it doesn't seem to be to difficult, just curious if any one has one?

They pretty much all interchange, but the question is will they interchange with proper clearances/headspace? The answer, in my experience, is no. Plus, don't forget the differences in extractor locations - later ones were at 6:00, early ones were at 7:00. I have three 44's, and access to a bunch more. Any specific details needed?

thanks Gary, looking at pkg deal 38-55 & 22lr, of course the seller knows nothing about it, did not get any kind of instructions if there were any, after checking prices are all over the place, but like a lot of things nothing show that it has sold, been for sale for months. I would like to have a 44, am Leary of getting something thats going down rat hole

Both barrels on one receiver? If it's truly a 44 and not a 44 1/2 make sure it has a lugged hammer and keep your loads really light. There's a reason they moved their "heavy" stuff to the 44 1/2 - the 44 1/2 is a true falling block in which the breech block is supported by the receiver mortise, pretty strong. The 44 breech block is more of a rolling block or a tilting block, which is supported mainly by the through pins in the action. Really neat guns but you gotta be careful what you stick in them.

I know the 44 was supposed to available in 38/55, but I’ve never seen one. Has to make you wonder what happened to the originals. To be honest, I wouldn’t, under any circumstances, put my ugly kisser anywhere close to one so chambered…uh-uh, no way!

My 44 was rechambered from 25/20 Single Shot to 25/20 WCF. I will only shoot black powder loads in that.

Smart fella.

I've seen a couple .32-40's, same difference. The thing isn't whether there's enough barrel diameter to safely contain the pressure, it's all about bolt thrust of the cartridge head. The formula to calculate that is based on the surface area of the cartridge head factored by the chamber pressure - it's late, and I don't remember the formula. But, it's simply understood by considering that if with, say, a .22 Hornet and a .219 Zipper with the same chamber pressure the Hornet will exert a heckuva lot less stress on the breech face than the Zipper will because of its much smaller surface area. The (uncommon) 44's with lugged hammers were meant to ameliorate that but they weren't that much better than a regular 44.

My 44 Stevens in .22 WCF has a chamber identical to the Hornet, it just uses a slightly larger bullet. I strictly adhere to black powder pressures, with smokeless, and wouldn't dream of cutting loose with some factory Hornets. It likely wouldn't come unglued but it would likely get stressed and loosened up considerably to the point of being dangerous in very short order.

Anecdote: in the very early 1930's Stevens gave the 44 one last lease on life by beefing up the action a bit, speeding up lock time, installing a wonderful trigger, and putting a heavy barrel and "modern" PG target stock on it - and called it the "Walnut Hill". As .22 target rifles they're wonderful beasties. They had the bright idea of chambering some initially in .22 Hornet too because the cartridge had just come out and the shooting world was ga-ga over it. Bad idea, those Walnut Hill Hornets started getting wobbly right from the start and Stevens had the good sense to stop building them right quickly - and those updated 44 actions were a lot better than than the old original 44 actions. The 44 was a jewel of the black powder era, but smokeless powder was its undoing.

I wouldn't touch off a .38-55 in a 44 unless it's a powder puff load.

When I was looking for a solution to a destroyed 25-20 ss chamber in my 44, the gunsmith wouldn’t go any bigger than 32-40, and that with black powder loads only. Ended up with a 357 max chamber, as it’s sooo close to 35 Maynard. It’s been like that for over 20 years. Never finished the project or shot it. It just sits collecting dust. Back then they’re were a lot of warnings to stay away from anything like 38-55, 45-70, etc.