Know what you mean, Spot. Not too long ago, I was walking out to my car across a WalMart parking lot, and noticed a fellow who was about 7 feet tall and would have field dressed at about 395 lbs. walking toward me from my left front, looking like he was focused on me, and appearing somewhat distressed. I was rethinking the issue of adequate penetration with the 9x23 Silvertips I was carrying when I realized that he was actually looking past me at someone he obviously knew. I suspect that the distressed look came as much from hauling all that lard around as anything else. (Yes, I was indeed profiling at the time. ) Anyway, that kind of target would certainly mitigate in favor of bigger, solid bullets.

quote:

Originally posted by Spotteddog:
But I think it was Shortranger who in the past wrote about compensating for one's physical decline, by carrying a heavier load. Unfortunately as usual, he was right!

Still in my thirties, I must be declining rapidly because I've been packing a .44 magnum lately.

On a serious note, If I thought the local dutchmen, who average about 6'2" were my biggest hazard, I might go with heavier bullets myself. 250 lb.+ brutes are the norm in the mostly dutch environment I work in. Many are 6'5".

quote:

Originally posted by Spotteddog:
The soon to be departed, won't know which he's been gifted with if truly delivered.

Quotewall noteworthy!

There is another argument that .44/.45 caliber and larger bullets are large enough to take care of themselves no matter what profile they are- so long as they velocity is correct so as not to create over or under penetration...

I defer to the coroners on this one, or one that has been shot with said types of ammunition.

I agree with the consensus that HP for social interaction is best.

I seriously doubt that anyone still carries the old 246 gr. "Lead Round Nose" Winchester .44 Special round for SD- not that anyone asked...just a side note.

Of course, it would be a lot better than a .25ACP!

I know there have been arguements about Marshall and Sanow's results but enough of their reporting seems to be based on actual shooting results, in statistically sizeable numbers, so I will use it till something better comes along.

Based on their results I would go with the JHP load. I would not care for excessive penetration possibly injuring anyone but the intended target. Also it's stopping record is better as I recall.

Rich,
I've never seen the complete survey results you mentioned. Did their work stipulate a bullet weight/type for their results with the .44 Special? It'd sure be interesting to know!
Thanks!

IIRC M&S didn't rate the .44 spl. Gold Dot and definately not newer stuff like DPX. I think anyone who is as interested in ammunition as you are, Spotteddog, would really enjoy and learn a lot from those books. Street Stoppers has, for example, an entire chapter devoted to the Gold Dot bullet.

Tests I've seen of the 200 gr. Gold Dot indicate it is a relaible expander with good penetration even at the reduced velocities of snubs, even better than the older Silvertip 200. Nothing wrong with a 245 gr. solid, but overpenetration could be a factor. Probably the key variable is the gun itself. A full size .44 will handle either, but a sub 30 oz. revolver such as the Charter Arms (21 oz.) is a handful with the 200 grainers. The 696 might be OK at 36 oz. but the 245 at 900+fps is pretty zippy. For most applications the 200 gr. GDHP seems a good fit, offering good control with excellent downrange ballistics.

Thanks Flop Shank!
Time to get on Amazon!

I use the 200 grain Gold Dots simply because they produce lower muzzle flip & recoil which helps me more accurately place quick follow up shots out of light weight .44 spl. revolvers.

MOONDAWG

When I was still using a C/A Bulldog in .44 Special for carry, almost no nothin' was available other than the 246 LRN load. Since even then I was hand loading, I ran a Rem JHP 240 grain of the era, designed for the .44 Magnum. Being far less certain today, than I was then, about whether or not that jacket would have opened at all? I'm sure the modern stuff is far better than the old. And I agree with you as to less recoil for follow ups in a light gun using 200's. If I knew then, what I know now, I'd probably have run as close to a full wad as I could have found in or around the 200 grain mark. My current .44 Special is a 696 running 36+ ounces. So the recoil is far easier to deal with, than in that 19.5 oz. Bulldog! Of course back in the day, I thought nothing of a hundred or so full house, out of a 29-2 4" in an afternoon as well!

gold dot 200 or the cor-bon dpx in my 3" n-frame?? have not seen any good info on the dpx,other than twice the cost. are the speer .44 spcl 200gr. blazers using the gold dot bullet? thanks,jon.

The last box of .44 Special 200 grain Blazer aluminum cartridge stuff I saw, did appear to be Gold Dots? But that was two + years ago. I'm not even sure if that loading still is being made? The Blazer wasn't cheap even then. But was much cheaper than the brass cartridge H/P stuff was at the time. Been a long time since I've paid much attention to factory loads.

Plenty of fine choices but I too went with the 180gr Hornady XTP load.