The .44 Special ain't so special?

I agree with the above critics of Mike Venturino's drift in his writing genre, BUT I agree totally with his evaluation of the .44 Special cartridge. Note that he was not real critical of the handguns, but rather the cartridge's performance itself. I grew to dislike the performance of my .44 Special S&W Model 624/4" enough that I converted it to .41 Mag. What a difference!

YMMV! ............ Big Cholla
 
B/C,
I think that .44 Special, .41 Magnum, 10 MM aficionados all have one thing in common.
ALL of us are the red headed step children of hand gunners! I like to think I'm in pretty good company because of it?
 
S/d: I agree with you. I really like the 10mm cartridge both factory loads and handloads. When I modified my S&W Model 624 into a .41mag, the Model 610 was not available. I have both now. The 610 has a 6" bbl. and is my hunting handgun. The 624 has a 4" bbl. and rides real nice in a highrise belt holster while out Jeeping.

While I was a gunsmith, I built almost every caliber available on the Colt Model 1911 frame. When it became available in the 10mm Colt Delta Elite, I grabbed one for myself, modified it slightly and never looked back. I haven't carried concealed a Colt 1911 in any other caliber for almost 8 years. I retired last week from my second career as a LEO Deputy. I will now go back to my Colt Delta Elite as my CCW serious social work handgun from the SIGs my agency made us carry. Not that I didn't like them, there just isn't one available in 10mm. ............ Big Cholla
 
Well he's mostly right. If you don't reload, there is nothing the .44SPL can do better than the .45ACP/.45Colt or 44/40 with factory ammo.
 
This is an old trick of gun magazine editors-have one of the writers attack a favorite cartridge or rifle or whatever, then sit back, watch the readers' letters pour in. Charlie Askins was notorious for this. "The Sixgun is a Clunker!" to cite one his titles.

I agree. I remember an article years ago by some n'er do well gun writer who thought it high time to trash the 'ol .30-06 and how it didn't do any one thing particularly well or even as well as a 7mm Remington, or the .300 Winchester, or...

Different dog, same tired old trick.
 
Well I'm red headed. Or at least I was until some of it fell out and much of the remaining stuff turned white.

Don't know about the step-child of a hand gunner part, though.:D

Bullets is bullets, guns is guns. Some of those 44 Special guns are pretty nice, though. Certainly I wouldn't kick any Smith and Wesson in 44 Special out of the gun cabinet.

I don't really buy any special mystique for any cartridge. I don't think that .45 ACP is as magical as many people claim either. Or even 357 Magnum.:eek:

So if he's just saying that .44 Special doesn't live up to some fancy hype, fine.

I enjoy the education I'm getting reading the posts and the original article. I don't have a horse in the race, but it's good to watch anyway.
 
I sometimes think the adulation of the .44 special is.....irrational...but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Pascal: "The heart has its reasons which reason does not know." I always wanted a .44 Magnum Highway Patrolman -a tapered-barrel, working-class .44 Magnum.

MV is simply playing the role of provacative iconoclast - probably trying to get a rise out of Taffin!
 
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read."

I believe that quote belongs to Groucho (Julius) Marx & not Mr. Samuel L. Clemens.
 
I read that article. Never owned a .44 Special, but the article wouldn't keep me from buying one.
 
It seems he rehashed stuff from last century. I have some factory ammo from Hornaday that lists a 180 grain bullet at 1000 fps at muzzle. That's a little hotter than the old .44 Russian, thank you. Most of us with .44 Magnums, and reload, shoot a lot more "special loadings" than full magnums. In fact, you see it recommended here all the time to shoot 800 to 900 fps loads for practice and magnums for hunting type circumstances.

The .44 Special is probably not a miracle gun/load. We still have to have good loads and good guns to make the cartridge work. But, I have to believe it is a lot better cartridge than the .44-40, just in the reloading comparison.

I agree with those here that think he just needed something to write about and produced something to argue about.
 
After many years and lots of guns, I learned there is not really any caliber that is "special" or vastly superior to other similar calibers. Almost any decent rifle caliber will kill a deer and almost any decent pistol caliber will work for self defense. I like the .44 Special caliber, and with my 4" 24-3 I can clear the 25 yard plate rack at my local range very quickly, and it has just the right amount of power, recoil, and blast to be enjoyable to shoot. I don't like shooting .44 mags any more, but loaded to hot .44 Special ballistics it would be fine as would the .45LC, .45ACP, .41mag, etc.

But for me, I guess the .44 Special is just a little bit..."Special".
 
Owning both in several varieties at one time or another I can say this Mr. Owl.
A wise old bird once demonstrated several times and for several reasons why the .44/40 can be a royal PITA to reload for. Not that the author was trying to sell ink or anything?
 
I'm not trying to start anything and I may be a little ignorant but as far as I know, with the exception of the Blackhawk there is no 44 special curently being made on a frame that is any smaller than the magnums. So why not buy the magnum and have the option of shooting either load?
 
"I'm not trying to start anything and I may be a little ignorant but as far as I know, with the exception of the Blackhawk there is no 44 special curently being made on a frame that is any smaller than the magnums. So why not buy the magnum and have the option of shooting either load?"

Most .44 Specials built on the N frame use a lighter weight barrel and a shorter (read lighter) cylinder. The .44 Special is handier and can do 95% of what a handgun is called for.
 
I did not have time to read the article. I have been SCUBA diving off the end of the pier in Santa Cruz ! :) :)

Jerry
 
Muley Gil, in answer to your question,: The 24-3 and all other models in .44 special smith made, all had the light, tappered "pencil" barrel. It makes a world of differance in weight and handeling from the heavy barreled model 29. Practicly from a "club" to a sweetheart! I have a 29-2 in 5" and the 6 .44 specials pictured to compare. Now, I do belive the mountain gun would be worthwhile, and very comparable with the same lighter barrel, however, even that one has a slightly longer, hence, heavier clyinder. Since I own both, no valid reason to get a mountain gun, however if I had NO guns, it would be the first on my list! Opps, I had to edit this, I didnt read your full question, and thought it was you asking the question! Sorry!
 
Last edited:
There are simply too many gun writers and not enough advancement in the industry to provide even a moderate supply of newish topics. What has the industry provided in the way breakthrough new firearms and related technology? They still fire the same old centerfire ammo, we have smaller guns, bigger guns, plastic guns, rifles in a half a bazillion oddish calibers that few people care about, 1911's with "breakthrough" different styles of slide serrations... and on and on.

For this industry, the gun writer heard needs to be cut in half.
 
I say Sheep Dip !

I don't get out much.

So, who the cat hair is this Mike Venturino gun guru anyway?

I kinda like the forty-four special. Always try to keep one or two or a half dozen around just in case I need a real shootin' iron...

GunsofMarch003-1.jpg


Go figure...

Su Amigo
 
The .44 isn't special?!?

Say it ain't so, Joe!

standard.jpg



Of course, any publicity for these folks is good publicity, so I guess they like all this chatter.
 
Back
Top