I guess I’m going to derail my own thread, but here goes.
It seems there’s a pretty good consensus that Rugers are stronger than comparable models made by Smith and Wesson. A few years ago Smith introduced their model 69 in an L frame chambered for .44 mag. I have two of them. I don’t shoot Buffalo Bore type full full strength loads from them because I’m not sure they, or my wrists, would hold up very well. But I do really like them.
Now take Ruger’s GP100, which I also have in .357 mag. Over the years I have seen it described here on the campfire as being “made like a tank” literally dozens of times. So when Ruger came out with a five shot version of it in .44 caliber did they chamber it in .44 magnum? No, to my disappointment it is chambered in .44 special. It weighs within an ounce of a model 69. Why didn’t Ruger think it was strong enough to chamber in a .44 magnum? I would love a GP100 in .44 mag.
