Anyone own/shoot .44 Mag in 2 or 4 inch barrel?

I have been thinking strongly about purchasing a .44 Mag revolver in either 2" or 4" barrel.

I was wondering if anybody has shot either of these barrel length .44s and what your thoughts are.

Is a 2+ inch barrel too short for a .44 Mag or is it a good shooting length.

My thoughts are a carry gun when hiking.

I have a .357 in S&W 386 Airlite so I know felt recoil from a larger caliber with a light frame and I shoot this okay.

I was thinking maybe a Ruger Redhawk or Ruger Redhawk Alaskan in .44 mag or even the Taurus Raging Bull series .44 mag.

Played with a little at the range but more a carry firearm.

Does anybody have any experiences and/or thoughts about this regarding either the recoil/power/knockdown ability or even another manufacturer I am not thinking of?

Thanks.

God bless!!

PPP

Quote:

---

Is a 2+ inch barrel too short for a .44 Mag or is it a good shooting length.

---

IMO its too short. You can't get near the potential out of the .44mag as you should. The 4" is short but a bit better. If the Alaskan would be available in a 4" barrel I think more people would buy it.

I shoot a 4" Redhawk in 44 Mag and although it can kick pretty good it is manageable. That big a caliber (44Mag) in a 2 inch wouldn't be a pleasure to shoot (IMO). If you're looking to be carrying it during hiking, that 2 inches less barrel really won't make that much of a difference in the weight but the addition of the 2 inches (a 4 inch barrel) will make a difference in shooting it.

I have a Ruger Alaskan in .44 2" bbl and find it quite managable. I shot two does with it and can hold a sub 6" group at 50 yards off of bags.

I have a taurus 2" 44 mag. I LOVE this gun....does have recoil but its about the same as my Ruger GP100 4" 357. I take both to the range and its a close tie.

Pretty new to the .44 Mag crew but IMO...the felt recoil from my 4" barrel is plenty! No real desire to go shorter, and I do plan to carry this in the woods.

I have a 4" Dan Wesson with both a 4" ported and unported barrel. 4" is about the shortest I would go in that caliber. It is manageable. If the recoil is too much for you, shoot 44spl in it.

Unless you are hiking in Alaska and expect to run across a big bear, why a 44? If you are just hiking in the NE US, a 4" 357 Magnum would be more than adequate.

FWIW, my hiking gun is a 4 4/8 Ruger Blackhawk in 41 Mag.

I have 2.5 inch ported smith. It is a handful. Wouldn't want to shoot it w/o the porting. It is a nice gun and caliber. The 2 short barrel won't give you the potential of the cartridge, but it will still be more powerful than anything else.

The weight may be much for a long day of hiking hanging off your hip. I have a tanker holster that hides well with a shirt, and makes for more comfortable carrying. Double Tap has some hot .44 specials that are nice to shoot in an N frame as well.

I've shot the 44 mag in 4" S&W 29 and a 4" DWA HVB. The S&W 29 was shooting 240 JHP it was something else the gun end up barrel pointing near stright up in my hand very hard on my wrist. The DWA 4" HVB just kinda rocked in my hand sorta like shoting 357 mag, it was shooting the 240 jhp also. Depends on the gun and person if it a pleasant experience. Some people like loud and high recoiling guns, I like a gun that I can shoot quick and accurately.

The revolver you are speaking of is a great choice for anything on this side of the US. The 4" Redhawk is very manageable and easy to carry in the woods, plus, it will handle the hard hitting, 1400 FPS, 300 plus grain, big bear stoppers. I have a Tracker .44 mag w/4" ported barrel, and the 4" unported Ruger has less recoil. It is a very good choice, if you can find one.