 Russian cartridge so why not make it a bit more powerful for their new flagship model.
More or less, you're right. The New Century revolver was a stronger revolver than the prior break open revolver.
 
Just for the record, I am fan of the .44 Special. I do load it myself, a SWC lead bullet and a dose of Power Pistol. The major problem with it for me is the .44 Hand Ejector is just a bit too big for me to carry as a hideout gun. Exposed holster only.
 
.... 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! 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. ....

Well, the ancients used nominally 1" wood boards stacked with 1" airspace between as the test media because it was before the invention of the plastic milk jugs ushered in the middle era of ballistic test media. (True adherents of the holey plastic milk jugs cult use gallon size only.)
 
Well, the ancients used nominally 1" wood boards stacked with 1" airspace between as the test media because it was before the invention of the plastic milk jugs ushered in the middle era of ballistic test media. (True adherents of the holey plastic milk jugs cult use gallon size only.)

LaGarde shot live cattle and human cadavers 1in 1904. After WW1, the Soviets used live people, and found that a high caliper pistol behind the ear worked great.

I can more or less laugh about the claims that the 44 Russian was not able to use smokeless gun powder. Today in the mail came my Aug 2022 Handloader and there is a long article on the 44 Russian, all with smokeless loads. The author says SAAMI piezo standards are 14,500 psia. He claims "period" pressure limits were 12,000 CUP, but does not provide a date. It may be the blackpowder era pressure limits as this 12 K CUP is after he mentions the 23 grain blackpowder load with the 246 bullet.

Brian Pearce's test data in the article, validates Mike Venturino's test results, that the 44 Russian is an exceptionally accurate round. Mr Pearce has 0.95 inch, 1.05 inch, 1.10 inch , and 1.15 inch groups at 25 yards. He used two modern Colt SAA revolvers with 44 Russian cylinders. Of the targets I see, they are six shot groups: that is darn good shooting

Here is a quote from the article,

"I was a bit surprised at the performance of some of the standard pressure loads, as many were able to push 240-250 grain cast bullets to 800 to 900 fps (and sometimes more).


Mr Pearch has a 250 Keith bullet going 837 fps with 5.0 grs Unique. If he can do that today, S&W could have done that in 1907 with the same powder and a 250 grain bullet. (they would have had to wait till Keith invented the 429421 to use the identical bullet) Any claims that the 44 Special was introduced solely to take advantage of smokeless powders, or that the 44 Russian could not use smokeless powders, is not supportable. The 44 Special was introduced to make customers who wanted the new fangled cartridge buy a new pistol.

Based on the inherent accuracy of the 44 Russian, maybe Charter Arms ought to come out with a Bulldog in 44 Russian, and S&W a target grade N frame in 44 Russian.
 
“Based on the inherent accuracy of the 44 Russian, maybe Charter Arms ought to come out with a Bulldog in 44 Russian, and S&W a target grade N frame in 44 Russian.”

Any .44 Special can load and shoot the Russian Cartridge. It’s a nice sub load. However, smokeless powder is not the problem for the .44 Russian it is the then obsolete break open revolvers of questionable metallurgy that would have been the problem. At the time of the .44 Specials invention both the Commercial and Military markets solidly considered anything black powder obsolete. Yes old cartridges were sill used because of stockpile and consumer need but nobody was buying a gun for a black powder cartridge. We talk about Webleys taking a beating with smokeless powder no doubt a No. 3 S&W or similar would suffer the same fate if a steady diet of smokeless .44 Russian is used. Maybe not catastrophic but certainly increased wear especially in a Military Environment. And then there is the fact that Russian can be loaded to Special levels but the Special easily exceeds factory loadings. It’s hard to know what the actual original performance was of the Special. The loadings of the Russian and Special quickly became almost identical. That was not S&W’s doing though, they didn’t make the ammo.
 
I think we can pretty well put to rest the theory that the 44 Russian cartridge was not suited for Smokeless powder.

As I have said repeatedly I only load 44 Russian with Black Powder, because I am shooting it in antique Smith and Wesson revolvers. I do not want to subject these antiques to the pressure spike generated by most modern Smokeless powders.

I have already posted a photo of a box of 44 Russian, probably made sometime in the 1930s or later, loaded with Smokeless powder.

index.php



I was just rummaging through my ammo stockpile and I came across a box of modern Blackhills 44 Russian ammo. I think I probably won the box as a door prize at a CAS event. Interestingly enough, only 20 rounds are left in the box, I must have fired the other 30. Most likely not in one of my antiques, more likely in a modern revolver chambered for 44 Special. I really do not remember.

Anyway, I turned to my reloading manuals, and three of them have recipes for 44 Russian with Smokeless ammo.

First, let me complete the quote somebody quoted earlier from the Speer 13th edition:


"Although the Russian was considered inefficient with the early smokeless propellants, it managed to survive the transition. The Winchester catalog for 1911 showed 44 Russian loads with 246 grain bullets in both lead and full metal patched versions, plus two "gallery" loads with a 115 grain conical bullet or a 105 grain round ball for indoor target shooting. Both black powder and "semi-smokeless" propellant versions were cataloged. the nominal velocity of the heavier bullets was usually listed as about 750 feet/sec."


Let me mention here that there are no official SAAMI standards for 44 Russian.

Three of my reloading manuals list Smokeless recipes for 44 Russian; Speer 13th edition, Lyman 49th edition, and Richard Lee 2nd edition.

Lee has loads for 165 grain lead bullets, 200 grain lead bullets, and 240 grain lead bullets. Powders listed are HP38, Clays,Universal, Accur#2, Solo 1000, ACC XMP5744, Accur#5,and A Nitro 100, Interesting that Lee does not list Unique. Without going through all the data line by line velocity varied from 769 fps to 1002 fps. Max pressures ran from 1040 CUP to 13600 CUP.

The only bullet Speer lists is a 200 grain cast bullet. Powders listed by Speer include Unique, Viht. N320, Universal, Bullseye, Tite Group, HP38, 700-X, Red Dot, 231, American Select, AA Nitro 100, and AA #2 Impr. Velocities listed run from 640 fps to 887 fps. Interestingly enough the 887 Max velocity was with Unique. The test gun Speer used was a Cimarron Arms replica of a SAA. There was no barrel length specified. Speer does not list any pressure data.

Lyman has data for 180 grain lead swaged bullets, 200 grain cast bullets, 240 grain cast bullets, and 245 grain cast bullets. Powders listed are Trail Boss, Nitro 100, Bullseye, Red Dot, Tight Group, AA#2, N320, HP38, 231, and Unique, Velocities out of a universal receiver with a 6 1/2" barrel varied from 608 fps to 880 fps. Lyman lists pressure data from 9800 CUP to 11500 Cup.

So clearly there is plenty of evidence that 44 Russian can be successfully shot with Smokeless powders. Also, most of the manuals mention the inherent accuracy of the 44 Russian round, particularly with target shooters before the 44 Special was developed.

I have no intention of loading any 44 Russian ammo with Smokeless, because as I said earlier, most Smokeless powders create a pressure spike that might damage my antiques.

But I think we have pretty well driven the last nail into the coffin about 44 Russian not being suitable for Smokeless powder.

I continue to believe the 44 Special was developed because Smith and Wesson wanted a fancy new cartridge for their fancy new revolver.

Just for the fun of it, here is a photo of me firing one of my antique Smith and Wesson New Model Number Three revolvers with Black Powder 44 Russian ammunition.

pmepwyRrj.jpg




Compared to 45 Colt, 44 Russian is pretty mild mannered.

polNePtOj.jpg
 
Last edited:
Marketing.

If you want to load it heavy .44 Special in a strong gun (or .44 mag) is what you want.

But if your only intention is for moderate/light loads .44 Russian is more efficient.

I reload .44 Russian for DA .44 spec. revolvers.
What does your 44 Russian load consist of? I'm looking for easy going target load to use in SA 44 Special. I noticed in the Speer Manuel #14, a Russian load of a 200 gr FN bullet and starting charge of 4.9 gr of Unique. Estimated MV of 813fps. The maximum charge is 5.4 gr, with a fps of 887. I may try this with 5 gr of Unique. These will be loaded in 44 Special brass.This will be used for plinking punching paper. What do you think?
 
LaGarde shot live cattle and human cadavers 1in 1904. After WW1, the Soviets used live people, and found that a high caliper pistol behind the ear worked great.

I can more or less laugh about the claims that the 44 Russian was not able to use smokeless gun powder. Today in the mail came my Aug 2022 Handloader and there is a long article on the 44 Russian, all with smokeless loads. The author says SAAMI piezo standards are 14,500 psia. He claims "period" pressure limits were 12,000 CUP, but does not provide a date. It may be the blackpowder era pressure limits as this 12 K CUP is after he mentions the 23 grain blackpowder load with the 246 bullet.

Brian Pearce's test data in the article, validates Mike Venturino's test results, that the 44 Russian is an exceptionally accurate round. Mr Pearce has 0.95 inch, 1.05 inch, 1.10 inch , and 1.15 inch groups at 25 yards. He used two modern Colt SAA revolvers with 44 Russian cylinders. Of the targets I see, they are six shot groups: that is darn good shooting

Here is a quote from the article,

"I was a bit surprised at the performance of some of the standard pressure loads, as many were able to push 240-250 grain cast bullets to 800 to 900 fps (and sometimes more).


Mr Pearch has a 250 Keith bullet going 837 fps with 5.0 grs Unique. If he can do that today, S&W could have done that in 1907 with the same powder and a 250 grain bullet. (they would have had to wait till Keith invented the 429421 to use the identical bullet) Any claims that the 44 Special was introduced solely to take advantage of smokeless powders, or that the 44 Russian could not use smokeless powders, is not supportable. The 44 Special was introduced to make customers who wanted the new fangled cartridge buy a new pistol.

Based on the inherent accuracy of the 44 Russian, maybe Charter Arms ought to come out with a Bulldog in 44 Russian, and S&W a target grade N frame in 44 Russian.

Thanks!

I'll look for that article.

What does .44 spl do .44 Russian cannot? It can be loaded over pressure in a strong (pref .44 magnum) gun, and will feed better in a lever gun than .44 Russian. Might be better with wadcutters, too.

But if you those don't apply to you may as well load .44 Russian.

I like 4.1 to 4.3 gr of 700x and a 200 gr bullet in .44 Russian.

Nothing against .44 Special. It has its uses.

I'd definitely buy a Charter "Russian Bulldog" in .44 Russian! (Its an American classic caliber made to 19th century Russian Empire specs. 20th & 21st Century Russia can burn for all I care)
 
What does your 44 Russian load consist of? I'm looking for easy going target load to use in SA 44 Special. I noticed in the Speer Manuel #14, a Russian load of a 200 gr FN bullet and starting charge of 4.9 gr of Unique. Estimated MV of 813fps. The maximum charge is 5.4 gr, with a fps of 887. I may try this with 5 gr of Unique. These will be loaded in 44 Special brass.This will be used for plinking punching paper. What do you think?

I use 4.1 to 4.3 gr of 700x depending how much recoil I want. (Its all mild) 200 gr cast .430 bullets. I don't cast and I forget the hardness rating.

Averages 740 fps from a 4 inch barrel. SD of 8 fps. :thumbup:

I do not know who this person is but their data is worth a look:

http://www.gmdr.com/lever/44ru200_dat.htm
 
I think Bullseye Pistol is worth a try. I did try to see if I could make an ultra low recoiling 44 Special load with Bullseye pistol, and I found, it is possible to cut Bullseye too low. Some of this data may be useful, most of it is a warning.


4" M624

240 LSWC Valiant 5.0 grs Bullseye Lot 6/20/05 Mixed Brass WLP
T = 64 °F 3-Mar-07

Ave Vel =764
Std Dev =16
ES =61
High = 795
Low = 734
Number rounds =28

very accurate, little powder residue

3TNkmmg.jpg


6.5" M24-3

205 LSWC 4.5 grs Bullseye CCI 500 W/W cases
T = 55°F 15-Nov-98

Ave Vel =765
Std Dev =16
ES = 43
Low = 743
High = 786
N = 6

240 LSWC Valiant 3.0 grs Bullseye lot 919 WLP (brass) primers
T = 90 ° F 2-Sep-15

Ave Vel = 568
Std Dev = 11
ES = 41
Low = 544
High = 584
N = 12

Poor accuracy, vertical stringing at 25 yards, at 50 yards, aimpoint top of crossbar on gong target. Excessive drop!

240 LSWC Valiant 3.5 grs Bullseye lot 919 WLP (brass) primers
T = 90 ° F 2-Sep-15

Ave Vel =629
Std Dev =18
ES = 59
Low = 596
High = 655
N = 25


zsol9tc.jpg

It might be possible to create accurate, low end ammunition for the 44 Special with Trailboss. I have not tried that powder, but it was developed for the Cowboy Action types and it is supposed to be bulky, which is good. Based on my testing, I think 650 fps would the lowest I would start testing again, and because I have so many of Reese Teagues (Valiant) bullets, I would be using 240's. My Bullseye pistol loads of 5.0 grains with a 240 and 4.5 grains with a 200 shot well. Reese told me he set the brinell hardness of his bullets at 13. Seems soft, but shoot well with very little leading.

I did conduct tests with my fixed sight Taurus. It needed 200 grain bullets because the sights were regulated for that weight. Incidentally, Red Dot was a well liked 44 Special target powder. I went with a 200 LRN and 6.0 grains Unique because it was accurate and did not kick. With a jacketed bullet, I would go 6.5 grains to start.


Taurus M431 3" Barrel

240 LSWC 5.0 grs Red Dot thrown, Midway Brass CCI 500

Ave Vel =684.1
Std Dev =17.11
ES =57.84
Low =654.1
High =712
N =16

Shoots way high


205 LSWC 6.0 grs Unique thrown, Midway Brass WLP
T = 54 °F 11-Dec-04

Ave Vel = 789.6
Std Dev = 27.18
ES = 96.54
Low = 724.1
High = 820.6
N =30

Accurate, shoots point of aim, light leading.

205 LSWC 6.5 Unique thrown, Midway Brass WLP
T = 54 °F 25-Nov-04

Ave Vel = 866
Std Dev = 16
ES = 52
Low = 839
High =891
N = 11

Elevation good, but left; more leading

205 LSWC 7.0 grs Unique thrown, Midway Brass WLP
T = 57 °F 25-Nov-04

Ave Vel = 906
Std Dev =16
ES = 56
Low = 876
High = 932
N = 15

elevation good but left: worst leading


ihGgls8.jpg
 
I have 2 of the Taurus mdl 431 revolvers - one having shown up just last week - and love them.

I settled on the Lee 200 gn LRN with 5.5gr RedDot (actually Promo). It shoots to point of aim, no leading with tumble lube, and just plain fun. And I have boo-coo Promo.

When folks shoot that revolver for the first time I usually have to fend off sale offers. They want to know where to get one. 'Well...they haven't been made for close to 30 years, so...'
:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top