Physically smallest .44 magnum?
pon...@asme.org
was too big for my small hands. I need some recommendation on the smallest .44
mag that are available out there, if any. Thanks.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
. . . . . . . . . .
Info on moderated group rec.guns is at http://doubletap.cs.umd.edu/rec.guns
Harold Leahy
#I need some recommendation on the smallest .44 mag that are available out
there
S&W made several lightweight versions of the 629. The one you would be most
likely to find and not have to pay to much for is the Model 629 1993
Mountain Gun with a 4" tapered barrel. I bought mine NIB last year for
around $400. Another one to look for that will probably cost a bit more is
the Model 629 Backpacker with 3" barrel. Another is the Model 629-2 Mountain
Revolver with a 4" barrel. These were made in 1989.
The 4" Colt Anaonda goes about 47 oz compared to 53 for the Super RedHawk.
Robert J. Christman
#
# I rented out a Ruger Super Redhawk and it was great. Only problem I had was it
# was too big for my small hands. I need some recommendation on the smallest .44
# mag that are available out there, if any. Thanks.
#
#
None of them are particularly small, but the Smith and Wesson
Model 29 or 629, particularly the mountain guns, with round butts
are probably the smallest as far as grip and trigger reach go.
The mountain guns are probably about the lightest as well.
--
Bob C. NRA Endowment USN (Ret)
MOONIESDL
hands and shoot a .445 Super Mag Dan Wesson (_very_ big gun) with Hogue grips
are perfect for my hands.
moonie ;)
Gandalf
> ...
> ...
One thing to really keep in mind is the fact that as the barrel gets shorter, recoil of the .44
magnun really becomes brutal. I have a 4" S&W 629, that I found hard to manage using my 'plinking'
load of 9 gr. of Unique over a cast 250 Keith type semiwadcutter. I have fired many, many thousands
of this load through various 6", 61/2", and 8 3/8" Smiths with no problems. I had the gun
Magnaported, (which I now regret, as this is a pinned and recessed, and quite rare 629; very few
were made in 4"). Magnaporting did much less than I had hoped in cutting down on recoil. My load for
this gun is now _8gr._ of Unique.
I also have the 3" 'backback' model, and my 8 gr. load is pretty uncomfortable to shoot in this gun,
despite a beautiful set of factory finger grooved wood grips. My load fot this gun is now 7 or 71/2
gr. or Unique. This puts the load down into the .44 Special energy area.
Perhaps you may be better off looking at some .44 Specials, as I think that you will find the short
barrel .44 Magnums _no fun_ to shoot. I cannot imagine what a full power factory load would be like
from a 3" .44 magnum!
Smith & Wesson makes a very nice 5 shot .44 special built, I believe, on the L frame (smaller than
the N frame used for the .44 magnum). I cannot offhand recall the model number.
Also, if you have not already considered it, a .357 magnum, such as S&W's and Taurus' factory
ported models may fit your hand better and actually allow you to use ammunition that produces MORE
muzzle energy than a .44 magnum with light loads.
But I would definately TRY BEFORE YOU BUY!!!
Hope this helps...
BJamesjr
#there
The S&W 629 is probably the smallest, and has been available with barrels as
short at 3", although I would recommend it in 4" or 6" versions. For small
hands you can replace the grips with something a little smaller which should
help you.
P. A. Harrington
#I rented out a Ruger Super Redhawk and it was great. Only problem I had was it
#was too big for my small hands. I need some recommendation on the smallest .44
#mag that are available out there, if any. Thanks.
American Derringer used to make a two-shot, stack barrel that would
fit in the palm of your hand. However, the muzzle blast was severe
and the recoil was not much fun.
..P
To reply by e-mail, please remove the ".ns." in my e-mail address. It is
my hope that it cuts down on the spam in my reader.
JKeenan
Try the American Derringer .44mag.
(I didn't say practical, just the smallest).
JK
Davidb
JKeenan wrote in message <6rg4kl$r...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
#You really want the smallest?
#
#Try the American Derringer .44mag.
#
#(I didn't say practical, just the smallest).
#
They also made the little gun in 30-30.
Also probably some bigger ones than that.
Robert J. Christman
#
# JKeenan wrote in message <6rg4kl$r...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
# #You really want the smallest?
# #
# #Try the American Derringer .44mag.
# #
# #(I didn't say practical, just the smallest).
# They also made the little gun in 30-30.
# Also probably some bigger ones than that.
#
Quite a bit bigger, they still list a single shot model chambered
in .45-70 Government. Not in MY hand, thank you.
--
Bob C. NRA Endowment USN (Ret)
. . . . . . . . . .
news
revolver w/2.5"-3" bbl.
If you can't shoot a particular handgun, then what the heck good is it?
Peace of mind? More like piece of s#@%!
Mark Horning
#
#JKeenan wrote in message <6rg4kl$r...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
##You really want the smallest?
##
##Try the American Derringer .44mag.
##
##
#They also made the little gun in 30-30.
#
#Also probably some bigger ones than that.
#
I have handled one in .45-70. It sort of begs the question "why?"
Mark E. Horning "You can not enslave a free man. The most
Physicist you can do is kill him."
Phoenix AZ --Robert A. Heinlein-- (Free Men)
BJamesjr
#I have handled one in .45-70.
That's one of those where you can look in the end of the barrel and see the big
soft nose looking back at you.
(Actually it's not hard to do that with my Para P12 also.)
P. A. Harrington
#I have handled one in .45-70. It sort of begs the question "why?"
#
Kinda like putting a scope on a Mini-14, huh?
..P
To reply by e-mail, please remove the ".ns." in my e-mail address. It is
my hope that it cuts down on the spam in my reader.
. . . . . . . . . .
P. A. Harrington
Tom Rutledge
#
# IMHO, the smallest good, practical .44 mag. is the S&W 629 'mountain magnum'
# revolver w/2.5"-3" bbl.
#
# If you can't shoot a particular handgun, then what the heck good is it?
# Peace of mind? More like piece of s#@%!
Big assumption, there. *I* can sure as heck shoot one. Gimme that gun
and a box of ammo of my choice, and I'll eat venison. What more could I
ask for?
Tom
Peter H. Proctor
#From: harr...@mind.ns.spring.com (P. A. Harrington)
#Subject: Re: Physically smallest .44 magnum?
#Date: 2 Sep 1998 09:04:25 -0400
American Derringer makes on in 44 mag that weighs about a pound. They
also make their light-weight aluminum alloy models in 44 special and 45 ACP
which weigh about 8 oz. The one I have in 45 ACP is essentially unuseable
with regular loads, but recoil is managable with 4.6 of unique under a 138 gr
round ball.
Dr P
KMiddle532
#Kinda like putting a scope on a Mini-14, huh?
Uh... well... I scoped my Mini-14, my eyes won't allow much accurate work with
iron
sights these days, between the scpoe and
careful hand loading I can keep 3 shots inside an inch@ 100 yards.
BTW: I also worked the trigger down from a
6.5 lb. pull to a clean 2.5lbs.
KM in NC
BJamesjr
#accurate work with iron sights
^^^^^^^^^^
What does "accurate work" have to do
with a Mini-14?
William Harvey
#news wrote:
##
## IMHO, the smallest good, practical .44 mag. is the S&W 629 'mountain magnum'
## revolver w/2.5"-3" bbl.
##
## If you can't shoot a particular handgun, then what the heck good is it?
## Peace of mind? More like piece of s#@%!
#Big assumption, there. *I* can sure as heck shoot one. Gimme that gun
#and a box of ammo of my choice, and I'll eat venison. What more could I
#ask for?
#Tom
You hunt deer with a American Derringer in .44mag? Sir, you are a
hell of a lot better stalker than I am.
William Harvey
wha...@win.net
http://www.win.net/~wharvey
Team OS2
=================
NO COLT !!!!!!!
=================
J. Henderson
Proctor) wrote:
> ...
A. Harrington) writes:
> ...
Bond Arms of Texas also has a very nice derringer available in .410/.45LC,
.45ACP, .357/.38, .44Mag/Sp., and 32 H&R Mag. It is in SS I believe and
has gotten favorable reviews. The barrels are also interchangeable. Neat!
JH
Fasteddie3
with a Mini-14?>>
Maybe this gentleman has one of the Mini-14s that, with good fortune and
perhaps a bit of tuning up, actually _does_ shoot good groups. While I know
that the AR-15 snobs will tell you that no Mini-14 _ever_ shoots under 5" at
100yds., my wifes gun apparently never heard that fable, and will do sub-moa
consistently with Federal Match or handloaded equivalent. Why? Damned if I
know, but I treasure it (and her) dearly, and wouldn't trade for either one.
Ed Arnold
NRA Life member
pla...@hotmail.com
faste...@aol.com (Fasteddie3) wrote:
# <<What does "accurate work" have to do
# with a Mini-14?>>
#
# Maybe this gentleman has one of the Mini-14s that, with good fortune and
# perhaps a bit of tuning up, actually _does_ shoot good groups. While I know
# that the AR-15 snobs will tell you that no Mini-14 _ever_ shoots under 5" at
# 100yds., my wifes gun apparently never heard that fable, and will do sub-moa
# consistently with Federal Match or handloaded equivalent. Why? Damned if I
# know, but I treasure it (and her) dearly, and wouldn't trade for either one.
#
I don't doubt it. I have a mini-30 that (with handloads) will continually
group 1.25 for 3 shot / all day long. Yet I have a stainless mini-14 that
just wont cut under 3.5 no matter what I do (unless I shoot one round every 2
minutes).
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
. . . . . . . . . .
KMiddle532
#Maybe this gentleman has one of the Mini-14s that, with good fortune and
#perhaps a bit of tuning up, actually _does_ shoot good groups. While I know
#that the AR-15 snobs will tell you that no Mini-14 _ever_ shoots under 5" at
#100yds., my wifes gun apparently never heard that fable, and will do sub-moa
#consistently with Federal Match or handloaded equivalent. Why? Damned if I
#know, but I treasure it (and her) dearly, and wouldn't trade for either one.
I have one too (Mini-14 and splendid Wife)
I won't trade either one for all the AR's one could shake a stick made of tea
from china at,
it (the -14) is fully capable of sub-moa, the wife, well I'd just as soon not
go there......
KM
If you ain't gonna cook, stay away from the stove!
siglite
Fasteddie3 wrote in message <6t24pn$m...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
> ...
at
> ...
sub-moa
> ...
one.
> ...
I have an AR, actually a Sporter II Lightweight by colt. A friend of mine
has a mini-14. We fired them side by side and traded off one day. Burned
up about 600 rounds of .223 at ranges varying from 50 - 500 yds. As far as
I could tell, our differences in grouping were more related to the shooters
than the rifles. Both performed sub MOA out to 100yds from a rest.
David Berryhill
problems with them are mediocre barrels and the gas system. Those are the 2
things that most 'smiths address when tuning them up.
Dave Berryhill
KMiddle532
#problems with them are mediocre barrels and the gas system. Those are the 2
#things that most 'smiths address when tuning them up.<
And just how did you arrive at this conclusions?
Would this be the result of personal experiance?
FYI: The barrels are anything BUT "mediocre", too light in weight for sustained
accurate fire yes, but that is the extent of it,
and the gas system is THE SAME as employeed on the M-1 Garand, M-14, M-1
Carbine, and others, do you take exception
to the value of the afore mentioned weapons?
KM
If you ain't gonna cook, stay away from the stove!
. . . . . . . . . .
Mark Horning
KMiddle532 <kmidd...@aol.com> wrote:
##You are lucky if you have a Mini 14 that shoots that well. The main
##problems with them are mediocre barrels and the gas system. Those are the 2
##things that most 'smiths address when tuning them up.<
#
#And just how did you arrive at this conclusions?
#Would this be the result of personal experiance?
#FYI: The barrels are anything BUT "mediocre", too light in weight for sustained
#accurate fire yes, but that is the extent of it,
#and the gas system is THE SAME as employeed on the M-1 Garand, M-14, M-1
#Carbine, and others, do you take exception
#to the value of the afore mentioned weapons?
Let me jump in here. The problem is not the gass system but that there is
usualy a distortion of the barrel where ruger ataches the gas cylander.
I have found that just by changing to a polymer stock can greatly
improve the accuracy. the stock fit to action is not great from the
factory.
Mark E. Horning "You can not enslave a free man. The most
Physicist you can do is kill him."
Phoenix AZ --Robert A. Heinlein-- (Free Men)
. . . . . . . . . .
Fluid
##The Main problems with them are mediocre barrels and the gas system.
# FYI: ... the gas system is THE SAME as employeed on the M-1 Garand, M-14, M-1
# Carbine, and others, do you take exception to the value of the afore mentioned weapons?
Experienced high-power shooters know that the gas system on the
Mini-14 is certainly NOT the SAME as that used on the M1 Garand or the
M-14/M-1A, or the M-1 Carbine for that matter. Yes, gas is caught
from the barrel and used to propel the rotary bolt to the rear, but
that is about the extent of the actual functioning similarity. No
long op rod as on the Garand, different piston geometry than the M-1A,
no stainless gas cylinder as on the Garand, different tolerances than
either the M1 or the M-14, etc. etc. By the comparison used here,
one could ALMOST make the case that the AR-15 has the 'same' gas
system too....but of course it wouldn't be true. And even if the
design was identical to the Garand, that does not imply that the
actual manufacture of the arm by Ruger was not without problems....
That said, my experience with the Mini did not shown a problem with
the gas system...feeding problems were traced to lousy mags. Kept
clean, it would work fine. My own opinion is that because some of
the Mini's operating hardware is shorter and more robust than that on
the Garand, it may indeed be better from a reliability standpoint...if
you get one from the right side of the QA/QC pile.
Jay T
Anonymous today
#
#<<SNIP>>>
# and the gas system is THE SAME as employeed on the M-1 Garand, M-14, M-1
# Carbine, and others, do you take exception
#
# KM
#
Whoa there! The only thing the M-1 Garand, M-1 Carbine, M-14/M1A and the
Mini-14 have in common re: the gas system, is that they are all below
the barrel.
Garand: Direct gas impingement on piston fixed to end of op rod. Gas
port near muzzle.
M-1 Carbine: short-stroke stainless steel piston. Strikes op rod and
propels it rearward. Gas port about mid-barrel.
M-14/M1A: Longer stroke piston, with cut-off after maybe two
millemeters of rearward travel. Strikes op rod and gives a more gentle
accelleration than the Garand or Carbine systems. Gas port about
mid-barrel
Mini-14: Screwy fixed piston in that barrel band kinda thing clamped on
the barrel. Gas cylinder inside big block at end of op rod. Not sure,
but it seems that the op rod is guided at the block area by nothing more
than the stock liner. Gas blows the op rod back kinda like you blow the
straw wrapper off of the straw at the burger joint. Gas port
mid-barrel. Reportedly a system which results in excessive heat
build-up if you try to adapt it to the 7.62 x 51 NATO.
It would be nice if Ruger could come up with a product improvement
program to fix the Mini's spotty accuracy record. The M-16 has been
PIP'd twice...
Wolfevette
My mini holds less than 5 inch groups at 100 yrds.
Wolfevette
So does mine. Much less