TexasCHLforum.com

Noooo, the 44 mag out of a rifle can take down bears.

C-dub wrote:Weren't they made in pistol cartridges so only one type of ammo had to be carried? You know, back in the old west.

Yes C-dub, exactly correct. Interchangeability of cartridges between pistol & rifle were highly desirable as more ammo could be carried on horseback.

Most rifle and pistol makers made guns in common calibers. Colt, Remington, S&W, Winchester, Marlin to name the most popular.

The interchangeable cartridges were:
.25-20 (.25 caliber bore)
.32-20 (.32 bore)
.38-40 (.38 bore)
.44-40 (.44 bore) [this was very close in size to the .44 magnum cartridge later developed, and many of the old lever guns were in .44-40 were re-chambered for the .44 mag back in the 50's & 60's as the lever guns were in plentiful supply, and not collectors items yet]

When I was a kid, I had a Winchester 1892 octagonal barrel and a Remington 1890 single action, both in .44-40 that I carried when I rode the pastures on our place. Back then predators were common place and it was necessary to carry for protection of the livestock(and myself). Wow. Stepping back in time. Thanks for the memories.

joe 817,

Great information!

Are pistol calibers like the .44 out of a rifle far longer reaching than out of a pistol, thus making them practical for a rifle?

Or are they limited to some degree say as compared to a 30-30 or .35 Rem?

My question is based on the idea of getting a 9mm rifle to match my pistol. Keltec makes one.

Abraham, I'd say that comparing a rifle to a pistol of the same caliber, the rifle is far more accurate in distance shooting than a pistol....if that's what you're asking.

But that's my opinion. I'll leave it to the ballistic guru's to prove that theory.

Abraham wrote:joe 817,

Great information!

Are pistol calibers like the .44 out of a rifle far longer reaching than out of a pistol, thus making them practical for a rifle?

Or are they limited to some degree say as compared to a 30-30 or .35 Rem?

My question is based on the idea of getting a 9mm rifle to match my pistol. Keltec makes one.

It depends on the loading. I have a 9 mm carbine, and from the numbers I've seen, you get negligible improvement (less than 5% increase in muzzle speed) compared to my Glock 19. Shooting the carbine is a LOT more accurate, though (I believe this is from having better control over the carbine as opposed to the handgun). I can't find any clear online documentation of this though, though you can peruse KEL-TEC's SUB-2000 manual for a graph demonstrating muzzle energy from a 16" barrel at http://kel-tec-cnc.com/images/downloads/sub2kmanual.pdf. You can do a quick and dirty comparison with crappypedia's page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9_mm. The only comparable figures are 115 gr FMJ, fires from a 16" barrel at 1350 fps, and from whatever the typically ill-documented wikipeida source used (I'd assume a 6" barrel) at 1300 fps, a 3.8% improvement for the rifle.

You can compare 44 magnum ballistics fairly easily though.
Handgun: http://www.accuratepowder.com/data/PerC ... data/44Cal(10.97mm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)/44%20Remington%20Magnum%20pages%20133%20to%20135.pdf
Rifle: http://www.accuratepowder.com/data/PerC ... andarddata(Rifle" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)/432Cal(10.97mm)/44%20Remington%20Magnum%2020inch%20page%20330.pdf
Pay particular attention to the heavier bullets, like SRA 300 JSP. Since they move slower, they spend more time in the barrels, giving the load more time to act on them before pressure is released (eg before they're out of the barrel). These bullets/loads generally show a 20% increase in muzzle velocity out of a 20" rifle compared to a 7.5" revolver. With a given bullet mass, that's close to a 20% increase in impact energy, which is significant at the higher end.

There's a lot more to the math, but those numbers are good indicators overall if you want a rough comparison.