Scopes on the .44 Magnum

[Gun Relics]

More of a story but there is a question at the end.

After seeing Dirty Harry, I wanted a .44 magnum. At the time, early 1970's, it was hard to get the S and W so the dealers were pushing Rugers. I was just out of high school but somehow I was able to buy a Blackhawk at a local gun store and had to take it to the local police station to get it registered. The officer questioned my choice of .44 magnum, so I just said "Dirty Harry' and he laughed and shook his head.

I read a few gun magazines and it seemed like every cover had a scoped handgun on it at the time. Knowing nothing about pistols, I took it to a gunsmith and asked him to mount a scope for me. He did. He had to drill it. We picked out a nice little handgun scope and went to the range. I took both .44 specials with me and .44 magnums.

At the range, I knew to brace for a the kick so I didn't end up with a black eye or a forehead that looked like an errant golf ball found it. It was fun watching the shooters around me flinch when I fired the cannon. When the gun misfired, an experienced shooter warned me not to cock the gun for a few seconds - some very good advice. Just when I had the scope zeroed in, to my dismay, the scope would go out of adjustment, no matter how tight the mounts were. A few months later, I decided to sell the gun. The scope was all but worthless.

So just how difficult is it to mount a reliable scope on a 44 magnum? Were scoped revolvers just a passing trend?

[Leonard]

Except in my teens when I thought making a handgun into a carbine sized gun made sense long barrels scopes I have since felt hand guns should be handy, not clumsy with very long barrels and scopes. TC's being a possible exception for a scope. When I would take a handgun hunting it was a max of 6" barrel with open sites. If open sites are a problem today's red dots are another option. BUT THAT'S MY PREFERENCES if you prefer today's proper mounts and a quality scope should handle the recoil.

[505Gibbs]

Inexpensive scopes rarely have a lot of adjustment - IMO! A lot a factors in play here between the mount, the rings and the scope. There are ways around this such as the rings sold by Burris with the plastic inserts which provide more adjustment. Also, the shorter the distance you're sighting in for the more potential issues because the reduction in amount of adjustment.
The adjustments quoted are usually for 100yds.
So, 60 inches at 100 yds is only 15 at 25 yds.
Here's my Ruger - very good at 100 yds!

[S&W ucla]

On most newer S&W models, the frame is factory drilled and tapped for a mount, covered by the sight. I have a 4x Leupold eer which I use on several guns to test loads and accuracy. My model 69 44mag can be a handful with full power loads, but with scope I get the best accuracy. I still prefer the iron sights for carry and hunting. As I get older I may try a red dot sight, they're getting better and more compact. Whatever works best for you, Good Shooting!

[GypsmJim]

I started handgun hunting with a Blackhawk about 25 years ago. A scope was mounted the first year. I used a no d&t mount. It worked fine for years with magnum loads. I even made my own leather holster because at the time I could find no holsters that I liked. Took several deer with it.

The "problem" that I perceived was simply that the balance was not good. It carried well, but even a 2-hand hold was not comfortable.

My current deer gun is an Encore with a 15" barrel in 0.308 Winchester. The scope is mounted with a double set of rings and has stood the test of time for 10 years now. On occasion I also use a Redhawk with a reflex sight. That replaced the scope that also made the revolver uncomfortable.

I guess it's a matter of preference, but rest assured that a cheapie scope won't hold up.

[Bald1]

Back in my 20s (early 1990s) I had a 3x Tasco Trophy series scope on my 6” 629. This 150lb hog was the first thing I shot with the scope. I felt like I was cheating at about 75 yds. I killed some deer with it and a surprising number of woodchucks. I upgraded to a Thompson Encore in 243 for deer. It wears a 2-7 T/C scope. First year I used it on public land I fired two shots and killed two deer. In NY you don’t trophy hunt on public land. That spike might be the only deer you see all year. I never had any problems with scopes getting loose or loosing POA.

[Yendor357]

I still like a scoped revolver. If you want to know what your revolver is capable of, put a scope on it. Red dots are fine, but on their best day, they’re not a scope.

The problem with a scope on a handgun is the scope slipping in the rings. Wilson Combat had a spacer/cylinder/ring that you’d put between the mounting ring and the turret in the middle of the scope that kept the scope from sliding. So if you can mount the scope in such a way that it has a “bump stop”, that helps keep things in place.

I also bought a Super Blackhawk in the early 80s when I was 20. It was lively. I sold it for a RedHawk, which was a bit tamer, and very accurate. Eventually, I sold the RedHawk as well. In later years, I bought a really nice Bi-Centennial Super Blackhawk again. I did a trigger job on it. I still have it. It is very accurate as well. With full power loads, it’s a knuckle buster. I usually run 200 grain XTPS at 1200. That’s a nice load for that one.

[series guy]

Like the OP I was reading the gun mags in the 70s and decided that someday I would own a revolver with a scope. I now have 4. I have a 25-2 converted to .45 Colt, a .44 Magnum, a 57/58 hybrid, and a 28-2. All shoot extremely well and I've never had any scope issues but the all have quality scopes purchased used on eBay.

[ajgunner]

Similar story with Dirty Harry and the 44. I bought a Ruger Redhawk in 7.5" 44mag. Then they came out with the 9.5 inch super Redhawk so I traded up. Being fairly young and poor, I hung a silver Simmons scope on it. Once I figured out I needed to reload if I wanted to do any quantity shooting, loading gear was where all my spare dollars went for a few years. Now 40+ years later and 1000's of rounds down the pipe, that old cheapo Simmons is still holding true. When I was younger and shooting 44 a lot, I had no problem putting 5 of 6 into a paper plate off hand at 50 yards. I hauled that anchor around for lots of miles in a uncle mikes shoulder rig. I never saw a legal buck while carrying it for several years of deer hunting. Of course if I was carrying a scoped rifle, all the deer seemed to be under 100 yards.

[rct269]

Okay---Kindergarten time:

I've never used a scoped handgun---and presume the scopes used are made for handguns---which is to say the eye relief is nowhere near that for a rifle.

Yes? No? What?

Ralph Tremaine

[cgt4570]

Here's my 29 silhouette. It has a no drill scope mount with a quality Leupold. It's a tack driver. (Ignore the little LS 3rd Target that photo bombed the pic).

[diyj98]

If you have trouble with the scope moving in the rings, try Burris Signature rings. I've used them on 357s', 44's, 454's, etc. and the scope won't budge.

I like red dot on deer hunting handguns, but scopes are best for accurate shooting.

[Wyo]

I have used a Burris 2x EER off and on for years on a S&W 629 Classic and most recently on a new Colt Anaconda. I’ve taken mule deer and antelope with that setup out to about 100 yds. I’ve also taken mule deer and antelope with iron sights out to about 100 yds. All in all, I’ve pretty well decided that the juice just isn’t worth the squeeze here - the extra bulk and weight are just more trouble than they're worth. As I’ve gotten older, though, my eyes ain’t what they used to be and I’m beginning to think a red dot might be of some benefit. Less bulk and weight and still gives some benefit so I might try that out sometime.

[NRA Dave]

Leupold 2x, Leupold 4x and B&L 3200 Elite scopes have served me well. Many deer, exotics and several head of African game all agree. I've scoped Super Redhawks, Freedom Arms Model 97s and 83s, and a 629. All of my Contender barrels have scopes.

[Mike C2]

Originally Posted by rct269

Okay---Kindergarten time:

I've never used a scoped handgun---and presume the scopes used are made for handguns---which is to say the eye relief is nowhere near that for a rifle.

Yes? No? What?

Ralph Tremaine

Yes, you are correct. They are long eye-relief scopes which make them perfectly accessible when your hand gun is at arms length. It’s fun and interesting to shoot a scoped hand gun.

[Ray]

Here's my 29 silhouette. It has a no drill scope mount with a quality Leupold. It's a tack driver. (Ignore the little LS 3rd Target that photo bombed the pic

Hi cgt4570 can you please refer me to the brand of your no drilling mount?
Thanks,Regards, Ray

[H Richard]

The recoil will do in a lot of inexpensive scopes. I had a 4X Leupold mounted on my 10" Contender for many years, and fired a few thousand rounds through it without any problems. Quality rings, properly torqued, should keep the scope from moving.

[BE Mike]

It's pretty easy with the factory drilled threaded holes and the UltraDot holds up quite well.

[tlawler]

While it’s not quite a .44 Magnum, I picked up a 610 no dash that someone had drilled and tapped for rings. I reamed it for 10mm Magnum and mounted an inexpensive Weaver stainless scope on it. Pushing 200 grain XTPs at 1450 fps, it’s nearing the low end of .44 Magnum energy. It’s a lot of fun to shoot and a pretty good tack driver despite the cheap glass on it.

[mtgianni]

I had a Super Blackhawk with a 2x Leopold that had no trouble staying in adjustment. IIRC, the mount was B square brand. I found I gained in accuracy and lost it in target acquisition time. I pulled the scope off and sold it when I went DA. My 14" contender has a scope and no problems. My Model 69 4.2" will not get near glass, as long as I own it. I have no control over my heirs.

[Doug M.]

My recollection, which might be poor, is that as a gun magazine reader in the late 70s/early 80s, the reports ere not favorable for scopes on handguns as the recoil impulse (at least on bigger calibers) was pretty harsh compared to being mounted on a rifle. Since I am not a physicist, my understanding might be really wrong.

[jake1945]

I have a Leopold 2x on my 7 inch Ruger Redhawk. Yeah, it's heavy!

[stansdds]

Originally Posted by Doug M.

My recollection, which might be poor, is that as a gun magazine reader in the late 70s/early 80s, the reports ere not favorable for scopes on handguns as the recoil impulse (at least on bigger calibers) was pretty harsh compared to being mounted on a rifle. Since I am not a physicist, my understanding might be really wrong.

Your recollection is just fine. Scope movement and durability were problems in the early days of scoped, heavy recoiling handguns.