.44 Special barrel length

[flhtcuibyhd]

Okay, I cannot take it anymore after reading all of the .44 special posts - I have got to get one.  Does it matter which barrel length between the two Ruger Blackhawks (4.62 or 5.5) for deer hunting?  I would prefer the shorter 4.62.  Does anyone have a favorite and why?

[Mikey]

The shorter barrel is easier to handle and shoot more accurately.  You do not lose anything by going to a shorter barrel, except the hole you wear in your hip after lugging a long barrreled revolver around for a buncha years.  IMHO.

[Ken ONeill]

I also like the looks of the 4 5/8" version, but you will see a bit more light on each side of the .125" wide front sight, if you select the 5 1/2" version, and this may make your shooting easier. The weight difference between the 4 5/8" and 5 1/2" versions is negligible.

[tacklebury]

I'd say you should go to a local gun shop and hold some.  It matters if it is S/S or Blue if you're looking at blackhawks, because the blue has an alloy grip frame, but the S/S has a steel frame.  It means a different feel in terms of balance.   In the blued models I like 5.5" and I can take deer at 70 yards.   If you want to scope it and extend range to 125 yards, you might want a 7.5" barrel for a bit more velocity.  A lot of guys like the 4.62" for carrying ease and I don't notice a bunch of difference, but in the S/S I like the weight distribution of the 4.62" better.  I only have a 7.5" on my ROA, so haven't really used that much, since I just got it.  Good luck with your choice and picking a winner. 

[Graybeard]

Mine is a 5.5" as are all my Ruger BlackHawks. I just prefer that length. I find the longer the barrel the smaller my groups.

[Lloyd Smale]

ive got a 4 5/8s bisley and prefer that lenght myself but in all honesty its doest matter a pinch.

[Ladobe]

My favorite Blackhawks are the OM 4 5/8".   Like the balance and being the easiest to carry climbing tall mountains (I prefer cross draw).   Hunted mule deer & predators with them for years and never felt I lost anything because of an inch of barrel.    Never had a problem with the open sights either, but my eyes were younger then too.   Wouldn't take much to open up a rear sight a little if needed.   So I'd go for what you like, what balances well for you.   Your confidence in your firearm is its biggest advantage, not it's barrel length.
 
BTW, I shot a muley with a 3" 44SPL DA no problem.    It wasn't a big buck, the range was only a stones throw, but it hammered it.

[BigMuddy]

I'd say you should go to a local gun shop and hold some.  It matters if it is S/S or Blue if you're looking at blackhawks, because the blue has an alloy grip frame, but the S/S has a steel frame.  It means a different feel in terms of balance.   In the blued models I like 5.5" and I can take deer at 70 yards.   If you want to scope it and extend range to 125 yards, you might want a 7.5" barrel for a bit more velocity.  A lot of guys like the 4.62" for carrying ease and I don't notice a bunch of difference, but in the S/S I like the weight distribution of the 4.62" better.  I only have a 7.5" on my ROA, so haven't really used that much, since I just got it.  Good luck with your choice and picking a winner. 

The OP'er asked about the Blackhawk 44 special. Blued or Stainless they are both all steel, no aluminum,  and also no 7.5" barrels. I like both but lately have been carrying 5.5" guns a lot and do not notice any more difficulty with them over my 4 5/8" guns. I have come to like the looks of the 5.5" guns better but it all comes down to a personal preference. If you prefer the shorter gun go for it. I am sure you will like the gun.

Dan

[mcwoodduck]

Since we are talking hunting.
See if there are any restrictions to caliber, barrel length or other that would make the choice for you.
I remember reading in NC rules as a hunting hand gun it needs to be 5.5" center fire, with a certain power factor of 357 mag.
Or if a bottle neck it need to be so long.
 
 

[AJAX]

My semi-local gun store had both the 4 5/8 and the 5 1/2.  I hefted both and liked the balance of the shorter one better so I bought that one.  I had previously ordered a 44 spec Bisley Blackhawk with the 4 5/8 and am now thinking it would have been nice to have the longer barrel to compare it to since the grip is a bit heavier (2 1/2 oz on my scale). So, if you can go someplace and heft them both you'll be able to make a more informed and potentially happier decision.

[Ken ONeill]

Mcwoodduck,
The 5 1/2" barrel resriction and .357 mimimum for straightwall cartridges, .24 cal. for bottlenecks, is no longer in effect in N.C. I wrote that original requirement in 1980. It was changed last year. There are now no barrel length or caliber restrictions in our state.

[mcwoodduck]

Mcwoodduck,
The 5 1/2" barrel resriction and .357 mimimum for straightwall cartridges, .24 cal. for bottlenecks, is no longer in effect in N.C. I wrote that original requirement in 1980. It was changed last year. There are now no barrel length or caliber restrictions in our state.

What made you pick the 5.5" as a min?  Did you also write the 6" min for small game?  and why.

[Swampman]

The shorter the better.

[SHOOTALL]

Lots of good opinions here. If you have time google some of the smiths that do big bore work. There are alot of heavy hitters in the 45/8 bbl range some suggest a shorter bbl for ease of carry. I like to tote the 45/8 bbl and shoot the 5.5 bbl. I have a 71/2 hunter blackhawke and when I tote it I don't carry a rifle. And that is also a consideration if it will be the primary weapon on the hunt or back up .
 

[Ken ONeill]

Mcwoodduck,
The 5 1/2" barrel resriction and .357 mimimum for straightwall cartridges, .24 cal. for bottlenecks, is no longer in effect in N.C. I wrote that original requirement in 1980. It was changed last year. There are now no barrel length or caliber restrictions in our state.

What made you pick the 5.5" as a min?  Did you also write the 6" min for small game?  and why.

No, the .22 LR 6" requirement was already in effect for some number of years. That was also changed last year. Any caliber is okay now.

The original proposal for big game hunting,which came about after years of our lobbying at Wildlife Commission public hearings, was for a .357 & 6" barrel minimum. With the rise of silhouette shooting at the time, that .357 minimum no longer made any sense.

 At the final public hearing in Raleigh on the matter, I was able to point out that there were by then a lot of bottlenecks being shot in single shots that were much more powerful than .357 Magnums, and ultimately a consensus was reached to permit bottlenecks of .24 cal. and a minimum  OAL of 1.75" loaded.

I also was able to point out that Ruger was about to introduce the Redhawk in a 5 1/2" version. Being a very active competitor at that time, I opined that there weren't 6 men in the state who could take advantage of that extra 3/8" sight radius offered by say a smaller framed 6" Security Six vs a 5 1/2" Redhawk. There was, however, little enthusiasm for allowing shorter barrels (scopes were in very very limited use then).

 Frankly, I was darned glad to get these two concessions. At the close of the meeting, I wrote out the proposals that the group had seemed to agree upon, and the NCWRC adopted them.

[mcwoodduck]

Mcwoodduck,
The 5 1/2" barrel resriction and .357 mimimum for straightwall cartridges, .24 cal. for bottlenecks, is no longer in effect in N.C. I wrote that original requirement in 1980. It was changed last year. There are now no barrel length or caliber restrictions in our state.

What made you pick the 5.5" as a min?  Did you also write the 6" min for small game?  and why.

No, the .22 LR 6" requirement was already in effect for some number of years. That was also changed last year. Any caliber is okay now.

The original proposal for big game hunting,which came about after years of our lobbying at Wildlife Commission public hearings, was for a .357 & 6" barrel minimum. With the rise of silhouette shooting at the time, that .357 minimum no longer made any sense.

 At the final public hearing in Raleigh on the matter, I was able to point out that there were by then a lot of bottlenecks being shot in single shots that were much more powerful than .357 Magnums, and ultimately a consensus was reached to permit bottlenecks of .24 cal. and a minimum  OAL of 1.75" loaded.

I also was able to point out that Ruger was about to introduce the Redhawk in a 5 1/2" version. Being a very active competitor at that time, I opined that there weren't 6 men in the state who could take advantage of that extra 3/8" sight radius offered by say a smaller framed 6" Security Six vs a 5 1/2" Redhawk. There was, however, little enthusiasm for allowing shorter barrels (scopes were in very very limited use then).

 Frankly, I was darned glad to get these two concessions. At the close of the meeting, I wrote out the proposals that the group had seemed to agree upon, and the NCWRC adopted them.

Neat history.
I always thought the Ruger Red Hawk in 5.5" was the basis for the rule and it eliminated the 5" colt 1911's as hunting guns

[painted horse]

The only advantage a shorter barrel has over the longer one is it's generally easier to carry on your hip, and may be a smidge lighter. Read an article years ago (way before home computors) I don't remember who wrote it or what magizine the article was in. The author went on about the optimum length of barrel for a revolver was six inches. I don't remember all the whatfors and howcomes, but I do remember it seemed logical at the time....

[Lloyd Smale]

What you read is one mans opinion. Some will claim a longer sight radius is easier to shoot. Funny thing is with me is that ive been shooting short barreled sixguns for years and i actually shoot them better off hand then I do a long barrel. they just balance better in my hand and the longer barrels tend to wander around on target for me. With a longer barrel any movement of your hand is amplified more in the front sight. Just take a 4 inch stick and a 12 inch stick and lay them on the table now move one end of both sticks the same ammount and look to see how much the other end moves. For the most part though there is no practical differnce. Its more just a matter of taste and considering right now i have 3 44 specials one a 3 inch one a 4 inch an one a 4 5/8s i guess its pretty obvious where my tastes lay.

The only advantage a shorter barrel has over the longer one is it's generally easier to carry on your hip, and may be a smidge lighter. Read an article years ago (way before home computors) I don't remember who wrote it or what magizine the article was in. The author went on about the optimum length of barrel for a revolver was six inches. I don't remember all the whatfors and howcomes, but I do remember it seemed logical at the time....

[painted horse]

Interesting thought on the longer barrel Lloyd. Never considered that. Like you, most of my shooting is done with "shorter" barrels. My favorites are 4 5/8in. but I have a 5 1/2in BBH (actually my least favorite barrel length, just not as pleasing to my eye) that I'm trying to get better with as this is the one I want to be "the gun". I'm sure most of my accuracy issues are trigger control and have nothing to do with barrel length. I have ONE 7 1/2in revolver, a 3 screw SBH that I can't shoot any better than the others, you can't imagine how many times I considered cutting that one down just for easier holster carry. 
 
As far as the article, we're in agreement there. You sure don't see many guns with six inch barrels offered.

[mcwoodduck]

What you read is one mans opinion. Some will claim a longer sight radius is easier to shoot. Funny thing is with me is that ive been shooting short barreled sixguns for years and i actually shoot them better off hand then I do a long barrel. they just balance better in my hand and the longer barrels tend to wander around on target for me. With a longer barrel any movement of your hand is amplified more in the front sight. Just take a 4 inch stick and a 12 inch stick and lay them on the table now move one end of both sticks the same ammount and look to see how much the other end moves. For the most part though there is no practical differnce. Its more just a matter of taste and considering right now i have 3 44 specials one a 3 inch one a 4 inch an one a 4 5/8s i guess its pretty obvious where my tastes lay.

The only advantage a shorter barrel has over the longer one is it's generally easier to carry on your hip, and may be a smidge lighter. Read an article years ago (way before home computors) I don't remember who wrote it or what magizine the article was in. The author went on about the optimum length of barrel for a revolver was six inches. I don't remember all the whatfors and howcomes, but I do remember it seemed logical at the time....

I call math fallacy!  If you take the stick and figure that the frame part of the gun is the same.  So make you pivot point 1 inch from the end of the stick and move that 1/2 an inch and the angle will be the same.  A bullet launched will end up in the same place.  Same angle. only difference is with the longer barrel you can see it easier.
 

[Lloyd Smale]

could be woodduck. But i know one thing for a fact. Breaking the trigger when the sight picture is right is an instinct that is learned with lots of practice. For an experience shoot barrel lenght doesnt mean much but what ive found is most inexperience shooters tend to see more sight movement with a longer barrel and most struggle more because of it. then again to defend you long barrel guys i know that even in my case with my aging eyes its getting pretty tough to focus on the front sights of short barreled sixguns.

[mcwoodduck]

could be woodduck. But i know one thing for a fact. Breaking the trigger when the sight picture is right is an instinct that is learned with lots of practice. For an experience shoot barrel lenght doesnt mean much but what ive found is most inexperience shooters tend to see more sight movement with a longer barrel and most struggle more because of it. then again to defend you long barrel guys i know that even in my case with my aging eyes its getting pretty tough to focus on the front sights of short barreled sixguns.

I agree that the slight movements of the hand = large movemets with the longer barrels.  And may make you take longer to shoot allowing the barrel to move more. 

[SHOOTALL]

I would say in the sighting process that movement in the effort to center the front sight in the rear sight will not involve the same degrees of movement when a longer bbl is used over a short bbl. all other things equal. For one thing the farther the front sight is from the rear notch the smaller it will appear and more light will show on either side of the post. again everything else the same. Most find this easier to get on target. Then one must consider after the trigger is pulled, the longer the bbl the more chance of influence from gun/bbl movement before the bullet is out the bbl.
So it would seem for most points there is a counter point    so pick what you like , feel comfortable with and can tote . State laws also may play a role...........

[S.B.]

I think the first rule for handguns should be Packable! I personally like short barrels.
Steve