.44 magnum 2.5" barrel vs 7.5"

[Dundgren]

Hi, Im planning on buying a ruger super redhawk in the future and have a little dilemma. I think the 2.5" version is cool as all hell. I will be reloading .44 to keep cost down and maximize power. I dont compete or hunt so it will all be for fun plinking. When I shoot a .44 I want as much bang and recoil as possible which is why I got the slowest powder available to me (n110). As far as I know slow powder = more fps = more recoil. Right?

Now heres my question. I wonder if the slow burning n110 at a full load will be a complete waste and most of the powder wont burn. Will the n320 (the fastest) have the same effect in such a short barrel or will I actually get more fps out of the n110?

Sorry if its messy. Keep in mind I dont care about ballistics or how the 7.5 is easier to aim and is more effecient.

Thanks,

Daniel.

[44 AMP]

As far as I know slow powder = more fps = more recoil. Right?

Pretty much, BUT, you are throwing most of that away with a short (2.5") barrel.

Slow powders need more time to fully burn. To do this, and still be inside the gun, means a longer barrel is needed.

Very short barrels and very slow powders mean that a good portion of the powder does NOT get to burn in the barrel. It burns OUTSIDE the barrel (if it burns), which means the only "benefit" you get from it is a huge muzzle blast.

This sounds like what you are looking for.

Recoil is a combination of how heavy the bullet is, how fast it is being driven, and the weight of the gun firing it. Felt recoil can be attenuated (some what) or emphasized by the shape & size of the grip. Short barrel guns are lighter than long barrel ones, and so will have more recoil.

I wonder if the slow burning n110 at a full load will be a complete waste and most of the powder wont burn.

While I don't know the specific powders you are going to use, this is the usual result when shooting slow powder from a short barrel.

Good Luck, have fun, be safe

[Dundgren]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

Pretty much, BUT, you are throwing most of that away with a short (2.5") barrel.

Slow powders need more time to fully burn. To do this, and still be inside the gun, means a longer barrel is needed.

Very short barrels and very slow powders mean that a good portion of the powder does NOT get to burn in the barrel. It burns OUTSIDE the barrel (if it burns), which means the only "benefit" you get from it is a huge muzzle blast.

This sounds like what you are looking for.

Recoil is a combination of how heavy the bullet is, how fast it is being driven, and the weight of the gun firing it. Felt recoil can be attenuated (some what) or emphasized by the shape & size of the grip. Short barrel guns are lighter than long barrel ones, and so will have more recoil.



While I don't know the specific powders you are going to use, this is the usual result when shooting slow powder from a short barrel.

Good Luck, have fun, be safe

Ok, thanks for your reply. Since most of it will burn outside the barrel will I get the same effect (recoil, bang) with a faster burning powder?

[T. O'Heir]

"...maximize power..." You won't. Velocity with a 2.5" barrel is less than 1,000 FPS.
"...will I get the same effect..." No. Just a nice big ball of fire than does nothing but light up the range. The bang is from the air that gets displaced going back. The recoil is the same regardless of barrel length. Felt recoil is subjective.
After all that, it'll still be fun. So you win either way.

[Dundgren]

Originally Posted by T. O'Heir

"...maximize power..." You won't. Velocity with a 2.5" barrel is less than 1,000 FPS.
"...will I get the same effect..." No. Just a nice big ball of fire than does nothing but light up the range. The bang is from the air that gets displaced going back. The recoil is the same regardless of barrel length. Felt recoil is subjective.
After all that, it'll still be fun. So you win either way.

Thanks for your reply. Im really torn because the 2.5" is so useless and dumb but at the same time really cool.

[Doyle]

Have you ever actually shot a .44 Magnum out of a 2.5" barrel? I can tell you from my own experience that I personally don't ever want to. I shoot it out of a 5" barrel and the blast/noise out of that is bad enough. No way I'd want to even think about owning a 2.5" .44 Mag.

[joneb]

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/produc...eets/5004.html
Comprimise?

[BBarn]

N110 will probably give higher velocity, even in a 2.5" barrel. N320 will probably be more efficient and produce considerably less muzzle blast and recoil along with less velocity. Full power 44 Mag. loads using N110 will generate serious recoil in a 2.5" barreled revolver. You may find the experience more painful than fun.

But you should be able to use faster powders like N350 or N320 to produce lighter loads and achieve a level of fun you are looking for. Of course 44 Special loads are also an option in a 44 Mag.

[444]

Do you own a chronograph ?

Hopefully you do because I want you to try an experiment where you load up the fastest burning powder in the manual and then the slowest burning powder in the manual (max loads) and then report back which gave you the highest velocity.


FWIW: I have done this in a number of various calibers (not .44 Mag) and with every one of them, whatever load was listed in the manual as providing the most velocity, that is the one that gave me the most velocity; regardless of barrel length. I tried this in calibers where I owned a rifle chambered for a cartridge that I also owned a pistol chambered for the same cartridge: in some cases, multiple pistols. I tried it in .45 Colt, .357, 9mm. Maybe others, but this was a long time ago. I didn't own a .44 Mag rifle at the time although I probably own a half dozen .44 Mag pistols.

In other words, let's say the manual says H110 gives the highest velocity. And N320 is the fastest burning powder but in the manual it doesn't give the highest velocity. So you load up both loads. Shoot them out of a 2 1/2" gun, shoot them out of a 4" gun, shoot them out of a 7 1/2" gun, and shoot them out of a 24" rifle. And my experience is that the slower burning powder will produce the most velocity every time.
The longer the barrel length, the more velocity. But in my tests, the load that produces the highest velocity in every barrel length is the same load....the one with the slowest burning powder.
Yes you will get a fire ball, yes this is inefficient. But the slower powder will give you the most velocity.

I make no claim of knowing anything. This is just what I found in my own testing. The important thing is that I did testing and didn't just go by guesses. At the same time, I am more than willing to admit I could be wrong....again, I am just going by my own limited testing.

FWIW: I have a Model 629 S&W with a 3" barrel, not that that adds anything to the discussion. But, I agree, the short barreled .44s are sexy.

[Tsquared]

I have used Lil Gun and Blue Dot which are not too far away in the Burn Chart from N110 with a 6" barrel - not fun. Lil Gun is more in line with N110 but I haven't pushed anything that hot in quite a while. I would want to keep the weight of the bullet down and load on the lower end. N110 is going to be a very snappy load in 220 to 270 grain bullets and compounded by a short barrel. I would look to a faster burning powder.

[Dundgren]

Originally Posted by 444

Do you own a chronograph ?

Hopefully you do because I want you to try an experiment where you load up the fastest burning powder in the manual and then the slowest burning powder in the manual (max loads) and then report back which gave you the highest velocity.


FWIW: I have done this in a number of various calibers (not .44 Mag) and with every one of them, whatever load was listed in the manual as providing the most velocity, that is the one that gave me the most velocity; regardless of barrel length. I tried this in calibers where I owned a rifle chambered for a cartridge that I also owned a pistol chambered for the same cartridge: in some cases, multiple pistols. I tried it in .45 Colt, .357, 9mm. Maybe others, but this was a long time ago. I didn't own a .44 Mag rifle at the time although I probably own a half dozen .44 Mag pistols.

In other words, let's say the manual says H110 gives the highest velocity. And N320 is the fastest burning powder but in the manual it doesn't give the highest velocity. So you load up both loads. Shoot them out of a 2 1/2" gun, shoot them out of a 4" gun, shoot them out of a 7 1/2" gun, and shoot them out of a 24" rifle. And my experience is that the slower burning powder will produce the most velocity every time.
The longer the barrel length, the more velocity. But in my tests, the load that produces the highest velocity in every barrel length is the same load....the one with the slowest burning powder.
Yes you will get a fire ball, yes this is inefficient. But the slower powder will give you the most velocity.

I make no claim of knowing anything. This is just what I found in my own testing. The important thing is that I did testing and didn't just go by guesses. At the same time, I am more than willing to admit I could be wrong....again, I am just going by my own limited testing.

FWIW: I have a Model 629 S&W with a 3" barrel, not that that adds anything to the discussion. But, I agree, the short barreled .44s are sexy.

Very interesting and helpful post, thank you.

[Dundgren]

Originally Posted by BBarn

N110 will probably give higher velocity, even in a 2.5" barrel. N320 will probably be more efficient and produce considerably less muzzle blast and recoil along with less velocity. Full power 44 Mag. loads using N110 will generate serious recoil in a 2.5" barreled revolver. You may find the experience more painful than fun.

But you should be able to use faster powders like N350 or N320 to produce lighter loads and achieve a level of fun you are looking for. Of course 44 Special loads are also an option in a 44 Mag.

"N110 will probably give higher velocity, even in a 2.5" barrel." This line really answers my question, thank you.

While I am chasing recoil I will reconsider if I truly want THAT much recoil. However I haven't found pain to be a factor if I just grip the gun further down similar to a single action revolver. Trying to shoot a .44 like JM though hurts like hell

[Paul105]

Here are some chronograph results for two of my S&W M69s (Smith & Wesson L Frame 5 shot 44 magnum). One has a 2 3/4" barrel and weighs 35 oz and the other is 4 1/4" and weighs 37 oz.

N110 is very close to the same burn rate as 2400 shown below -- H110 is a bit slower than N110 and 2400 -- slower(est) powders will give highest velocity regardless of barrel length.

Chronoed these from the 2.75” M69. Three rounds at 5 Long paces from muzzle and 68 deg F. Larger sample could change the results a bit. Largest ES was 42 fps.

260 WFNGC w/23.0gr H110 avg 1,125 fps
240 Zero JSP with 23.5gr H110 avg 1,126 fps
240gr Fed Factory avg 1,125 fps
265gr CSWCGC (Lyman Thompson) with 17.5gr A2400 (Deep Seat) 1,119 fps avg
325gr WLNGC (BTB) with 22.0gr H110 avg 1,104 fps

For comparison purposes these were shot a while back from my 4 ¼” M69: Same temp, distance from the muzzle.

260 WFNGC w/23.0gr H110 avg 1,224 fps
240 Zero JSP with 23.5gr H110 avg 1,230 fps
240gr Fed Factory avg 1,220 fps
265gr CSWCGC (Lyman Thompson) with 17.5gr A2400 (deep seat) 1,140 fps avg
325gr WLNGC (BTB) with 22.0gr H110 avg 1,182

FWIW,

Paul

[44 AMP]

"N110 will probably give higher velocity, even in a 2.5" barrel." This line really answers my question, thank you.

The key word in this is "probably". You need to look at how much faster the highest velocity from the slowest powder is, over the highest velocity from the faster powder.

Because, if its only a handful of FPS, then its essentially insignificant.

Firearms can be quite individual in their exact velocities, because of so many factors involved.

One gun might be measurably faster, than another, shooting the exact same load out of the same length barrel. I've personally seen 100fps difference between 3 different 6" barrel .357s, shooting the same ammo. That much difference is uncommon, but not unheard of.

SO, it is POSSIBLE that the slow powder might not give you the very fastest speed. Not likely, but not impossible IF the stars line up, and your gun is on either end of the bell curve.

And, if your personal combination of gun and load happens to be a few fps below what you expected on the chronograph, odds are good it won't be enough to matter.

[Pond, James Pond]

Finally a powder discussion that I have had personal experience with!!

I load .44Mag for a 4". I've used N320, N350 and N110. Also the only powders I can get readily.

So far I've only used N320 in .44Spl. The others were for .44Mag.

I'll start by saying that the issue only really arises, IMO, if you get the snub.

I initially bought N350 so I could load .38Spl and .44Mag. The 38 was a snub and the .44 was 4". N350 was fine in the .44, but abyssmal in the snub because the powder simply didn't burn efficiently. Unburnt powder, squibs, you name it....

So I ditched it for the Spl and went to N320. N110 is even slower than N350 so I can imagine the problem would be much the same or worse in the short Redhawk.

So my recommendation is go for N320 and if you want to feel recoil, then just get heavier bullets... I have 300gr plated bullets loaded to mid-ranges and you can certainly feel it even with the 4" but a 158gr Spl out of my snub feels just as stout, so it's all relative!

[Paul105]

Not ment to be argumentative or as a criticism, but barrel length is not a factor in causing "squib" loads.

FWIW,

Paul

[444]

One thing that has been mentioned is that if you are only talking about a few feet per second (and we are), then there is no real reason to seek the absolute highest possible (safe) velocity.
While slower burning powders will give you the most velocity regardless of barrel length, in my opinion there are other factors involved in finding the load you want to shoot a lot of. I will grant you that if you buy a big bore handgun, at some point you want to shoot absolute max loads out of it just to experience what it is like. At least that is what I have always done and I don't think it is unusual. But, after you get that out of your system, and you are shooting something like a 2 1/2" or 3" barrel....or even a 4" barrel: you might then want to come up with a load that is a little less dramatic. And that load will not be all that much less velocity and it will be much more pleasant to shoot on a regular basis. And I am sure it will still give you the "power" and the recoil you are looking for.

But, in the mean time, when you want punishing recoil and a huge fireball at the end of the barrel, the slower burning powders will get you there. I was on a kick for years of shooting big bore revolvers with max loads and I had a lot of fun with it. At one point I had to send my 4" Model 29 in to be fixed I shot so many hot loads through it. Today, this doesn't really interest me all that much. I did it, and I enjoyed it. But now, I have just as much fun with much lighter loads. Every once in awhile though, I shoot a few big loads just to confirm the fact that I am still alive

[David R]

I have a 3" smith 44 and a 7.5"? 8.5"? Ruger SRH.

Slower powder wins in velocity for both. Its the same for a 38.

The really big boomers hurt my hand with the 3".

David

[Unclenick]

A friend of mine has a short barrel Ruger in .454 Casull. I've shot it and it is not impossible. You just won't want to do it all day long.

In general, barrel length does not affect which powder will give you the most velocity until the barrel gets very short, indeed. For a rifle cartridge it can happen at 7-12" and under that you start to see a trade-off. For revolvers, the difference between 2" and 3" seems to be the significant range. The slow powder will usually still give you the greatest peak velocity and recoil, but it also tends to give you the most erratic velocity. We had a fellow on another board with a .38 Special with 1⅞" barrel who was using something in the burn rate range of Power Pistol, IIRC (similar to N350, but with almost 20% higher energy content per gram). I've forgotten his bullet weight, but do remember he had over 25% velocity variation from around 475 fps to 650 fps. Switching to something faster he averaged only 600 fps, but it was much more consistent, like 575-625 fps.

By experimentation, you might find a really hard crimp, as made by the Lee Collet Style Crimp Die, would reduce some of the erratic behavior by giving the powder more time to ignite before the bullet starts moving. N110 is not hard to ignite, so I would try both standard and magnum primers over a chronograph to see which produced better performance. You would think the magnum primer is an obvious choice, but sometimes you can unseat a bullet with a hot primer before a slow finishes getting started burning, and then you get lower velocity. You will have to try it to see.

[mavracer]

If you want recoil use the heaviest bullet you can find, go ahead with the slow powder and use a heavy crimp.

[disseminator]

If maximum blast and recoil is what you seek, get a 4" 500 S&W Magnum but be warned it's not for the weak.

;-)