loading .44 Spl?

[savasyn]

S&W 624 3"

Cool. That's basically the same as my 629 3". Nice.

[earchivist]

Alright here is my Bulldog Pug. I also have a set of Crimson trace laser grips for it. But for the load testing the Presentation grips are better. The light is in the path of the laser, so you can't have the light mounted if you want to use the laser sight.

Well I finished loading last night. I just need to get out to the range.

[savasyn]

Awesome, thanks for posting the pic! The light actually works nicely on there.
Looks like things haven't changed much other than the finish and the profile of the front sight. Here's a shot of mine which I just got a couple of months ago. I added the Pachmayr grip on day one. Never even tried the stock grip.
My .44 dies should be here tomorrow or early next week so I can get started loading for it. Let me know how yours turn out.

[savasyn]

Better yet, the UPS guy just dropped off my boxes from Dillon so once I get finished doing my .357 work up, I can switch over to .44!

[jyo]

Put me down as a long time (40 years).44 Special shooter---I too have used the old standby of 7.5 grains Unique under a reasonably hard 240 grain SWC in modern solid head American commerical brass. This goes about 950 FPS out of my Colt SAA 4 3/4" and about the same out of my very old original Ruger .44 Mag. Flattop revolver with the 4 3/4" barrel (shortened from factory 6 1/2" way back when). I consider this a "+P" load only because the factory loads are loaded so weak (about 700 FPS or even sometimes less!). This has been my practice/field load for all this time and also goes close to 1050/1100 FPS out of a rifle (Ruger #3 single-shot)---shoots like a big .22! In my experience, Charter Arms revolvers are built on the lighter side---I probably would look for a lighter load for CA guns. Good luck with this and be careful!

[savasyn]

Put me down as a long time (40 years).44 Special shooter---I too have used the old standby of 7.5 grains Unique under a reasonably hard 240 grain SWC in modern solid head American commerical brass. This goes about 950 FPS out of my Colt SAA 4 3/4" and about the same out of my very old original Ruger .44 Mag. Flattop revolver with the 4 3/4" barrel (shortened from factory 6 1/2" way back when). I consider this a "+P" load only because the factory loads are loaded so weak (about 700 FPS or even sometimes less!). This has been my practice/field load for all this time and also goes close to 1050/1100 FPS out of a rifle (Ruger #3 single-shot)---shoots like a big .22! In my experience, Charter Arms revolvers are built on the lighter side---I probably would look for a lighter load for CA guns. Good luck with this and be careful!

Thanks for the info! It'd be nice if there were regularly published .44 Spl +P data like there is for .38 Spl.

[savasyn]

Speaking of +P data, here is a page I found that has a variety of different hotter loads people are using.

DISCLAIMER - all the loads listed in this link are above the standard listed data for .44 SPL so proceed at your own risk if you choose to try any of them.

http://www.handloads.com/loaddata/default.asp?Caliber=44%20Special%20+P&Weight=All&type=Handgun&Order=Powder&Source=

[earchivist]

I came across this while looking around.

http://www.levergun.com/articles/44_Special_Bulldog.htm

He mentions some loads he worked on for his Bulldog.

[savasyn]

I came across this while looking around.

http://www.levergun.com/articles/44_Special_Bulldog.htm

He mentions some loads he worked on for his Bulldog.

Very cool, thanks for the link!
Interesting that you can run such hot stuff through the Bulldog without shooting it loose. Perhaps I'm just suckered in to the scuttlebutt about it being a cheap gun. I haven't had any trouble with mine, but I haven't shot it much yet either. That'll change now that I'm loading for .44.

[earchivist]

I made a mistake when I mentioned the old copy of Gun Digest. You need to see the 1975 edition of Gun Digest. That's the 29th Anniversary edition. Pages 34 to 38 is an article on the original Charter Arms Bulldog. And my gosh rereading it they actually used the original Keith load in it! That's right a Keith 250gr SWC on top of a charge of 17.5gr's of 2400! The author mentions that it was hard on his hand but he shot that and a number of other fairly heavy loads. With no ill effects on the Bulldog I must add. It would seem that back in the good old days, men were men indeed!

[savasyn]

I made a mistake when I mentioned the old copy of Gun Digest. You need to see the 1975 edition of Gun Digest. That's the 29th Anniversary edition. Pages 34 to 38 is an article on the original Charter Arms Bulldog. And my gosh rereading it they actually used the original Keith load in it! That's right a Keith 250gr SWC on top of a charge of 17.5gr's of 2400! The author mentions that it was hard on his hand but he shot that and a number of other fairly heavy loads. With no ill effects on the Bulldog I must add. It would seem that back in the good old days, men were men indeed!

Wow, that's crazy! Yeah, men were men and if you blew a hand off, you just sucked it up and grew another one through force of will

Thanks for the info on the GD edition. Amazon had it used, so I ordered it. Looking forward to check out that article.

[earchivist]

So that's how you do it. Regrow your hand from force of will! Oh, I see... I guess I'm not made of stern enough stuff!

[savasyn]

So that's how you do it. Regrow your hand from force of will! Oh, I see... I guess I'm not made of stern enough stuff!

Neither am I, my friend. I'll stick to NOT blowing off my own body parts!

[savasyn]

I made a mistake when I mentioned the old copy of Gun Digest. You need to see the 1975 edition of Gun Digest. That's the 29th Anniversary edition. Pages 34 to 38 is an article on the original Charter Arms Bulldog. And my gosh rereading it they actually used the original Keith load in it! That's right a Keith 250gr SWC on top of a charge of 17.5gr's of 2400! The author mentions that it was hard on his hand but he shot that and a number of other fairly heavy loads. With no ill effects on the Bulldog I must add. It would seem that back in the good old days, men were men indeed!

I received my copy of this Digest today and read the article. Dang, they had nothing but good things to say about the Bulldog back then. Either it was a "payola" situation, or the gun has an undeserved reputation for being low quality. Granted, the fit, finish and machining on mine is NOT up to S&W/Colt/Ruger levels, but that doesn't make it weak necessarily.

I wonder if my new one is as strong as those older ones. I don't think I've ever seen an older one for sale in the used area(couple of newer ones, though.) I've never looked on Gun Broker, maybe I'll take a peek. Perhaps people who own them really do like them.

[earchivist]

Savasyn,

You should checkout the thread on TheFiringline Forums,

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=402341

A gentleman there bothered to Chronograph His CA Bulldog firing a number of different factory 44 loads. Including Buffalo Bores 255gr Keith recreation. Keith's load might get 1,200 fps from a 6.5" S&W, but from his Bulldog it only averaged 817! Useful stuff to know.

Yes the Gun Digest article was pretty up beat. As upbeat as a guy can be thru gritted teeth! It was obvious he didn't exactly enjoy shooting all of those heavy loads. He was reporting that they worked though. And the gun didn't go kaboom! I assembled some Keith equivalent loads while I was working up all my other test loads. Care to join me on the range for that?