Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns New 5 shot, Ruger GP100 .44 special

and then there is the six shot 41magnum redhawk with a short barrel.
it's fun with a full load of powder and a 265grain bullet.
I pulled out the 696 the other day after reading this thread,
i still like that revolver no matter what anybody says.
however, reading on here about a short barrel 69 gets my attention.
I showed a guy yesterday a cast 130 grain 38special, next to it was a cast 265grain 41mag, also can be done in 41special.
they is a small bit of difference, i think he used the word, wampum, in it hitting something.

i also tried to find some loading info for a 310grain pill in 44special with no luck.

No reason not to have both. No reason to make it more complicated than necessary.

Lot's of short revolvers it seems. I heard an 8-shot 357 Redhawk, 2.75" is the pipeline too.



What are the odds that gunmakers were tooling up for a HRC win, and legislation against manufacture/sale of semiautos to civ's?

Makes as much sense as anything.

Okay, I'm asking this as a completely honest question and not looking to start an argument but what is the draw for snub nose super powerful revolvers?

From what I can see you get a huge amount of muzzle blast while taking away the whole reason for a magnum case, which is to be able to throw a nice chunk of lead faster than it's "special" or original counterpart. Yes, you still may get more velocity than a shorter case, but you're not going to get all that much, certainly not in proportion to the increased recoil and concussion.

In a .4x caliber the diameter is what does the work, speed mostly just gives you flatter trajectory. And flatter trajectory is only needed as ranges increase. In a super short barrel you take away speed and you take away sight radius for longer range accuracy, so regardless of whether a very good marksman might be able to make a 100 yard shot with one there are far better tools for that.

So I'm gong to assume one doesn't buy these specifically for long range shooting but rather for up close shooting. So again you're left with a lot of blast and recoil when the same diameter and weight bullet could be driven at a near enough speed from that barrel in a much less offensive manner.

In a decent holster a 4" barrel is no more problem to carry than a 2.5" or 3" and gives you increased sight radius and it does give just that much more velocity.

Anyway, I don't see the reasons for these little snub nose cannons like a Ruger Alaskan .454 Casull or a 2.5" .44 Magnum but that's because I don't see them. But I am always open to enlightenment, so could someone please tell me why these are so popular?

(P.S. when/if you answer, please don't start off with "you've obviously never..." which is really insulting. I'm stating up front that I have never.... whatever with a short barreled canon, which is why I'm asking.)

Since we're talking about a 44 special and not a magnum, we're not talking about a super powerful revolver. We're looking at ~250 gr of lead @ 900-1000 fps. You're not going to loose a lot of velocity with the 3" tube, and you're not going to have hellacious muzzle blast as I assume one would be using a medium burning rate powder.

I'm in the camp that would prefer a 4" barrel, but there is an appeal of a compact revolver that has enough power to get real work done. We're looking at just a little more oomph than a 45 acp, in a compact solid revolver and because it's not a fire belching magnum, it'll be shootable. Even with the short sight radius a competent shot shouldn't have trouble making a heart lung shot inside 50 yds, or head shooting a grouse a stones through away.

as many have already alluded too, there is no reasoning or logic when it comes to handguns, especially "hunting" or "backpacking" or "hiking" handguns.

You forgot "woods" and "truck" gun.

I think on the sum total of it you are completely right. I am i think of the big fat bullet at moderate speed crowd. The L shape 696 or my little ruger 2.75 will both throw a 200something pill at about 1000fps. So will the 3inch, 4inch, six inch, and 7inch something blackhawks i have in 41mag. The only real atvantage i can think of in the "mag" category is it can last a long time at the upper ranges of the non mag rated version of the same thing. I am still debating the utility of the 2.75 redhawk 41mag. It works, but it is nowhere as near sweet as the lew horton smith i have in the same caliber.
The reality of it is which is difficult to admit to, the 4inch 57, or the 4inch 58 works just about perfect anyway. I put a 696 44special smith next to a 58 41magnum out of curiousity, and they are not to me that much different in size, except six shots and if i want to, i can really up the velocity in the 58. The difference in .410 and .429 diameters is not really that important. I came in possession of a smith "classic" four inch model 29, i removed the factory stocks, put something on it i liked, and replaced the front sight with one of those red fiber optic's i think comes on the 329?
I have only fired a full house load a few times through it.
mostly, stuff around 1000fps. And i can do the same in a 44special, 41special, 45colt, and for that matter a 38wcf. And the same in a 10mm glock.
but sensibility doesn't have much to do with it.
I have had a few people over and asked them to try the fit in hand, trigger, and single/double action of a smith in these categories vs. the ruger. Smith every time. Being a rather ol fahrt these days, i also carried a k frame 19 four inch both in uniform, and concealed in the 70's, 80's, 90's, and so on till i got smitten with other things.
I never felt it was an issue. But i never fired much of the hipower stuff in the 19, i have a 28 for that in 357. But i have been messing with .41special in 170grain bullets for the little redhawk.
they seem a perfect mix. I could see wanting to do something like that with this 44special ruger.

Jimbo!

I have a number of .44 Specials but I can't tell you what they weigh exactly.

My Flattop is more smaller than a Super Blackhawk and with the steel grip frame it makes a wonderfully shooting big bore revolver. It's a 4 5/8" and sees a steady load of the 260gr Keith at 950-1000fps. Even kids shoot this thing with no problem. 250yds gongs are in trouble with this one.

Another I own is a 24-3 Lew Horton. This probably makes the least sense because it's in an N-frame. But at the same time it would never see magnums even if it could. The above mentioned load is horrid in the Lew Horton. Horrid. It sees a lot of 200gr. wadcutters at around 850fps. 250 gongs are more safer with this one, but not by much.

The other I own is the 396NG. A backpackers dream and a great CC gun. But 260's @ 1,000 fps will make your vagina hit the floor so hard you'll think somebody dropped an octopus on the linoleum. I load it with these anyway in bear country. It's downright wonderful with 180gr XTP's between 750-800fps.

I still shoot a lot of 260's around 1,100fps in my Model 4" 29-2. But sooner or later I'll stop doing that and just use Special brass/loads exclusively. 250yds gongs are fugked when I'm shooting this.

The GP100 isn't going to do much of anything different. But I do know I dig the .44 Special in short barrels. Not so much for weight reduction but just all around packing.

I know the weight of that GP should be ballpark for allowing me to shoot a lot without discomfort.

Or maybe it will just be a big POS. I'll let you know regardless.


Dave

typing at the same time i think, you said it better than i did.

Sorry, I should have been more specific.

While I would prefer a 4” barrel, I can sorta/maybe see a good reason for this 3” Ruger .44 Special. In fact I think a .44 Special in a mid-size revolver is probably one of the better field guns one could find, since most .44 Magnums are loaded to Special velocities most of the time anyway. My post was more referring to things like the 2.5” Model 69 loaded to full pressure or the 2.5” Ruger Alaskan in any of its full powered chamberings.

Yeah. You couldn't give me one of those.

But to each their own.

I do need a 4" .500 though. But that's only because I have a small dick.




Merry Christmas,
Clark

I still want a 480 Toklat, but looks like I'll need to Bobbit a full length 480.

Not sure who they consulted when naming the snubby super the Alaskan as I'd venture to say most Alaskan's would say it should have been named the DSMFer.

LMAO.

This guy.

Though I am a big fan of the 44 Special and own a number, I am lost on what this does over a tidier SP-101 357 Mag, which I was out shooting today? For CC the SP-101 wins, for romping the woods a proper six shot short barreled Blackhawk wins, assuming Ruger was a requirement.

this ought to make a few people lose sleep. I got an email from ruger this evening announcing the five shot 44special.
they also announced a .357magnum EIGHT SHOT with the 2.75inch barrel.
HEE Hee
Yeah they did.
and that's in the gp100

and edited to add i goofed, the .357 is in the redhawk. thats what happens when you got a nasty head cold sinus infection and its too late at night.

Isn't the 8 shot .357 in the Redhawk?

Yes, the Redhawk......bug hunk if steel.