Discussion in 'Handguns: Revolvers' started by Mr. Mosin, Oct 19, 2020.
In Texas we are overrun with feral hogs and yes they run in packs, but every time I’ve put one down with my 4” Redhawk in .41mag, the rest scatter like a well done break on a pool table. There’s only been a couple of times that I have been able to make a follow up kill and that’s on the closest running hog. My .41mag is my favorite caliber for over 30 years, though I’ve hunted everything up to Texas Mule Deer with .357 mag and .44 mags ethically as well. My next hog hunting venture will be with my Springfield XDM in 10mm. My hunting buddy is devistating with his on pork.
In the .44, I run a 240 grn handcasted RNFP from a Saeco mould at around 1000 fps. I got this load from a Pierce article on the .44. It is one of his tier 2 loads. This is also accurate and easy to shoot from the BH. I reckon that these loads will dispatch any critter I run across in the lower peninsula of Western MI.
While I have seen no evidence of hogs at my place in E. TN yet, people say they are around. That said, my GP-100 in .357 shoots really small groups with a 358429 PC bullet at around 1000 fps. Though it also shoots 148 wc very well too. That is what is usually loaded for around the farm. Will let you know what works on hogs if they show up.
If we're being brutally honest here, I think I'd be better armed for the most likely scenarios with my G43 and a spare magazine. It's light, handy, reliable, quick to reload.....
WCs work. My second favorite load in the .357 is a lyman 358432 162 grn DEWC run well over 900 fps. Accurate and effective. I have also had good results hotrodding DEWCs from 140 to 148 grn.
A 38spl would work for OP needs .. with a good hardcast bullet ..
Underwood produces alot of options , for alot of cartridges ... one that stands out to me is a
40 S&W 200gr Hardcast load @ 1000fps
since I own a
Charter 40 S&W revolver
45 ACP ... Underwood 45ACP +P 255gr Hardcast
@ 925 FPS
I've become fond of a 220 grain bullet, at around 950fps, in my .44 specials.
I have carried 230 grain HSM Bear Load semi-wadcutters (advertised at 1233 fps/777 #s) in my pocket 41. I also have 240 grain Winchester platinum tips jhp (advertised at 1250 fps/833#s).
What load would you choose for a woods load??
Due to wanting to be a little more versatile I would lean towards the swc load. I think it may be more forgiving to the meat should I come across a rabbit or other small edible game vs the jhp. Clearly neither load are ideal for that scenario, but I think it would leave more meat on the bone, so to speak.
It's more a defense load (sorry should have been more clear).
I think either load would work well against most threats one would encounter. I think it would come down to what you want to prioritize Expansion or penetration. In your neck of the woods I think either bullet would pass through whatever you encountered.
edit: hard to go wrong when we’re talking 41 mag!
It was not the primary weapon.You had it on when working on your wood pile or picking berries.If you were fishing it was called the kit gun.
I did a bunch of experimenting once, and wrote a little self-published/home made book. I tested a bunch of different revolvers, loads and bullets, in order to determine penetration, for the purpose of what would work good/best for shooting through a grizzley's skull. Kind of a back-packer's handbook.
The "interesting" thing was, the bullet that penetrated the most, and not by a lot, but more, or the most, was a round-nose, 240 grain hard cast bullet out of a .41 Magnum. It even beat out FMJ silhoulette bullets (speer) out of the .44 magnum, and similar bullets out of the .357. (the .44mag and .357 were about equal, in penetration. Of course, the .44 was penetrating with much more mass)
It was also the only round nose bullet tested, so I don't know if the .44 or .357 would have done as well or better, with a round nose. All calibers tested were with hard cast or FMJ bullets, of heavy for caliber weight. Also tested .45 Colt, and .44spl.
Right. When I think of a "woods gun", I like it to be capable of taking small game. The .44's and .357, and the .45 all do that well with shot loads. Automatic pistols, not so well. As long as I have a rifle, or bow, my woods guns are lighter pistols of smaller caliber, such as a .38spl, 7.62X38mm Nagant, a .22LR or .22WRF. These days, I've turned most often to my Remington Navy .36 as my woods gun. Just for fun I sometimes carry Grand-Dad's Luger, but don't really consider a 9mm as a good woods gun.
I have been using that mould since about 1960. Shoots well in every gun I've tried it in. Mine, however, is not a double end. Had a definite front and crimp groove.
Posted this pic on another thread, but this has been my "woods gun" lately, and most often when I'm hunting. My Remington Navy has taken a few grouse with light round ball loads, and she packs a good punch with slugs. This set-up can carry a lot of ammo, without too much bulk or weight. The horn-flask and cap pouch will pack at least 50 rounds. The pouch will hold more slugs than that, but I don't really know how many powder charges the flask holds. My guess would be 50.
The woods I hunt/trek/explore in have some nasty critters, so I'd not carry this as my only weapon. But along with a powerful bow I'd feel fine, or one of my spears, which I sometimes hike/trek/explore with.
Another combination I like is a .44mag, and then my Little Badger .22LR. That covers all bases, but would be "woods guns" rather than woods gun.
Here's a curve-ball for ya'll. Sometimes when I'm exploring, I'll carry this as my side arm, or "woods gun" when I take a bow. I have some self-contained shot "cartridges" for it, for grouse, can load round ball over light powder charges for wabbits, and for protection she'll shoot a 240 grain .512" slug over 60-70 grains of powder, so she ain't no slouch on the power scale. Isn't she pretty?
You are right, it is a button nose WC.
No, the WCs run straight in my experience with no tumbling.
I have seen Hollow Base Wad-cutters when pushed
fast tumble ... on impact ... now double end wad -cutters .. I have not witnessed tumbling
Separate names with a comma.