Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > General Topics > The Lounge
Forum Register Expert Commentary Members List


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-19-2010, 06:26 PM
PALADIN85020's Avatar
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 5,072
Likes: 539
Liked 9,826 Times in 1,363 Posts
Default Surprised by the recoil of the old '92 in .44 Magnum!

Well, today I went out with my new old Model 1892 Browning carbine, chambered in .44 Magnum. Here's the gun:



Now I have some other pistol-caliber levers, namely a Rossi Puma '92 in .357, and a Winchester trapper in .45 Colt. So I was expecting relatively mild recoil.

WOW. This baby stung with full power .44 mag loads. I was wearing just a light knit shirt (no padding to speak of), and I had to call it quits at about 15 rounds off the bench.

When I got home, I broke out an old BASIC program I put together about 20 years ago for calculating recoil. With the gun at 5.3 pounds and a muzzle velocity of about 1400 fps with a 240-grain bullet, the .44 mag develops 11.16 foot pounds of recoil energy at the butt. Just for comparison:

Same gun - '92 in .357 mag: 5.28 FPE
Model '94 in .45 Colt: 5.78 FPE
1903 Springfield in .30/06: 14.42 FPE

That means that effectively, the .44 mag '92 generates about twice the recoil of its .357 magnum brother. A rough rule of thumb is that 15 FPE is about the "comfort limit" for most folks.

Now I'll have to admit, I'm getting older, and I'm more recoil shy than when I was younger. Of course, a lot depends on how you are dressed, and what the shape of the butt is.

Lesson learned: For adequate power in a '92 and much more comfort, I'll stick with .357 magnum. If I have to shoot that .44 Model 92 again, it'll be stoked with .44 Specials!

John
__________________
- Cogito, ergo armatum sum -
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-19-2010, 07:01 PM
max max is online now
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: illinois
Posts: 3,307
Likes: 196
Liked 777 Times in 337 Posts
Default

John, I could have told you that. I have a Win 94 in 44 and with magnum loads it kicks like a mule. I much prefer the lighter loads.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-19-2010, 07:24 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Minden , Nebraska
Posts: 987
Likes: 1
Liked 423 Times in 204 Posts
Default

the bullet that shot the best in my Browning M-92 was the Hornady 265 grain sp. the recoil was very snappy. in a brain fade moment I traded it away
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-19-2010, 07:45 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: columbus, ohio usa
Posts: 554
Likes: 61
Liked 127 Times in 55 Posts
Default

[donning flamesuit]
That's what you get for not getting a Marlin.:-)

Seriously though, I had both a Marlin 1894S and a Winchester '94 Trapper at the same time. After experiencing the recoil of each, I still have the Marlin. I gotta say I somehow liked the look of the Winchester a little better. Prob'ly all the Duke movies, I guess.

If you should get the chance, try some 'Specials in your '92. Still chuckin' a big bullet but with less masochism. Or even some Magnums but loaded with about 11 or so grains of Unique.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-19-2010, 07:54 PM
cmort666's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Rocky River, OH, USA
Posts: 5,573
Likes: 118
Liked 2,559 Times in 1,200 Posts
Default

Assuming I ever have another job, I plan to get one of the Cimarron 92s in .44 Magnum. Of course I'll shoot hot 200gr. .30-06 loads out of my Savage 112BVSS all day long without concern for recoil.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-19-2010, 07:57 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 11,001
Likes: 6,391
Liked 3,071 Times in 1,722 Posts
Default

The original Winchesters could be had with a flat "shotgun" buttplate. That was supposed to let it kick less.

And they were in .44/40. Does that reduce recoil, too, having only a 200 grain bullet? Has anyone here tried one?

T-Star
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-19-2010, 07:59 PM
7tenz's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: so cal
Posts: 515
Likes: 7
Liked 22 Times in 17 Posts
Default

Where are you placing the butt? Try holding it a little more in towards the chest area, in the more fleshy part. I've mistakenly put my Marlin 44 in the crotch of the shoulder and it stings a little, but inward just a little more and it's a pussycat, even in a t-shirt. My 7mm rem mag, now that smarts in a tee no matter what I do.
__________________
8tenz

Last edited by 7tenz; 10-19-2010 at 08:07 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-19-2010, 08:06 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 948
Likes: 3
Liked 18 Times in 11 Posts
Default

The shotgun style buttplate is much easier on the shoulder than either the crescent or carbine buttplates.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-19-2010, 08:29 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SW MT
Posts: 1,859
Likes: 283
Liked 308 Times in 237 Posts
Default

I have a Rossi that bruised me with the butt in my shoulder, in the crook of my arm and on the joint. I bought a lace up recoil pad that it wears when it isn't in the safe.
__________________
Front sight and squeeze
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-19-2010, 08:50 PM
Snapping Twig's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: S.F. Bay Area
Posts: 2,060
Likes: 141
Liked 821 Times in 325 Posts
Default

A nice lace-up butt pad should do the trick and look good doing it.

Mine's an old 1978 vingage Marlin and I shot 265g cast out of it @ 1700fps at the muzzle, so far no big whoop.

I shot a newer one in stainless and I'd have to say it kicked pretty hard.

Odd when you consider the new one had a soft butt pad and mine has the hard plastic, who knows?

I bought an 1895 45-70 and recently got my mould for a 350g bullet over the weekend, so I'm going to try some of those out at 1400 and 1800fps this week. Never shot a 45-70, so this should be educational.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-19-2010, 08:53 PM
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: utah
Posts: 13,159
Likes: 2,550
Liked 6,760 Times in 2,965 Posts
Default

John, here are those lace up pads. I have your exact same guns, even as to caliber. I bought my pads from buffalo arms. They are about $28s apiece. They helped with LOP and recoil. If you get some get the very small rifle. Even those run just a little loose.

http://www.buffaloarms.com/browse.cfm/2,169.html


Last edited by feralmerril; 10-19-2010 at 08:55 PM. Reason: add info
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-19-2010, 08:56 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,571
Likes: 1,515
Liked 1,094 Times in 469 Posts
Default

i have an 1895 marlin in 45-70 and w/ the factory winchester 300 grain loads, it is in the same league of recoil as i remember in my .44 mag lever marlin.
it always amazed me how the pistol cartridges could "frog" you in a full sized carbine.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-19-2010, 09:25 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Absurdistan
Posts: 1,229
Likes: 445
Liked 140 Times in 77 Posts
Default

I find shooting the 44 Mag in a light carbine like the 1892 or 1894 just about like shooting a .30-30 in the same rifle. Not fun without some extra padding.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-19-2010, 10:33 PM
gaucho1's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Farrrrrrrrrr West
Posts: 1,292
Likes: 721
Liked 377 Times in 199 Posts
Default

I always felt that for it's power the 30-30 has the worst kick in my
94 of any rifle I can remember. Especially from the bench.
__________________
I Love This Site
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-19-2010, 10:50 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Poynette, WI
Posts: 4,062
Likes: 5,918
Liked 654 Times in 420 Posts
Default

I was surprised by the recoil of my Ruger 99/44 carbine in
44 Mag. It felt more than a Ruger Redhawk. A little annoying,
but it's just so cute, that I put up with it. TACC1
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-20-2010, 09:44 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 358
Likes: 6
Liked 26 Times in 21 Posts
Default

Factory 44-40 in a Win. 92 is much more pleasant. I had a Ruger carbine and after 5 rounds it went away.

Regards,

Tam 3
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-20-2010, 09:57 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: KY
Posts: 3,261
Likes: 446
Liked 627 Times in 308 Posts
Default

I thought I was the only one that thought the 1894 44 mag was a little stout. I was surprised at the recoil. I am getting older and I notice recoil more than when I was younger.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-20-2010, 10:10 AM
Faulkner's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Arkansas Ozarks
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 974
Liked 4,034 Times in 778 Posts
Default

Nice looking rifle, though.
__________________
- Change it back -
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-20-2010, 12:35 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 2,204
Likes: 432
Liked 805 Times in 369 Posts
Default

I found the same thing to be true in a pre-safety Marlin 94 carbine in .44Magnum some years back; it sure surprised me. I think I had the same program you had which sort of explained it to me. Between that and the poor accuracy (?) of the gun I sent it down the line.

I probably should have opted for the .357 but the .44 has a mystique about it, I guess.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-20-2010, 01:15 PM
n4zov's Avatar
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: S.E. USA
Posts: 1,951
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 11 Posts
Default

Your comments would also apply to the old Ruger .44 Magnum "Deerslayer" carbine! That little Ruger had felt recoil far out of proportion to the performance it delivered and was one of the reasons I soon got rid of the one I bought years ago.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 10-20-2010, 02:03 PM
ldausmc1369's Avatar
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: KY
Posts: 206
Likes: 29
Liked 18 Times in 11 Posts
Default Ruger .44 mag Mod 96 lever gun

This gun is just a little larger than a 10-22. Kicks the bejesus out of you with 240 gr full house loads! Was advised to put one of the extended butt plate/recoil pads for the Mini-14/mini-30 on it. Gives another 1" or so LOP, so its fits a lot better and the recoil is seriously tamed by the pad! Great little short gun for hog hunting and will seriously get a whitetail's attention in the 100 yd range. Shot a 2'' 3 shot group off the bench with it last weekend at 50 yds. Plenty accurate for piggies!
Got a .44 mag Marlin 1894 that rattles the fillings in your teeth! Got to figure out home to tame it!
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-20-2010, 02:39 PM
Frank237's Avatar
SWCA Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Craig, Montana
Posts: 2,075
Likes: 113
Liked 777 Times in 321 Posts
Default

Like Scotty on Star Trek would say..."Ya can't change the laws of Physics".

The recoil in ft lbs feels worse due to the horrid stock design and narrow butt plate. Ever notice how a stock with a straight or flat comb seems to simply push BACK and not UP as much. Due to the minute DROP AT COMB figure.

Those old lever guns had a ton of DROP AT COMB, hence they buck UP into your cheek and BACK as well...sort of a fulcrum/lever deal.

I've always marveled at folks buying a model 94 in .30-30 for a young hunter thinking it kicked less.

FN in MT
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-20-2010, 03:31 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 55
Liked 228 Times in 152 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PALADIN85020 View Post
When I got home, I broke out an old BASIC program I put together about 20 years ago for calculating recoil. With the gun at 5.3 pounds and a muzzle velocity of about 1400 fps with a 240-grain bullet, the .44 mag develops 11.16 foot pounds of recoil energy at the butt.
If you are using full power loads, they are most likely producing 1650fps to 1700fps. 1400fps is very low for full power 44mag loads from a rifle.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-20-2010, 07:32 PM
PALADIN85020's Avatar
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 5,072
Likes: 539
Liked 9,826 Times in 1,363 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cowart View Post
If you are using full power loads, they are most likely producing 1650fps to 1700fps. 1400fps is very low for full power 44mag loads from a rifle.
Using 1700 as a velocity, then the foot-pounds of recoil energy works out to 15.19 in the 5.3 lb. Model 92. That's more than a .30/06 in the 9 lb. '03 Springfield, which generates 14.42 FPE.

As I mentioned, the upper limit for recoil for most folks is around 15 foot-pounds of kick.

My limit was reached, for sure!

John
__________________
- Cogito, ergo armatum sum -
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
357 magnum, 44 magnum, browning, carbine, colt, hornady, redhawk, rossi, ruger, savage, springfield, winchester

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
The Lounge Thread, Surprised by the recoil of the old '92 in .44 Magnum! in General Topics; Well, today I went out with my new old Model 1892 Browning carbine, chambered in .44 Magnum. Here's the gun: ...
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
44 Magnum reduced to 38 special recoil-Comments needed haris1 S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present 18 03-17-2013 10:44 AM
I'm surprised that nobody straightshooter1 The Lounge 13 04-20-2011 02:50 AM
Reduced Recoil .44 Magnum brokenprism Ammo 30 06-16-2010 01:37 PM
Well, I'm Surprised!! TACC1 The Lounge 3 03-18-2010 02:11 AM
44 Magnum Recoil - Putting It All Together conchmariner Ammo 16 01-18-2009 05:28 AM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:49 PM.


S-W Forum, LLC 2000-2015
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)