Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Ruger NMBH 44 special to 44mag conversion?

Is this possible?

Possible? Yes. Practical? Probably not. The Blackhawk .44 Specials are made on the "old model" sized .357 frame which is shorter than the other New Model Backhawks. A .44 Magnum cartridge with an OAL of 1.610" is right at the limits of the cylinder's length which is very close to the frame length.

Is the diameter of the cylinder smaller on the flat top 44 special than on the standard NMBH?

If so, then the chamber walls would necessarily be thinner on the 44 special and less likely to handle the pressure levels generated in a 44 magnum cartridge.

If I recall the story correctly from my readings, Bill Ruger built prototypes on the old flattop, .357 frame in .44 magnum. One was to be given to Elmer Keith, who planned to use it as a .44 special...he was reluctant to use magnums in it. Before one could be shipped to Elmer, one of the prototypes blew with a .44 magnum load. Ruger then developed the .44 frame, which is the Super Blackhawk (and since 1973, all Blackhawks without the flattop, .357 sized frame). So, at least with 1950s metallurgy, the flattop frame, .357 sized, which is used on the .44 special flattops, was not enough for the .44 magnum.

Yes.

Got to ask or "axe" you as Mr. Bricktop would say, "why"? The same basic gun is available in the guise of the 2006 model 50th Anniversary Blackhawk .44 Mag. It is in all probability the exact same gun with either a longer cylinder or one bored out to accept the longer cartridge. They are not uncommon and are fine guns. Would seem to me much cheaper and not taking a less-common gun out of the pool for the .44 Spec. aficionados.

The 50th 44 Mag is not built on the mid-frame as the 44 Special is. A 5 shot 44 Mag on the mid-frame has been built. If you have a couple of grand to throw at it another could be done.

Yep, using a 5-shot cylinder. All things considered it's a spendy conversion. Check out Hamilton Bowen's website.

I thought the whole idea of the .44 Special was that it was a .44 Special and NOT a magnum? Why would you ruin the one thing that makes that gun great?

you can always down load a 44 mag to special loads.
but I understand wanting a smaller gun

How about a bulldog?

Kevin, my thoughts exactly. The 44 special is my favorite revolver round due to its versility and lighter weight.


ddj

It�s dangerous in a 6 shot and exorbitantly expensive in a 5 shooter.

It�ll kick like a mule from hell.

Finally, why?

You can reach Elmer�s original goal within the .44 Special Flat Top as is. All Elmer wanted was to push his 429421 at 1200 fps, he figured that was fine for heavy pistol work. Now when Remington gave him something that would push it to 1400 he was ecstatic. In a 7 1/2" Super Blackhawk you can hit close to 1450. But in his 4� Model 29�s, even with his load of 22.0 grains of 2400, I doubt he was pushing much past 1300 fps. I've shot a couple of 4" Model 29's with the 429244 (similar bullet but a gas check design) and IIRC that's what I got with 22.0 grains. I remember it kicked like a sonuvabitch.

The Ruger .44 Specials with 5 �� barrel shooting the 429421 with Elmer�s �heavy Special� load of 17.5 grains of 2400 will get you 1200 fps and change. Depending on b/c gap and other dimensions, a 4 5/8� barrel will get you so close the difference is negligible, like 1180 fps or thereabouts. Probably break 1200 if the moon is in a different phase. I know this from chronographing this bullet with that load in both barrel lengths of the Flat Top.

Recoil with the Bisley at that level is frisky but the Bisley frame handles it. Recoil in the standard XR3 grip frame beats the living sh*t out of my middle finger. 16.0 grains of 2400 is all I want to shoot out of the standard Flat top and even that not too often.

Go with Cole�s advice if you really want a Flat Top. If you want a .44 Magnum get one built from the start for the magnum.

Because it's there.

I wouldn't do it either. Mostly because, considering the costs, the .44 Special barrel lengths will make it complicated to realize any huge benefit.

Why? Because I want a SS flatop bisley in 44 or 45LC and Ruger doesn't seem to have made one. Converting one of Lipsey's 44 special would fill the bill nicely, but it sounds like such a conversion isn't practical.

You could probably fit a six shot .45 Colt cylinder in that frame since it is basically the same one as the New Vaquero. A stainless .45 NV barrel and cylinder would probably go right in with just a little fitting, but that's just an assumption since I've never done it.

As long as you stayed in sane pressure territory and didn't try to run those 30 kpsi loads it would make a very nice sidearm.

That would still let you run 250 grain bullets up to about 1050 fps, at least my NV didn't complain at that level.

PS - I might be mis-remembering this, but didn't Brian Pearce mention that Ruger might be considering chambering the Flat Top in .45 Colt? Maybe it was just him wishing out loud in one of his articles.

Get one of the 50th anniversary .44 magnum Blackhawks and have it hard chromed.

So, what would happen if you purchased a 44 mag Bisley hunter, had it rebarreled and the top milled off of the frame?

Was thinking some more about this last night and a .45 Colt conversion might be very do-able. Haven�t measured cylinders but as long as there is enough metal a simple rebore of the existing cylinder and barrel would be the most practical way. You could get the chambers line bored and control the throat dimensions exactly.

The cost would probably be right about what gunsmiths have been charging to rebore old model .357�s to .44 Special. Last time I checked into that two years ago it was around $600 so it�s still expensive but you�d probably get a very accurate revolver out of the deal.

You�d still have to stay with factory level loads or a bit higher. There are some articles out there on loading the New Vaquero and those would be excellent guides for a Flat Top conversion.