Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Has Brian Pearce published loads for the GP100 .44 Specials?

He posted loads for the mid-size frame Blackhawk .44 Specials so I was wondering if he's written an article about the new 5 shot GP100 .44 Spl. Being one is a 6 shooter and the other 5 I'm thinking the GP100 might not have the same pressure limits. Not that I'd want to hot rod loads to the max but he is the only writer I know of* who lists good data at "low, medium, high" pressures applicable to specific models of handguns.

My subscriptions to all magazines have expired and I don't normally check the magazine racks so was wondering if he's gotten around to this particular model.



* "I know of" - if anybody else has data for this model on a website or even a magazine article that would be valuable as well.

In the lower 48, I can't think of anything I'd want to do with a handgun that I couldn't get done with a 240gr LBT at 1,100fps. And I have no doubt at all that the GP-100 could handle that load.
Now I personally don't care for "magnums" (and that load is in the magnum realm) under 4", but I could "suffer" along with that beautiful GP-100 at 3". I think FOR ME, I would drop the above load to 900fps and call it good for anything I'm likely to do with that particular revolver.

Yeah, I shot various .44 Magnums for over 25 years and it finally dawned on me that full power loads kick. My standard blastin'/fun/jackrabbit load was a Lyman 429215 (215 gr. SWC) at right about 1000 fps which was extremely accurate and a powder puff to shoot from a SBH or Redhawk. Before I got out of .44s and the .45 Colt altogether my standard .44 Special load in a Blackhawk Flattop was a 200 RNF from a Lee mold at about 950-1000 fps.

To my original question, Google and ye shall find, mostly. Ran across this blurb from a post on castboolits.gunloads.com from poster DougGuy who seems to know whereof he speaks:

"I had another thread asking for cylinder measurements and we got to the point where the 5 shot GP100-44 cylinder is actually thicker than the 6 shot Flattop Blackhawk 44 Special so going by the fact that a Flattop Blackhawk, medium framed Blackhawk in 45 Colt is good to 23kpsi (45 ACP+P pressure) and the 44 Special is slightly smaller so cylinder measurements are slightly thicker for the 44 as compared to the 45, it would seem that the 44 Special in the flattop would be good to 25kpsi, and if the GP100-44 cylinder walls are actually thicker, then I would say 250gr @ 1200fps from a 5 1/2" barrel would be doable and still under the 25kpsi pressure ceiling".

I was thinking 1200 fps as an absolute top end load, which I would stay a good 100-200 fps under. My only concern would be the safety of such loads and, so far, it appears the 5 shot GP100 has plenty of safety built in.

I'd still like to see Mr. Pearce do his thing with this new revolver, either the 3" or 5", as our philosophies seem to be similarly aligned and I absolutely trust his data.


FWIW, Elmer's goal with the .44 Special was his 429421 at 1200 fps as he figured that was good for any game he would likely shoot up to and including big elk. When Remington gave him the .44 Magnum capable of 1400+ I can see why he was ecstatic with it.

He just did an article on the 44 Special in the Feb Handloader. Not specific to the Ruger though. The pressures were in the 22,000-25,000 range.

Excellent! Just what the doctor ordered. I'll look for it wherever fine right wing magazines are sold.

Jim, I'm pretty sure that I saved the pages containing the reloading data from 3 different pressure levels of .44 Special loads from a Pearce article in Handloader several years ago. I'll see if I can find them and if i do, I'll snap pics and e-mail them to you if you'd be OK sharing your address. (Still haven't spent the time to figure out how to post pics since I've been back)

PM sent. Mucho garcia!

Try this one: http://www.goodrichfamilyassoc.org/44_Special_Articles/Brian%20Pearce%20on%20the%2044%20Special.pdf

The limitation on the GP is going to be the thin forcing cone and we don't have an official ruling on that yet. Which is surprising because they've been out for over a year.

We are quite similar. I ended up with a .44 special load that hit 1,000fps with a bullet from a Saeco 200 grain mold for the .44/40; it was my favorite walking around load.

For anyone looking there is a 3" barrel Taurus 431 44 Special on the classifieds.

Pulled off the market. He likes it too much to sell it.

Jim, if you're in a rush, let me know and I can scan this article and email it to you. pm your email address if you'd like to have it quickly.

I appreciate the thought but picked up the February Handloader this morning when I was in Sportsman's Warehouse. Just bought a Winchester 1885 .38-55 yesterday and that is taking up my time (and money ) getting together brass, dies, bullets and such. The .44 Special idea isn't forgotten but will have to go on the back burner for a few weeks at least.

The 38-55 is a caliber I've always liked but have never owned one.

Yes, it's "interesting". As in dimensions are all over the place - mine has a .3751" bore - standard is .377” up to .380” so available dies and commercial cast bullets are sized accordingly, when they are available. Not real high demand items so various on line dealers are showing a lot of "out of stock, backorder okay" for much of that. Oh well, I’ve shot enough .357’s and .30-06’s to figure out how this reloading stuff works, time to branch out…

I agree with the forcing cone being the likely weak link, but why try to “magnumize” the GP100? My 3” has been shot a lot with the Lyman 429421 at a little over 800 fps with no signs of a problem. A fun to shoot load that will do all I need to do with a short barreled 44 Special. I’ve got Redhawks if I need a “magnum”.

Yeah and a Redhawk is a pound heavier. The best thing about the .44Spl is power in a portable package, smaller and lighter than your average .44Mag. It's not about "magnumizing", it's about utilizing its fullest potential. No need for pigeonholing. A 250gr at 1000-1200fps is a long way from a .44Mag, which is 250fps faster and at least 10,000psi higher in pressure.

That being the case, and due to the lack of thickness in the forcing cone area of the GP 100, I won’t be shooting those loads I’m mine. It is just me I’m sure, but I have no desire for a 250 gr bullet fired at 1200 fps out of a 36 oz revolver.

I've been looking on the web for hard info about the forcing cones or other strength factors for the GP100 and as usual, lots of hearsay and opinion but precious little (i.e. zero) actual measurements.

Just finished Pearce's article in the Feb. Handloader and while he doesn't cover the GP100 at all he does mention that some revolvers are not suitable for +P handloads that exceed the 15,500 psi SAAMI limit. Among those are the S&W 696 and 396 Mountain Lite. He further explains: "Some of the above guns will handler greater pressures than industry guidelines but have other durability issues and should not be used in conjunction with +P data". Although he doesn't specifically state what "durability issues" are I assume forcing cone cracking could be considered one of them. In the Category 3 (25,000 psi) list at the bottom right of page 45 he does list the Ruger New Model Blackhawk as one which is suited to the Cat 3 loads.

I posted a blurb above about the cylinder thickness so I don't think there are any issues there. But if someone has a GP100 .44 and can measure the thickness of the forcing cone that would be very useful, especially if someone who has any of the mid-size frame .44 Flattop's could measure and post the thickness of that forcing cone, and take a good pic to boot.

Here's the best pic I've found so far of the forcing cone on the GP100. The High Road publishes pics in a format incompatible with linking so you'll have to go to their page to see it.
Pic of GP100 forcing cone about halfway down the page

It does look thin so I can see where opinions would form on either side of the durability issue, but I know Ruger uses some pretty sturdy steel in their revolvers so appearances can be deceiving. Hmm, maybe it's time to write an old fashioned letter to Mr. Pearce at Handloader addressing this issue.



In other news, I see that Rick Jamison is writing again and has an article in this latest Handloader. Could be old news, I haven't read a gun mag in a couple of years, but it's nice to see his byline again.

My personal opinion, and what I intend to do when I get my GP100 44spl, is that it is roughly in line, strength-wise, with the S&W M696. That is, I would not use loads generating pressures above those generated by Pearce's "category 2" loads. Whether the weak link is the forcing cone or the cylinder walls I would rather not find out, and while the GP100 is overbuilt as a .357, it likely is merely sufficient for the 44spl and I see no need to find out its actual limitations.