Welcome to the New GunAndGame.com
Send Feedback - Back to the Old GunAndGame

Go Back   Gun and Game Forums > Firearms > General Firearms > General Handgun

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-03-2004, 07:18 PM   #1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3
S&W Mountain Gun 45 LC or 44 mag?

Got some nice answers on this topic from another forum, beating the bushes one more time on this topic.

Looking to pickup a S&W 625 or 629 Mountain Gun.

In going over information from friends and data, it looks like the 45 LC and 44 Special are very similar. Have been shooting a 45 LC (Taurus 450) but have not had much experience with either the .44 Special or .44 Mag. The possibilities are:

1. (going with the .44 mag)Load the 629 with .44 Special and then work up to the .44 mag and get the best of both worlds.

2. (going with the .45 LC) Use the regular loads and light loads to start and go with handloading or the Corbon HP loads. Anyone have any experiece with these in a Mountain Gun?

Thanks!

Bob
Bob Mueller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2004, 11:26 PM   #2
Super Moderator
 
BattleRifleG3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Western PA
Posts: 11,475
Images: 13
44 Rem Mag is a more uniformly loaded cartridge. I tend to shy away from using old black powder cartridges in modern firearms because you can load them so much higher than the guns they were originally chambered for, but factory loads will be light or non-uniformly custom (I wouldn't want to be stuck with one brand). I would get the 44 Rem Mag myself because the factory loads and your best handloads would be closer together than with 45 Colt.

However, my next revolver will probably be a 45 Colt. Why the apparent hypocrisy? Because I plan to use it with black powder , with which it has more potential than 44 Rem Mag.
__________________
Trust is earned, not... GIVEN away. - Worf
BattleRifleG3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
s w, mountain, gun, mag

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:38 AM.


[Output: 50.16 Kb. compressed to 48.27 Kb. by saving 1.89 Kb. (3.76%)]