Other than the coolness factor, and the ability to handle a bit larger bullet, is there any real good reason for a 45LC over a 44mag? Most likely deer will be the only big game critter I'd ever shoot with it, very slight possibility of a black bear some day.

I already own and load for a 44, but would like to leave that out of the equation for now.

The 45 has the ability to shoot heavier bullets better. Lots of people like the larger frontal area, which I think is what you were saying. I've shot neither animal with a handgun but certainly would not feel compelled to buy a .45 for one if I already had a .44. Conventional wisdom would be that a hot .44 Special or a .357 Mag. would handle either quite well, let alone either of the cartridges you mentioned.

When you get right down to it, if you really want to load up, the 45 Colt does have more case capacity than the .44 Mag. I don't recommend it, but there it is. Of course the 44-40 has more capacity than the 44 Mag. too.

I have both and use the .44 for the heavy loads because some of the .45 revolvers I use may not stand up very well to high pressure stuff. If I only had strong .45 LC revolvers I would load both chamberings up to about the same levels and not worry about any differences between them.

I like the lighter recoil of the 45 but would use it at a reduced range than the 44. I also think a faster follow-up shot may be possible with the 45 due to the less recoil, but have not timed it--and with the reduced range, hopefully this would be less likely to be needed. I know the 45 can be loaded up, but I don't since I have guns that can not handle those loads, so for me if more power or range is needed the 44 will win out. If that is not needed, I prefer the easier shooting 45.

Been mention of the revolver being stout enough. What I have now is a Redhawk, what I'm considering is a Bisley Vaquero. I'm guessing the Vaquero is as sturdy a wheelgun as the Redhawk, or at least sturdy enough..?

I have several of the older Vaquero .45 LC's and one older Vaquero in .44 Mag. I think they are sturdy enough to handle hot loads and have shot heavy loads in all of them with no problems. I cannot speak for the newer Vaqueros in .45 LC because I only have those in .357 Mag.

I know a guy that "claims" he uses a bunch of 296 in his Ruger .45 colt and gets pretty high velocities with it. I know with todays revolvers it may be possible to do what he says it will do but i doubt ill be trying it. I have a .45 colt and it does make a big hole but the 300gr XTP in my .44 mag does too. I just like the 44 better because of the ease of finding ammo and brass and the raw power. The 45 colt is a tried and true round just like the 45-70 and the 30-06. I still like the 44 for putting animals down. however, if you do get one look me up. I have about 100 once fired brass i may part with to help a man get started.

No, the New Vaquero, of which the Bisley Vaquero is a variation, is NOT as sturdy as the Redhawk. The old Vaquero, properly termed the Vaquero, was as strong and could tolerate the Ruger/Contender loads, but the New Vaquero is built on a smaller frame and should only be used with normal 45 Colt loads. It is questionable whether it is actually quite as strong as a SAA. This is due to the investment cast process Ruger's are made with. Normally, Rugers make up for the lack of forged steel with greater mass. This isn't the case with the New Vaquero.

Anyway, that's my take on it.

They did make the old Vaquero in .44 Mag but, unless I am mistaken, not the New Vaquero. I assume they would if they thought it could handle the heavy loads.

.44 mag if you don't handload


.45LC if you do

Not too many animals are going to know the difference between a 340 grain cast .44 versus a 360 grain cast .45.

I have both and found, on an average that I get better accuracy out of .44 caliber guns. It is usually quite hard to find an inaccurate .44. The 45s with their well documented varied throat sizes have been a horse of a different color.

Once you find a 45 that shoots well, you are G2G.

That's probably correct. Another concern is the metal between the holes in the cylinder, or the lack thereof. The same gun in 44 Mag. will have more metal than a 45 due to diameter. But IMO you're correct. They would make it in 44 Mag. if it would handle the round.

Same frame different bore size does effect weight.

I could definitely tell the difference between the blackhawk 44 and 41 Mag.

Wierd

Ruger's original Vaquero, usually now called the "old model Vaquero" in CAS circles (not Ruger's term) was made in both standard plow-handle and Bisley versions, and chambered for both .44 Mag and .45 Colt (along with some other smaller cartridges). This original Vaquero seems to be strong enough for heavy loads, certainly as strong as a Super Blackhawk since it's the same basic frame and cylinder sizes. I've not fired heavy loads in any of my Vaqueros, though, and the Super Blackhawk cylinder LENGTH is a factor compared to the Redhawk... so the old Vaquero has the same limitations. I'd suspect you can pick whichever cartridge you prefer; game won't notice difference.

Note there was also a Bisley Blackhawk, too, built on the Super Blackhawk frame size. Both chamberings, I think.

Ruger's New Vaquero -- or maybe they call it the New Model Vaquero, is smaller, roughly the same mid-size frame/cylinder as their original .357 from way back when. They do chamber that in .45 Colt, NOT in .44 Mag. I've heard there is (or soon will be) a special distributor's run chambered for .44 Special. This smaller New Vaqeruo is NOT/NOT suitable for heavy loads, per Ruger. And the standard grip frame is smaller enough that it'd hurt me. I think I've heard there is or might be a Bisley version, and that might be more acceptable... but I've not seen/felt one, if they exist.

I have loaded/fired 320-grain cast bullet loads from my Redhawk and from a previous Super Blackhawk. Cylinder length was an issue with the Blackhawk, so the loads were slightly different. This was using a boatload of W-296 or H-110 (same powders) with chronographed velocities in the 1200-1300 fps range (I'd have to look up my notes to get the exact figures). Probably shoot through trucks. I know from first-hand experience that a hard-cast 240-grain SWC at roughly 1250 fps will shoot completely through a scrawny Appalachian whitetail lengthwise... so heavy 320-grain bullets aren't usually required for anything less than one of our Eastern Appalachian Elephants, which of course are smaller than the African versions

Back to the original question, given sufficient handgun strength, the critters won't know the difference. Given the stronger Ruger revolvers (or Freedom Arms, for example), you can load to reasonably powerful levels on each.

Pick whatever you like.

-R44

Couldn't agree more.....

I couldn't remember whether they made the original Vaquero in a Bisley version or not, and figured the OP meant new guns anyway. I would not be afraid of "Ruger Only" loads in an original Bisley Vaquero.

The Blackhawk Bisley is still in production.

Landrum

If you gotta ask, get the 44 Magnum.