Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns 44 mag or colt 45?

Decided to start putting dallars in my piggy bank for an effective woods sidearm. I'm not a big guy nor do I have big hands, but not worried about recoil. I live in Griz country and have had my share of encounters, all with positive outcomes. These are the cals I'm thinking of, particular pistol suggestions are welcome also. Thanks.

4" S&W M629....Hard Cast.

Ingwe

Both calibers are effective. The 45 Colt is disadvantaged by the fact of not being as readily available. At least around here, you'll never see 45 Colt in Wal Mart. The .44 Mag. is always there. 45 Colt in loadings effective on Grizzly Bears is uncommon. 44 Mag. loads that should be effective are not. If you are reloading, it doesn't matter.

Specifically, if you have smallish hands, I'd get a Ruger 50th Anniversary Blackhawk. Not the 50th Anniversary Super Blackhawk, made a couple of years later. The Blackhawk was made for only one year but is on the smaller frame. It is nearly identical to the New Vaquero in size but has the advantage over the NV in its chambering. The NV in 45 Colt SHOULD NOT be used with "Ruger Only" loadings.

Another option would be the Smith and Wesson 629 Classic in the barrel length of your choice. Be sure to get one with the Hogue finger groove grips. In fact, any 629 with either original or aftermarket grips such as I mentioned, will work fine. I have small hands and those grips fit me very well.

Both these guns are made in USA. I wouldn't buy a brand new Smith or any of the recent ones with the lock. The Ruger has a lock under the grips, but I've never heard of one failing.

I do reload and plan to do so for this firearm. I do plan to carry max loads for bear and other nasties, but don't plan to shoot hot loads often. Been cruising the pawn shops, but don't know detais/ capabilities of enough models. Doing research and compiling a list of notes.

can you specify your mould and load details, Ingwe???

The two I listed are good options if your hands are on the smallish side. If you're not worried about grip size, there are a lot of guns that will work. The Super Blackhawk is very common and usually available for a decent price. The Smith 29/629 is higher, but is a good gun. Look for those that have -4 or greater suffixes in the model designation. These will have the durability enhancements and be a more robust gun. Redhawks are good.

Guns that you don't want are Smith 25 variants in 45 Colt and Ruger New Vaqueros. These along with Colt SAA's, their clones, old west replicas (or originals) in that caliber will not be good guns to use with heavy loads.

If you want a 45 Colt, get a Ruger Blackhawk, a Redhawk or some other heavily-built handgun in order to take advantage of the Ruger Only loadings.

Large frame Ruger single action .45 Colt,(the old style Ruger Vaquero birds head model will fit your hand)...335 grain hard cast LBT-WLNGC,...lotsa WW-296. Don't forget to locktite the grip frame screws.





http://www.castperformance.com/Detail.bok?no=21

If you are casting your own the Lyman #429421 with 21.0 grains of H110 behind it, Mag Primer.

If you are buying bullets any good hard cast 240 gr. SWC...same load.

Its comfortable to shoot and the penetration is more than adequate.

Ingwe

If loading your own, you can load colt right up there with anythign the 44 mag can do, plus, it makes a bigger hole.

I was in the same spot and went with the 4" Ruger Redhawk 45 LC
Did a trigger job on it and added fiber sights. this is a nice gun and will handle hoter stuff than a Smith.
PS I have been a Smith guy for years but when I wanted a big hammer went to Ruger.
JMHO

Since you are going to be rolling your own, .45 Colt all the way. Bigger, heavier bullets than the .429 magnum......

"Bigger and heavier" isn't always better. For bear protection I want a bullet that will break bone and penetrate - given the same velocity that means sectional density. A .45 Colt bullet has to weigh 265-grains and fly at the same speed to equal a 240-grain .44 Mag. Yep, there are other factors and I'm crowding a lot of angels on the head of this pin.

I remember reading alot of Elmer Keith's stuff years ago. Sixguns by Keith stands out in my mind.
He wrote alot about the .45 Colt, the heavier loaded .44 Specials and, later the .44 Magnum.
Unrealized by many it that you don't have to push either round to gun break down point to kill a nasty animal even a big bear. The old .45 Colt rd., for instance, had a great rep for doing that with it's original loading of the 255 gr. RN bullet at not much over 800 fps. It didn't kill quickly, but it did penetrate well. And that's what you need with a CNS hit.
Some say you can't kill an attacking bear with a pistol. Keith's book cited examples that say otherwise. One of them involved a 1911 Colt, .45 ACP against an alaskan brown bear.
I watched a fish and game cop shoot a grizzly very dead when the grizzly atacked him during a tranplant operation. The guy was knocked to the ground, and shooting double action. The gun was a .357 Magnum. Interesting video.
I'd find a gun that I could handle comfortably and quickly first. Then I'd load a heavier lead bullet and see how well I could shoot it. If I couldn't handle a 250 gr. plus bullet at 1100-1200 fps., I'd go for a round nose or a semi flat point/round nose at lower velocity.
When I say "handle" that means shoot quickly and accurately enough for a CNS hit. No pistol load is going to kill a big bear quickly with anything less than a CNS hit. E

thanks, ingwe...

traded my only .44, which i never handloaded for, off a while back, and i haven't cast bullets since i was in high school...
i've got the bug for another .44, but if good cast bullets are available for sale, i've got a surplus of hobbies already....

Lots of good information here. So what I add is a little bit different.

I know that what I carry(in different situations) depends on the ease of carrying. That is why I like my 329PD. Very lightweight, you do not even know it is there. It does not matter what cartridge you have if the handgun is clumsy to carry, and heavy. You will probably leave it at home. I have several Ruger single actions, and they have their place. But for day in day out use, they are heavy and clumsy(just an opinion), please do not flame me for saying this. But I have carried a lot of BH's, and I have left them at home on the counter because it was just one more thing.

take a look at a high quality lightweight rig that you will always carry, and not mind carrying.

When I want to shoot 200 or 300 rounds for fun I take my 45 Colt BH to the range and have fun. Or a 44 mag. BH. But when I seriously carry my handgun, it is one of my S&W Titanium's.

Both cartridges will serve you well. Personally I would choose a catridge based on what is most economical for me to shoot, and practice with. Tom.

go to CDNNinvestments.com, and download thier latest catalog - it is 150 pages, don't print it!

They have Ruger Blackhawks in 44mag and also beretta Stampedes for under $375...NEW

Platform-wise, one more twist is DA vs. SA. Sometimes the same guys that don't want to be bothered with flipping the safety on a CCW handgun don't mind having to cock a revolver with a 1,000-lb grizzly bearing down at 35-mph while rooting up trees on the way.

My basic plan is to not live in grizzly country.

I agree with Hogghead. Both cartridges could serve a guy well with the proper loads. I don't own a colt 45 but I have been impressed by it and some of the handloads I've seen used in it. I do own and reload for a 44 Mag; a 7.5 inch Redhawk and if I were planning on being in bear country I'm sure it would be with me, along with a load featuring a good hard cast bullet at a good velocity.

I went to the range today to try out a Ruger BH 45colt I just picked up.

I brought along a box of Mag Tec 250grn cowboy loads and a box of Buffalo Bore 325grn.

The MT loads were easy shooting, fairly accurate(I'm not an accomplished pistol shot!), and I have no doubt, plenty capable of taking deer at any range I could safley hit one at.

The BB loads were stout. 325grn at a claimed 1325fps. After the third round I caught myself flinching and had to slow down and concentrate! I imagine these things would put a loooong wide hole in what ever you shoot.

+1 Lot's of flexibility in bullet design & weight choices, for light to heavy, from plinking to serious social interaction.

MM

4" 629
4" Redhawk

Hard to go wrong either way!!

Hot loads or light weight guns do no good if you don't hit the intended target, whats the #1 factor you fight when shooting a big handgun.....recoil. A couple of good hits with even a 357 magnum & good bullets is much better than a 335 gr slug in the mud! And you'll only get one shot with the monster loads.
Someone said you need to hit the CNC & thats correct, if its a charging bear you only have the head to shoot at & that bear most likely won't be in the wide open spaces, he'll be plowing down brush like a bull dozer & you just might be a little bit excited.
A 44 or 45 with hard bullets at a velocity you can HANDLE is way more important than gun weight or horsepower!

Dick

Heavy loaded big bore handguns aren't that difficult to shoot. It's just a matter of practice and conditioning yourself to them.

629 felt good in my hands, Red Hawk grip was too big in the grip for comfort even with Hogue grips. Local dealer swears the Alaskan will be somewhere in between (he has one). Gonna check it out tomorrow. Might go 454, so I can shoot 45lc most of the time and carry cannon fodder in the bush. I must reiterate, I haven't even held the gun yet so all ideas are subject to change. I knew I'd like the 629 'cause the old man has one. I've run a bunch of rounds through it and it was easy to shoot. I've got lots of time to think before I have the cash to drop, so a fella can dream...

Bristoe, you're probably right, I need to get in more practice before I say something like that....just inexperience!

Dick

A 629 is a danged good choice. So is its caliber. Be advised that the 454 won't be extremely easy to find. Either of your former choices will be easier to obtain.

not worried about factory ammo

If you must have a double action 44 mag is the choice

If single will do flip a coin. I hate to have to live on the difference.

454 all the way. last year i sent over 1k down the tube of my m83. you get used to the recoil. very few thing will get the attention of a bear like a 300 gr xtp mag at 1750 fps. i shot a nice whitetail this year with this set up. with the shooting gods smiling it will keep 5 in 2" at 100 yds. this is scoped off of a bench. when i pull the scope for hunting it opens up to 4". i have many big bore revolvers and byfar the 454 is the most versitle.

I have no idea what your experience is,...but I don't think too many people would recommend a .357 for defense against a Griz.

The Alaskan is a 3" cut down Super Redhawk, if memory serves. You won't gain much with a 454 in a 3" gun over a heavy loaded 45 Colt except they are harder to shoot and hit with. A 5.5" Redhawk in 45 Colt or 44 mag would be a better choice in my opinion. I'd do Ruger (not a new style Vacaro) or Colt Anaconda over Smith if you will be loading hot. And then I would do 45 Colt over 44 Mag, for the larger bore size.

Nice buck 14cm! I judst got back from the shop, and I think I'm in love. The Ruger Alaskan felt good and I love the versatility of being able to plink with long colt. Now to figure out what I can sell off to buy it....

Kool, word to the wise. when you start loading for the 454 watch your brass. Also never never never light load h110 or 296 and last but not least. use small rifle mag primers in the 454.

I didn't say I recommended a 357 for bears, I said hitting with a 357 makes a lot more sense than missing with a big bore. The big guns give a false sense of security if you can't handle them, if you can, then you're ahead of the game.
Phil Shoemaker, one of the most respected bear guides in Alaska used a 357 magnum for several years using Norma full metal jacketed slugs & yes they will penetrate the skull of large bears, he has since turned that gun over to his daughter Tia & he's went with a 44 magnum & hard cast slugs.
If there's anything more important than hitting your intended target I guess I've been doing it wrong for many years.
14cm, that is one beautiful whitetail, congratulations! The 454 is an outstanding revolver, accurate, flat shooting & plenty of power, whats not to like!!

Dick

thank you sir, 300 yds from my back door. just the way we like em. I do have to agree with idaho1945, i see way too many people who shoot handguns poorly in the best conditions because of two reasons.
1 they are over gunned and are scared of the recoil
2 they put 20-30 down the tube a year and call it good. these hand cannons need to be shot and shot alot.

most people have no clue how accurate a revolver can be. my super blackhawk hunter in 45lc will keep 5 in 3" at 100.

I have no idea how to prepare for a bear backup scenario. maybe have your wife throw bowling balls at you as you try to hit them. this could kill 2 birds with one stone. lol

Yeah, well,...the guy is asking about big bore handguns for Griz defense.

I see no reason to be patronizing about it by suggesting that he can't handle one that's loaded heavy.

As I said before,..they're not all that difficult to shoot. It's just a matter of practice.

John Linebaugh isn't a particularly large man and he seems to handle recoil okay.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DZdfdAuxCA&feature=player_embedded

Certainly not suggesting that he can't handle one, I said if you can you are ahead of the game, that goes for anyone. Sounds like you can, thats great! Being accurate with a bigger gun can save your life in a bear encounter & like I said, missing with one doesn't help the odds.
Bears are extremely fast & in a charge situation, something like 40 yds or less you have maybe 3 seconds to get in the fight, a big bore, with one shot that hits would have to be a wonderful feeling, but you most likely will only get one, make the most of it by using a gun & load that you can hit with.
Pretty much what I've said 3 times now.

Dick

From Shooting Times article:

"To render this in more familiar terms, let�s take the average energy figures for the .454 Casull ammunition through the 2 1/2-inch gun and compare them to the .44 Magnum, which is the most commonly used other cartridge for dangerous-game protection or backup in the field. The most powerful SAAMI-spec commercial 240-grain .44 Magnum load fired in a 7 1/2-inch industry reference barrel generates 971 ft-lbs of energy (all heavier bullet .44 Magnum loads produce less energy than that). That gives the short .454 Casull Alaskan a 40-percent energy advantage over a long-barreled .44 Magnum."

Hmmmmm...

I would not put much stock in "energy figures" if I were you

When one bullet is wider and heavier than another, energy figures are pretty safe bet. Velocity is the variable that is squared in the energy calculation, so the wider and heavier bullet also has to be going faster, or dang close.

As for the Ruger Alaskan, not for me. It's definitely a try before you buy handgun. Or, do what I did and just watch someone touch one off.

In that way of thinking you would need a 41Mag cause it will shadow the 44(42mag)! Bob

Yes I think a 45colt buffalo bore 300 grain bullet in the right pistol or lever carbine would work,but the Alaska Indians go out to take out a problem polar bear with a .223(m-16)and the bear always loses.

Bob

That's true, there are .41 Mag loads that outperform the .44 Mag. I reconcile all the trivia by not limiting myself to one revolver and focusing on each revolvers' sweet spot.

I have a 45 Colt single action that belonged to my Texas Ranger grandad, and it shoots really well..I also have a S&W mod. 29 44 magnum..I have also used the 41 mag. a lot over the years...

Of the 3, I have not been able to tell any difference at all on deer, and that is all that I have shot with them..I would put more emphasis on the gun and how it felt than the caliber between the 3....My choice is the double action S&W 6 inch in each case. You can pick up a 45-5 S&W for less than you can a 29 or 57 btw..I just looked into that on Guns America..Those 45 Smiths are bring about $599 average, thats a buy for sure.

If I want a defence gun then I will opt for a 45 auto, Browning HP 9mm or a combat magnum 357 Smith with a 4 inch barrel.

There's nothing like walking in the dark by yourself, smelling like dead elk with a hunk of meat strapped to your back in an area where you've seen griz and wolves to make you want a cannon strapped to your hip.

We ain't got grizzlies around here but the pissed off hogs have me wanting a cannon.

If you've made your mind up on the Ruger Alaskan or something else, more power to you. As for me, I don't live in Grizzly country but I chose my general all-around outdoor gun as if that were a strong consideration... because it was. I really wanted a custom .475 Linebaugh or a .454 Casull based on a Ruger Super BlackHawk, but after owning 2 or 3 SBH's, they just don't feel right to me, although I love their looks, stoutness, etc. Bristoe's Birdhawk version makes me drool though!

I grew up reading a lot of Keith, and that had a big influence on me, so I finally decided that I didn't really need the recoil and muzzle blast of the .454 or .475 and bought a S&W 629 with 4" barrel which by that time (15 years or so ago) came with a Houge grip which fit my hand perfectly. I still love that gun.

I shoot it 98.5% of the time with 7.5 grains of Unique under a 240 grain SWC and enjoy the heck out of it. Not only do I shoot this gun better than any other hangun I own, so have 3 or 4 other non-handgun-shooter-type family members and friends that I've had try a Walther P22 (.22 LR), Kel-Tec P-32 (.32 ACP), Kahr P9 (9mm), and the 4" 629. Funny thing is, the bigger the cartridge, the better they shot! (Yeah I know it probably has something to do with the platform rather than the cartridge).

The only thing I'd change if I were to do it all over again would be to buy the Scandium 329 instead.

Behemry, are you using 7.5 grs Unique & a 240gr slug in 44 special brass or 44 magnum? If its 44 special brass that load will run right at 900 fps, if its magnum brass it will be a fair bit slower, still a good load. I used that load in 44 special brass last fall to take a Montana whitetail, worked great. One through the lungs, one through both shoulders, both shots exited, down & out in 5-6 seconds.
You need to shoot someone's 329 S&W before wishing you had one, a cylinder full might change your mind, they are great packing guns, but if you wind them up a little bit they can be brutal. I'm guessing if you shoot one 6 times you'll run home & kiss that 4" model 29.

Dick

Idaho1945,

I didn't note which brass I was using at the time , I used to use a lot of 44 special brass, but have since converted to all magnum brass. I get 860 fps with that load and whichever brass I was using when I ran it through the chrono.

Idaho495 said

I owned two Scandium .357's at one time. Sold the 3" version, lost the 2" in a divorce (actually she hocked it for $250 before the divorce .) Those were by far the hardest kicking guns I've ever shot in my life, and I've shot my share of guns. Cylinder latch would rip the inside of my thumb open on the first shot with full power .357's and it felt like someone took a ping pong paddle and hit the palm of my hand as hard as they could on each shot. But dang, it was accurate! And you forgot you were even carrying it because it was so light.

From what I've read, the gunwriters that have shot both the .357 and the .44 mag scandiums say the .44 isn't as brutal. I'd load it down for "plinking" and carry it with the serious stuff (after checking point-of-impact) in bear country. But, you may be right!

I just got my Ruger Redhawk 44 mag. 5.5 stainless, I am still working on loads for it. I am mainly interested in loads for Bear and Hogs... any suggestions?

I have shot enough game with both calibers and I can say with a reasonable amount of certainty that the .45 Colt is higher up on the food chain. Your sectional density argument notwithstanding, in all of the penetration testing I have performed, my large handguns (.45, .475 Linebaugh, .500 Linebaugh, .50 Alaskan, etc.) penetrate all out of proportion to their paper ballistics and yes, really poor sectional density relative to rifle bullets. For example, my .416 Remington, loaded with 400 grain solids has a great sectional density of .330, whereas my .475 Linebaugh loaded with my 420 grain WFNs has a not so stellar sectional density of .265. Yet, despite this huge "disadvantage," it never fails to out-penetrate my .416....... Nose profile is the most important factor in penetration (how big is the meplat?), but weight carries momentum. All else being equal, the .45 has a distinct size advantage over the .429.

Like I said, "lots of angels".

It used to be the .44 Mag vs. .45 Colt debate had merit - the two cartridges were vying for the King of the Hill. Nowadays neither is even close. In your post you listed the .475 Linebaugh, .500 Linebaugh, and .50 Alaskan, but we can easily add in a bunch more that thoroughly thrash the old standards. The debate is moot.

A regular ol' .45 Colt in a medium weight and barrel length revolver is already perfect and I don't mess with it. I can trump the best .45 Colt handloader in the world by spending 20-minutes at the gun store and picking up, oh joy, another revolver. Part of me finds that fact depressing - some of the art of guns and handloading gone and any dork with the latest whiz-bang can smirk at my sweat-stained handloads. The better part of me now enjoys a cartridge for what the inventor intended.

Sorry for the dose of 'JOG Philosophy' with your morning coffee.

Then you must love the .500 Linebaugh because it is pretty much perfect on all counts (save for recoil!)!

Whitworth is right on! The .45 Colt handloaded, wins hands down. I use a 300 gr. LBT WFN PB in Rugers and Marlin 94s.
In my old Freedom Arms revolvers, the 340 gr LBT got the nod.

For defense against a grizzly both can get the job done and I doubt the griz would ever know the difference. I think I'd choose the extra frontal diameter and bullet weight of the .45 Colt over the extra velocity of the .44 mag. But if you're being charged, you're going to have to make a head shot, and at that point as long as you crack the skull, both rounds will give you the exact same result.

If you're not a handloader, then go for the .44 mag. If you're a handlaoder, then I'd recommend the .45 Colt.

Personally, I'd take a 5" Taurus Raging Bull in .480 Ruger, loaded with an LBT WFN bullet.

how about a glock 10mm? 15 rounds of 200grain hard cast bullets at 1375fps. Its the next handgun i'm going to get followed by a redhawk 4"