Wonder why 44 Spl is often Compared to 38+p

[powhs]

I was loading some 44 specials today and was thinking how some people compare a 44 special to a 38+p.
I load a 240gr swc to 800fps which is similar to 45 hardball. I know Corbon and Black Hills sell some good 44 ammo so why do people think 44 spl is so weak? 

[Mikey]

Probably because it was never listed as a powerful round from the factory and if you wanted something better than what was offered in the 44 Spl in the old days (245 gn round nose bullet at maybe 700'/sec, you had to reload it which most people didn't.  And, if you are hyping something smaller, like a +P 38 load, you would want to be able to compare it to something bigger so it would sell. 

The only thing you need do with a 44 spl is load it with a semi-wadcutter bullet - does not need to be +P, just a different bullet.  Same thing with most 38 loads - but so many use the snubnosed revolver that the development of +P rounds in that caliber has been focused on their use in short barrels and many, including ammo makers, believe this a better defensive option for those guns. 

If you load your 240 gn swcs to 800'/sec you have a very nice easy shooting and accurate load for your 44.  If you want warmer loads, charges of Unique or 2400 powder will get that same slug moving to 1000 - 1150'/sec., in a good solid revolver.  HTH.  Mikey.

[coyotejoe]

I think they are compared because they are comparable. When both are loaded with the old standard round nose bullet neither are anything to brag on and both can be greatly improved by handloading or just selecting the best of the factory loads. I know it will upset some "big bores" to hear this but in documented actual street results the .44 special was rated very close to the .38 special with one-shot-stops running about 50%.

[S.S.]

THERE ARE SO MANY MORE STATISTICS TO COUNT WITH THE 38 SPL THAN THE 44 SPL,
THAT THE COMPARISON IS NO WHERE NEAR FAIR. I WOULD TAKE A 44 SPL ANY DAY OVER A 38

[coyotejoe]

Yes, so would I, but I wouldn't be loading either round with the old standard lead roundnose. I favor a hard cast full wadcutter bullet for my snubby revolvers figuring they'll never give enough velocity for reliable bullet expansion so the flat nosed wad cutter will do the most damage, 148 grain in a .38 and 180 or 200 grains in .44 special. Given the choice however, I'd take the .357 with 125 grain JHPs over either "special".

[yooper77]

Who compares them?

They are not even close in any means.

The mildest 44 Special loads tops the 38 Special +P's all day long.

Heavier bigger bullet moving slower hits harder and penetrates deeper.

yooper77

[coyotejoe]

Who compares them?

They are not even close in any means.

The mildest 44 Special loads tops the 38 Special +P's all day long.

Heavier bigger bullet moving slower hits harder and penetrates deeper.

yooper77

That is a common opinion but there is absolutely no evidence to support that opinion, especially in regard to the "moving slower" part. How on earth can "slower" possibly be better than "faster"? Isn't "faster" the sole difference between a .38 special and a .357 mag, or a .44 special and a .44 mag?  Speed is the difference between a 32/40 and an 8mm Rem mag. Velocity is what makes firearms usable, or any ballistic projectile for that mater.
  All other factors being equal, bigger is better and faster is also better, but all other factors never are equal, that's why we have so many choices available.

[yooper77]

Who compares them?

They are not even close in any means.

The mildest 44 Special loads tops the 38 Special +P's all day long.

Heavier bigger bullet moving slower hits harder and penetrates deeper.

yooper77

That is a common opinion but there is absolutely no evidence to support that opinion, especially in regard to the "moving slower" part. How on earth can "slower" possibly be better than "faster"? Isn't "faster" the sole difference between a .38 special and a .357 mag, or a .44 special and a .44 mag?  Speed is the difference between a 32/40 and an 8mm Rem mag. Velocity is what makes firearms usable, or any ballistic projectile for that mater.
  All other factors being equal, bigger is better and faster is also better, but all other factors never are equal, that's why we have so many choices available.

The subject is: Wonder why 44 Spl is often Compared to 38+p, not some other selection of cartridges to make the slower bullet come out worse.

I am talking about foot pounds of energy, the heavy larger slug shot out of a 44 Special case moving slower than a lighter faster slug shot out of a 38 Special +P's case will hit harder.

Your comparison is between two equal (.38 special and a .357 mag, or a .44 special and a .44 mag) calibers at different speeds, not the same in any way from comparing the 44 Special and 38 Special +P's, which is no comparison other then both are pistol cartridges.

Another good comparison is I would choose the 45 ACP over the 9mm Luger all day, heavy slow bullets hit hard.

yooper77

[coyotejoe]

And so do light fast ones. Don't get your knickers in a twist here Yooper, I'm trying to agree with you, to a certain extent. I agree that a larger bore is an advantage but higher velocity is also an advantage. Within any given caliber I would never choose the heaviest possible bullet for defense, but would choose a bullet that is relatively light for its caliber, say 125 grain .38s and 180 grain .44s and drive it as fast as possible. With those loads the .44 is better. There are some .38 special loads I would prefer over some .44 specials. The old 246 grain roundnose .44 is a poor choice and has proved so in actual shootings, about like the .38 158 RN. Across the board, yes, I'd prefer the .44 but the difference is not enormous unless one is loading the .44 like Elmer Keith did. If we're talking concealed carry we are probably talking a gun which cannot handle those loads. Some people think the .44 special is a real terror simply because of its bore size, I cannot agree, there is more involved than just a pair of fours.

[Mohawk]

  If high "velocity" loads made that big a difference then the .45 Colt and .45 ACP would have faded decades ago. Didnt that same "study" of "real" shootings place the .45 ACP(230gr HP) up there with the .357 Magnum(125 hp)? Good example of slow and fast with equal "results". I was born because my grandfather's .44 Special Smith worked with LRN bullets years ago. Good enough for me.

[yooper77]

And so do light fast ones. Don't get your knickers in a twist here Yooper, I'm trying to agree with you, to a certain extent. I agree that a larger bore is an advantage but higher velocity is also an advantage. Within any given caliber I would never choose the heaviest possible bullet for defense, but would choose a bullet that is relatively light for its caliber, say 125 grain .38s and 180 grain .44s and drive it as fast as possible. With those loads the .44 is better. There are some .38 special loads I would prefer over some .44 specials. The old 246 grain roundnose .44 is a poor choice and has proved so in actual shootings, about like the .38 158 RN. Across the board, yes, I'd prefer the .44 but the difference is not enormous unless one is loading the .44 like Elmer Keith did. If we're talking concealed carry we are probably talking a gun which cannot handle those loads. Some people think the .44 special is a real terror simply because of its bore size, I cannot agree, there is more involved than just a pair of fours.

Nope, I wear boxers and I don't live in England, thank god for that, so moot point!

No need to agree with me, you can have your ideas and beliefs and I certainly will have my own.

Oh, so you are talking about self defense and concealed carry against humans, either way I would choose the slow and heavy slugs over the light and fast.  Talk to any drug enforcement officer, they choose the 45 ACP over the 9mm Luger, because slow and heavy saves lives and breaks down a druggie.

yooper77

[jimster]

I think there is something to be said about bullet shape as well...the heavy Keith style bullet, with a sharp shoulder and flat nose will not only cut a hole, it will smash through bones as well.  Not to mention the amount of blood loss on both sides. 

Might be debatable to use such loads for self defense against humans in a carry gun due to penetration...but the killing power is awsome on bullets like the Keith style, or the wide flat nose bullets.

I hear the .357 125 gr is one of the best stoppers around too,  there is a lot of speed there for sure,  maybe the reason it's popular is because it might not penetrate too much like the bowling balls do. 
Guess it depends on what your planning on shooting or where you'll be shooting.