Bigger is better....but which?
Author |
Message |
Ramoel
|
Post subject: Re: Bigger is better....but which? Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 5:14 pm |
|
Longtime Regular |
|
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 8:52 pm Posts: 826 Location: MN
|
You'll never be happy until you own a real fire breather! Will you still be craving a .44 magnum after you get a .44 special? I bet you will!
_________________ Ron
NRA Life Member
USS Bristol DD857
_________________________
If life was fair, Robins couldn't eat worms...
Last edited by Ramoel on Wed Sep 16, 2009 1:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
|
joelr
|
Post subject: Re: Bigger is better....but which? Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 6:11 pm |
|
The Man |
|
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:43 am Posts: 7970 Location: Minneapolis MN
|
Probably. And probably vice versa -- there's something particularly nice about a .44 Special shooting rounds made just for it. (If that sounds like I'm knocking the 629, I'm not; I own two.)
_________________ Just a guy.
|
|
|
|
|
DeanC
|
Post subject: Re: Bigger is better....but which? Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:50 pm |
|
Longtime Regular |
|
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:54 am Posts: 5270 Location: Minneapolis
|
The difference in carrying an alloy (nearly) J-framed size revolver compared to an all steel N-frame sized revolver is not insubstantial.
_________________ I am defending myself... in favor of that!
|
|
|
|
|
mrokern
|
Post subject: Re: Bigger is better....but which? Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:59 pm |
|
Longtime Regular |
|
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:40 pm Posts: 2264 Location: Eden Prairie
|
DeanC wrote: The difference in carrying an alloy (nearly) J-framed size revolver compared to an all steel N-frame sized revolver is not insubstantial. I've got the J. Now I just need the fun.
|
|
|
|
|
Dee
|
Post subject: Re: Bigger is better....but which? Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:30 am |
|
Longtime Regular |
|
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 11:39 pm Posts: 533 Location: Mankato Area
|
"mrokern wrote: Then a little voice in the back of my head starts saying, "Do you feel lucky..." and .44 magnum starts dancing around. LOL If you're hankering for a "Monsta Killa", there's always the DE. Though at $1149, it could put a velociraptor size dent in the pocket book. Ever consider one of the older (pre CZ) Dan Wesson revolvers? A friend had one and I used to drool over that. They were noted for their accuracy and the interchangable cylinders and barrels were real nice too. I always thought that was like getting the best of all worlds, revolverwise. They are however, not easy to find anymore. Check out - http://www.notpurfect.com/main/dwrev.htmespecially the instructions on changing barrels and grips. It's very simple and quick.
|
|
|
|
|
DeanC
|
Post subject: Re: Bigger is better....but which? Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 9:12 am |
|
Longtime Regular |
|
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:54 am Posts: 5270 Location: Minneapolis
|
_________________ I am defending myself... in favor of that!
|
|
|
|
|
mrokern
|
Post subject: Re: Bigger is better....but which? Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 8:31 am |
|
Longtime Regular |
|
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:40 pm Posts: 2264 Location: Eden Prairie
|
So, the big reveal... The answer is...it's a work in progress. First off, a Taurus 431 in .44 Special. Previous owner put Wolff springs in it, and it's about the nicest trigger on a revolver you can imagine. A couple of folks here can vouch. So, I decided to drop by Frontiersman to pick up some ammo for the new kid. Walked out with ammo, speedloader, and a nice deposit down on a Taurus 608 (6", 8-shot .357 magnum). Help! I think I have an addiction.... -Mark
|
|
|
|
|
BrianB
|
Post subject: Re: Bigger is better....but which? Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 10:39 pm |
|
Member |
|
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 9:24 pm Posts: 40 Location: St. Louis Park, MN
|
mrokern wrote: So, the big reveal...
Help! I think I have an addiction....
-Mark There is no help anymore you may just be a lost cause.
|
|
|
|
|
joelr
|
Post subject: Re: Bigger is better....but which? Posted: Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:41 am |
|
The Man |
|
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:43 am Posts: 7970 Location: Minneapolis MN
|
Yup; he is. I'm a fan of the .44 Special, but I think he's going to find that the .44 Magnum is a different itch, which also needs scratching. The really nice thing about the .44 Special, is that the guns can be lighter because they don't have to stand up to Magnum pressures. I really wish they were more popular; it'd be nice, once the present ammo panic eases, to be easily able to get a wider variety of ammo for the things, but it's become closer to a specialty round. Right now, though, my favorite .44 Special loads can be found here. They're among the few folks who make the stuff for guns that can take greater pressures than the old Bulldogs. Not cheap, though; the 255 grain Keith bullets moving out at 1,000 fps cost just about two bucks per bang. But when you care enough to send the very best . . . downrange . . .
_________________ Just a guy.
|
|
|
|
|
peter94
|
Post subject: Re: Bigger is better....but which? Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 9:02 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 3:22 pm Posts: 21
|
My brother has the 44 mag. You can feel quite the shockwave when he is shooting 300 grain hollowpoints out of it. And I mean when you are standing about 5 feet behind him. I may have to get myself one of those one of these days.
|
|
|
|
|
This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.
All times are UTC - 6 hours
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
|