« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: .44 deerfield  (Read 882 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 45/70fan

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 452
  • Gender: Male
.44 deerfield
« on: October 26, 2006, 05:17:42 AM »
Has anyone tried anything heavier than the standard 240 gr loads? How about the Buffalo Bore or Garrett loadings, do they cycle and shoot ok?
Logged

Offline targshooter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 491
Re: .44 deerfield
« Reply #1 on: October 27, 2006, 03:45:40 PM »
I've had good results with Speer 270 grain Gold Dots. In the Ruger Deerfield they feed well, are accurate, and they penetrate deer well too.
Logged

Offline Cheesehead

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3282
  • Gender: Male
Re: .44 deerfield
« Reply #2 on: October 27, 2006, 03:52:22 PM »
A few years ago I used 250 grain Black Talon ammo on deer. Very accurate and tremendous terminal performance on big game.

Cheese
Logged
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance.

Offline Ranger J

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 990
  • Gender: Male
Re: .44 deerfield
« Reply #3 on: October 31, 2006, 05:47:36 AM »
With deer season in Missouri less than two weeks away my wife and I went up to do some work around our stands and then went out to the rifle range to do some shooting.  I plan on hunting with my new 1895 Marlin 45/70 and she will use her 1894 .357.  As I was getting the rifles out of the safe I saw the Deerfield setting there and on a whim took it also.  I had loaded a box of shells with 240Sps over a heavy load of H110 and also a few Hornady 300G also over H110.  I had forgotten how accurate that little son of a gun was with the 240s.  It made me think again about what rifle to take hunting.  With the 300G it was another story.  I had seated them deep enough to cycle in the gun and they did that well.  Accuracy left a lot to be desired.  They shot about six inches to the left of where the 240s were shooting and they did not group at all.  I had only loaded five of the 300s so this was not a conclusive test but it was not encouraging.  If I get to take the Deerfield out I think I will stick with the 240s.  They are more than enough to handle any deer I am liable to run into.
  PS.  The 45/70 shot well too and there is that satisfying deep-throated boom when you touch it off.  As usual Sue out shot me with her little 357. :)
RJ
Logged

Offline K.K

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 533
Re: .44 deerfield
« Reply #4 on: October 31, 2006, 02:59:35 PM »
I agree with staying in the 240 gr range.  Garrett and Buffalo Bore make some awesome ammo for the .44 Mag and other calibers, but they are only to be used in T/C, Ruger other heavy built guns.(i.e Contenders, Super Blackhawks, No. 3s, etc)   I know that Ruger makes a very solid auto, but in addition to possible feeding and accuracy problems, you may batter the reciever and cause undue wear.  I could be wrong, but I have killed some pretty big deer with the Remington 240 gr flatnose and they not only shot well, but handidly dropped deer.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »