Thank you Fred. It sounds like I had better stick to my .41 for the woods or find a 4" or shorter .44 magnum.
Is the .44spl a cult chambering only? Is it at all desireable? I'm in no way having remorse, but it sounds like you are saying that the .44spl doesn't really do anything that the other more popular chamberings can't do just as well.
The introduction of the .357 Magnum way back in 1935 kind of eased the door closed on the .44 Special. Not so long ago the shooting world was down to just one "factory" .44 chambering in the Charter Arms Bulldog, along with a host of out of production S&W's. With modern metallurgy the .44Spl was a good fit into a smallish frame, 5 shot CC piece, and tosses a factory standar 246 grain LRN which certainly set it ahead of the .38 Spl snubbies. With the rise of the "big bore" craze came a resurgence of interest in the .44 Spl and special runs started appearing, but most people had moved on to the .44 Magnum as their "staple .44" and there wasn't much need or interest in a seperate, "special only" chambering. S&W started bringing out lighter versions of the Magnum which helped to stiffle handloaders from getting creative with the .44 Spl as has been the case with .44 Magnum "reduced loads," and with the .45 ACP and .45 Colt.
Even now, no sooner did S&W build an L frame, 5 shot, compact .44 Spl, they turn around and chamber the .44 Mag into the exact same size gun! Well, if the choice is a 300-ish lb-ft .44 Spl load in an L-frame, or an 800-ish lb-ft .44 Mag load which will MOST people grab? Sure there are a tiny number of improved performance loads for the Spl...barely, but considering that most handloaders will load down from full house magnum loads to something still more potent than the .44 Spl, their isn't much fervor to develop hotter loads that bring the Spl up to meet the Magnum.
The Bulldog's success was stuffing a thick-bodied round into a compact revolver (and CA hasn't strayed from that successful formula) which basically competes in the .38 Spl arena which creates the perception of it being "powerful," yet when the .44 Spl moves into the world of .45ACP/.45Colt chambered revolvers built heavy enough to accept "warmish" loads that double the .44 Spl's power, and of course lightweight M29's such as the Mountain gun that can handle much heavier loads that any warmed up .44 Spl, you see the old .44 Spl has simply become "irrelevant" to all but the dedicated firearms enthusiast/collector, someone who wants something "different" to play with, or...novices who don't know where the .44 Spl really lies within the convoluted spectrum of handgun cartridge "power." Having said that, Underwood builds a 255grain, Keith style LSWC load rated at 1,000 fps/566lb-ft which ain't too bad for urban defense...well ahead of any .38 Spl, on par with and snubbie fired .357 Mag yet delivering with a much heavier slug, and a tad more potent than factory +P.45ACP which means it's a worthwhile choice for those so inclined. As for proof against bear attack...well, anything is possible, but I would not expect to make a good showing against a large, dangerous animal with any handgun cartridge that doesn't provide at least 700lb-ft KE with a heavy, non-expanding bullet for caliber, and I personally feel 1,000lb-ft is the minimum.
Just my "buck-2-98" worth.
are Ahrends, and look like Cocobolo.
