I feel the best "ALL ROUND" handgun for woods carry is a S&W 44 Mag 4".

You can pick the ultra light Scandiun frame, the Mountain Gun, or the standard 29 or 629 depending on how many ounces you want to carry, and how much recoil youi want to endure.

But the fact remains, the 44 Mag is the PERFECT combination of power, load avialibility, finding ammo while on the road avialibility, and carryability.

If you are a 41 Mag freek, or shoot a lot of 45 Colt, and choose one of them fine, they suit your purpose.

Still every thing considered, the 44 Mag is the logical choice.

I will have to say that I agree with you completely. Availability and variety of ammo, and it's a lot easier to shoot than some of the other truly lasrge calibers.

ya'll probably figured out already, I'll take the illogical choice of the 45LC .. and then the 41, then the 44 .. but it like which egg goes in the omlet first...

I will put my vote in with Jeffe and go with 45 Colt. I have had both of course, but decided that I liked the 45 better than the 43. As long as one knows the limits of the many many varibles that occur with the 45 Colt---from the SAA to the heavy Ruger guns one must be aware of the max for that gun or cylinder. With the tiny Taurus guns which I have carried most since they come out right up to the big Rugers. Make mine a 45. I have the Taurus guns, Colt SAAs, S&Ws, Colt Anacondas, Rugers and some other cowboy type guns. Even shot some boars, kittys and even a black bear with them and never felt the need for anything else.

Now I won't disagree that for the common chap that don't hand load, maybe a 44 is the best all around choice because of factory ammo but other than that I can't think of any other reasons.

As for the light weight-the Taurus-I have two Mt Revolvers in 45 Colt 4 inch so I see no great advantages in the type of gun, 45 or 43 have both.

And for me I choose to only load 1 revolver cartridge and one auto cartridge---both 45.

Michael

Ammo availability is precisely why I chose the .429 Magnum over the .45 Colt -- not becuase I prefer a smaller hole. I couldn't agree more that handloaded, the .45 is a much better hammer........

44 mag 4 5/8s blackhawk. Hard to beat in that situation.

Being a reloader I don't care about, ammo availability. The only time I would have a concern with ammo availability would be if I were flying somewhere, but most of the time I drive. But I still prefer one of my big bore handguns for woods walking, or all around carry while in the back country.

How ever I did pick back up my S&W Model 657 3 inch Lew Horton 41 Mag last week. I sold it to a buddy 7 years ago, and he called me back and asked if I wanted it back. I was there that night picking it back up. So it will go with me in the woods as well.

quote:

I feel the best "ALL ROUND" handgun for woods carry is a S&W 44 Mag 4"

Agreed, and not just in the woods either.

quote:

Best Handgun for the Rifle Hunter ands Woods Walker

But if a fella has a rifle already, or is just puttering around in the woods with no particular plan in mind, then I respectfully suggest a handy little 22 is just the ticket...say a S&W Kit Gun or a Ruger Bearcat.

speaking of 22s, I took the taurus 94 4", which weighs less than the "original" SW kit gun.. and sent a shilen barrel off to a reknown pistol smith, to have a trailgun that can shoot SSS ammo accurately ...

I consider the 625 mg to be the 45LC "trailgun", which I bought to match up with said 4" 22!!

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
I feel the best "ALL ROUND" handgun for woods carry is a S&W 44 Mag 4".

You can pick the ultra light Scandiun frame, the Mountain Gun, or the standard 29 or 629 depending on how many ounces you want to carry, and how much recoil youi want to endure.

But the fact remains, the 44 Mag is the PERFECT combination of power, load avialibility, finding ammo while on the road avialibility, and carryability.

If you are a 41 Mag freek, or shoot a lot of 45 Colt, and choose one of them fine, they suit your purpose.

Still every thing considered, the 44 Mag is the logical choice.

+1

I've been a big .41 fan for many years, owning two S&W's, but i now live in the rio grande valley and huge rattle snakes are very numerous. I wish one of them would handle factory shot cartridges as i haven't been able to reload anything that compares to what is available for the .44. If anyone has any suggestions outside of trading guns i would like to hear about it. I can reload shot cartridges but they don't hold as much shot as the .44's

Don't happen to know a fellow by the name of Leroy Jackson down there do ya?

To adress your question there is obviously no way to get as much shot in a 41 as a 44, but I think that your problem may be more in your mind than anything.
The 38 snake shot cartridges work just fine, so the 41's will do the job even better.

Just step on their tail first so that they hold still and you should not have any trouble getting your barrel down real close to their head.
Let me know how it goes..

All BS aside, your 41 will work great in my opinion.

The .41 and .44 go along for deer hunts. When out at the farm or woods for other reasons, then it's a Browning HP with several extra loaded mags.

We don't have the mountain lions, bears and such to consider. What we do have are packs of aggressive wild dogs, coyotes that enjoy trailing you, poachers who think it's a public hunting area, locals who can be found at 4 a.m. doing no telling what kind of transaction, trespassers breaking into barns and cabins and those who pull cars, I presume stolen, up behind the barn and set them on fire.

I have carried a Super Blackhawk 4&5/8" for years. I like to "handgun hunt" if the opportunity presents itself even if I'm taking my rifle for a walk. So far it's done very well on several deer, elk, bear and a moose. I know it works on black bears because I've killed them with it. Yes, grizz are bigger and I still carry spray, but there's always what if... Bullet choise is critical with any handgun, but that's another subject.

Peraonal protection? Thank God I live in Montana and the only reason I need a CWP is to avoid taking my shoulder rig off in town...

Buy one of the new 44 special Blackhawks in a 4 5/8" and never look back.

Just my recent opinion.

ddj

Make mine a 4" Smith & Wesson 44 Magnum.

In the early 80's I bought a 6" S&W 629-2 that I still carry regularly in the field. Then about 6 years ago I came across a dressier piece - nn original 4" S&W 44 Magnum that has been used but carefully maintained.

Neither of those guns are tough high pressure 44s like the Rugers and late model Smiths, but they are artful pieces of engineering and the N frame is a better fit than most 44 magnum offerings.

Grew up with a .44Mag, still have it.
No real complaints, did its job on deer,hogs, etc.

On my first trip to the frozen north, my crusty old guide looked at it and said:
" Nice pistol. Better file those sights down."
I responded "Huh" in my then youthful voice.
He quipped " Yeah, then it won't hurt so bad tomorrow when brownie shoves it up yore A**"

I'm sure he said that to many "tinhorns".

Sometime later, I had Bowen build me a .475 on a Redhawk in the trail configuration; good gun but sold it in 2003.

Now in "badboy country" (where I can carry) I have my S&W 500 custom shorty. (If it had been around I would have bought the .460 instead.
Now both .500 and .460 are available in the factory short version.)

The one I carry in Tejas hunting is my .357 686 7-shot in a shoulder rig.

for me, my smith Airweight .41 Mag. I really had to search for one - wasn't easy to find.

.44 Mag is a great choice, but I wanted an ultralight carry rig. That, and I don't live in Alaska so Brownies aren't really my concern...

Can't go wrong with a 629 in .44 mag though except for the weight...

Here is a funny story.

I live on a place that has a good sized pond.

My wife goes fishing quite a bit, and she was running a weed eater around the places she likes to fish.

Well she has seen a few snakes, probably the "posionous water type".

So I told her she could carry her 2" Airweight 38 Special with some shotshells.

She told me, "I would rather carry my 44" [a 4" S&W Mountain Gun].

I guess I trained her well.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by rnovi:
for me, my smith Airweight .41 Mag. I really had to search for one - wasn't easy to find.

.44 Mag is a great choice, but I wanted an ultralight carry rig. That, and I don't live in Alaska so Brownies aren't really my concern...

On the 41 Mag..

I had a S&W Model 58 once. With loads of equal "power" I could not tell any difference in recoil between it and the 44 Mags.

The difference in weight between a 41 and a 44 S&W Airweight can't be much, if any.

I just would not want to put up with the difficulty of trying to fine 41 Mag ammo on the road, or even at home for that matter.

There is nothing wrong with the "power" of the 41, just the ammo problem.

There is a good friend of mine that has been a "41 Mag Guy" since the early eighties, He also used the 38 Super LONG before it was the IPSC holy grail. So I know and respect that he is ballisticaly savy. I do know that the 41 Mag has a Cult following.... I just cannot see it.

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
She told me, "I would rather carry my 44" [a 4" S&W Mountain Gun].

I guess I trained her well.

LOL! Looks like you certainly did!

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
I feel the best "ALL ROUND" handgun for woods carry is a S&W 44 Mag 4".
Still every thing considered, the 44 Mag is the logical choice.

What really big bad things need defended against in your neck of the woods that a smaller caliber wouldn't suffice?

I'm not going to put down the 44 mag since factory ammo would be available in most places.

When I went to Nome last September to hunt Grizzly, with a rifle, I did stop into the local sporting goods store and did find both 44 mag and 45 LC (Buffalo Bore) so felt confident my choice of carrying my 4-5/8" RNMBH in 45 LC was a good choice. Of course many of you will recall I got to use the 45 LC on my 62" moose @ 15 yds and it thumped him good with the 335 gr WFNGC's from Cast Performance.

I'd say the only thing wrong with where I was at compared to the first post was I wasn't out in the woods. Their are no "woods" north of Nome.

Alan

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:On the 41 Mag..

I had a S&W Model 58 once. With loads of equal "power" I could not tell any difference in recoil between it and the 44 Mags.

The difference in weight between a 41 and a 44 S&W Airweight can't be much, if any.

The difference between the .44 Airweight and the .41 is 1.5 ounces. The .44 weighs 26 oz., and the .41 weighs 27.5 oz (smaller chamber holes).

The real reason I went with the .41 was controlability. The .41 in an airweight platform is pretty much the max I can handle. My current handload is a 260gr. Cast Perf over 16.0gr. of 2400. I haven't chrono'ed it yet but I'm sure it's over 1,000fps. In the light frame, that's just about the max I can handle for 6 rounds...

Anyway, I do agree, Smith Mountain Gun in .44mag is darn near perfect...I just wanted something a bit lighter.

rnovi

A 40 cal hard cast bullet at @1000fps should shoot through the head of any animal in NA for sure.

quote:

Originally posted by onefunzr2:

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
I feel the best "ALL ROUND" handgun for woods carry is a S&W 44 Mag 4".
Still every thing considered, the 44 Mag is the logical choice.

What really big bad things need defended against in your neck of the woods that a smaller caliber wouldn't suffice?

That is the nice thing about a 44 Mag.
You can use loads from 44 Special power for small game hunting and plinking, up to 300 grainers when in bear country.

Plus, for Protection against 2 legged varmints there are again, a lot of satisfactory loads from 44 Special up to you limit of controlability.

I have always been a bigger fan of 45 ACP semiautos, and 44 Mag revolvers.

Plus I carry a 44 Mag rifle as a utility rifle a lot of the time as well.

For general use here in Texas a 240 grain bullet with 8 to 10 gr of Unique is hard to beat.

Also I find the Speer shotshells to be most useful.

In fact in the last several years I have killed more stuff with the3 shotshells than "solid" bullets.

They work great on small game, especially on one of my favorites mountain grouse.

You tip-toed around my question. Your personal preferences notwithstanding, what critters inhabit your Texas woods that require the power and weight of the 44 mag? Certainly not small game. Nor those 2 legged varmints. Are there many bears roaming Texas woods?

Versatility is good. Carrying one ammo for both revolver and rifle is nice. Speer makes 357 shotshells, too. 357 can be downloaded with 38 special in a smaller, lighter package. Is it not an option?

Being I have more than a few hunting revolvers to choose from, then my choice of carry to compliment rifle would depend very much geographical location and type of game. During spring turkey season in West Texas I prefer the .45 Colt with some shot capsules. The .45 Colt has served me well but if seperated from ammo the .44 Rem Mag is usually easier to get re-supplied especially with ammo at power levels needed for large game at some distance verses the more popular cowboy action loads in .45 Colt.
Rodney.

Onefunzr2, concerning your thoughts on the idea why someone would desire to carry a .44 Mag for a sidearm in Texas, alot of that is personal choice and proficiency with the handguns we use. Besides I could show you areas where the feral hogs are so plentiful you would wonder how anything else could live there, including birds. Also the size of them can be alot more than one might expect to stumble across and there is usually several together at one time. It is kind of nice to have a sidearm with plenty of power for these critters in thick cover.
And just for sake of argument black bears are making a steady come back in Texas, not at any threat though. So having lived several years in West central Pennsyvannia myself, the same question could be presented to anyone up there.
Rodney.

So you're saying the 357 won't cut it? Reason I ask is cause jeffeosso plans on using a 22 rimfire revolver on hogs out to 75 yards. By that yardstick even the 357 is overkill.

Rodney H., Good Post

Onefunzr2
The short answer is NO I do not think the 357 Mag will cut it. At least not for me. Sorry do not want to start a Hatfield and Mccoy Fued.
When the 357 was first introduced a some big game was taken with it. Some people even used the Savage 250/3000 for Tiger. That does not make either one of those the best for the job.

As to killing a wild pig with a22LR. I know it has been done. I did it ONCE.

I think the wild pig deserves better.

I am in the minority as I think wild pigs are a great game animal, really fun to hunt, and I like the meat even better than deer and elk.

In fact I had wild pig heart for dinner last night.

Also here is a true story.
About 2 years I was in a gun store here in Texas and another customer that I had seen in there before was looking at 45/70 ammo, for ig hunting.

The salesman called me over to talk to the customer as he knew I hunted pigs.

The customer was looking for more owerful 45/70 "pig" hunting ammo. Here is why.

He is hunting pigs, shoots one, and it charges him. As he is working the lever the pig knocks him down and knocks the rifle out of hnis hands. He has a 500 S&W IN THE POCKET of his overalls, as he has not been able to find a holster for it. As he tries to get the revolver out of his pocket the hammer snags, and he cannot get the gun out. All the while he is on his back and the pig, with his tusks, is cutting up his legs as he tries to kick him away.

He finally gets the 500 S&W out of his pocket and kills the pig.

Now this sounds like a "BS STORY".

Until he showed me his legs.

If he had not had a big handgun he would no doubt been seriously injured, maybe killed.

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
If he had not had a big handgun he would no doubt been seriously injured, maybe killed.

I believe Jeffeosso uses the .22 for a trail gun, and yes he intends to take a feral hog with it. But more seriously he has and uses a .45 Colt for his hunting revolver that he handloads his own hunting loads for. Yes I believe a .357 mag is capable but there is no substitute for displacement and the .44 mag is a better choice for hogs.
Rodney.

quote:

Originally posted by onefunzr2:
So you're saying the 357 won't cut it? Reason I ask is cause jeffeosso plans on using a 22 rimfire revolver on hogs out to 75 yards. By that yardstick even the 357 is overkill.

Yup a ___ (fill in the blank) behind the ear will drop any hog in its tracks -- or any animal for that matter. The problem with pigs is hat they are perpetual motion machines and quite frankly, the behind the ear shot doesn't present itself every time you find a .22 LR in your hands. Me? I prefer a caliber that will reach the vitals even on a Texas heart shot, and that is not the forte of the .22 (obviously). .357 will work, loaded properly (heavy hardcast bullets with a wide flat nose), but on the bigger hogs with a heavy gristle plate, give me a .44 or better. It's a personal preference.

quote:

Originally posted by onefunzr2:

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
If he had not had a big handgun he would no doubt been seriously injured, maybe killed.

Why do you think that's BS? Lots of people get charged and cut by wild hogs that are wounded. Granted, the chances are remote (chances are remote that you will get charged by a cape buffalo as well), but it certainly does happen.

quote:

Originally posted by onefunzr2:
Reason I ask is cause jeffeosso plans on using a 22 rimfire revolver on hogs out to 75 yards. .

Gottas go kick a sleeping dog for fun?
I plan on having an accurate 22LR trailgun that can be with me, WHEN I AM NOT HUNTING but a perfect and LEGAL opprotunity presents itself.

And, sir, I am putting my money where my mouth is, and putting several hundred bucks and MANY hours of practice into, being able to do such a thing.

Let me know when you send you 357 off for a a custom rebarrel, tuning, accuraising, and have put 1500 rounds down the tube at your expected hunting ranges.


-- if you are HUNTING you need a bigger gun, if you have PERMISSION to hunt, and are just out, you don't have one.

i HUNT with a 45LC or a 10MM .. I've hunted with 357 mags -- they work GREAT .. no one is saying thay don't.

Don't kick ants on me, friend.. Its bad for the ants and I tend to react poorly

onefunzr2

I thought it might be BS too, but like I said I saw his legs, heard his story and "looked into his eyes".

He was not bragging as he told his story, he was scared.

Part of "my Job" was [retired now] "talking" to people, and I had no doubt he was telling the truth.

I don't doubt the story. What I doubt is your reasoning that ONLY a 500 magnum saved his ass. If he had a smaller handgun at hand instead of that big lump of steel it wouldn't have gotten caught up in his pant's pocket, and he could have dispatched the wounded hog before it mauled him.

I am responding to this thread only in the vein of the title, "Best Handgun for the Rifle Hunter ands (sic) Woods Walker." If there were grizzlies or a yeti in the area I would want a big bore on my hip, too. I don't see that as the case in Texas.

quote:

I believe Jeffeosso uses the .22 for a trail gun...

Is there a big difference between a trail gun and a woods walker?

Look folks. I have no Texas experience, or hog experience for that matter. Perhaps hanging a 44 mag on your hip is the rule rather than the exception. The only thing I ever fear here in Penn's Woods is somehow getting between a momma black bear and her cubs which is pretty unlikely. We have no wild hogs or packs of wild dogs or wolves or abominable snowmen. If I'm just out in the woods for a stroll or actually doing work, like cutting firewood, there is no need for a 44 mag. If I'm already carrying a hunting rifle, a small revolver could deliver a coup de grace on any of our big game animals. Perhaps I perceive fear differently. I just had a little trouble with your blanket statement that a 44 mag is always the best choice. We'll have to agree to disagree. Unless you enlighten me of something I'm not grasping.

A Navy shipmate of mine who lived in eastern Washington state told me of deer hunting. He would pack horses and go off for 2 weeks at a time up into the mountains. That's unheard of here in PA. In that situation, I'd pack a 44 mag. Just in case.

Dave,
yeppers.. lots of difference.. a 22 is meant to blast off snakes, pot small game, be a decent noise maker if your are lost, and, in a wicked pinch, under perfect circumstances, pot a SMALL pig.

a hunters backup gun, or a wood walker (if you are INTENDING to hunt) should (but up to you) be a significant caliber.

The choice be 44 mag and 45LC is entirely academic .. or, really, even a 357 at the range MOST PEOPLE are good enough with to HUNT .. for self defense, or bears, perhaps that's a different story.

You want a 357? hey, GREAT .. want a 44 russian/special/mag .. GOod on you ... you want a nice mild 45LC --well, that's a clear indicator of hidden genius, and not a bad choice either! (sorry Tony/Marco, it was a cheap shot!)

A 200# pig has NO, zip, zero nadda, natural enemies in texas that doesn't have tires or just 2 feet - other than another ppig.

they are our analog of bears .. except they come in sounders of 5-10-30-50 (okay, 50 is rare) .. imagine 10 FULL GROWN momma bears, and 30 cubs .. and 2 or 3 boar bears mixed in, just for fun...

and, oh yeah, you FELL into their den ... or stepped into a creekbed, and there they are.


and if a pig knocks you down, he can get you.. can't do MUCH other than hook you (ever been fed to a shredder) or knock down (hit by an ATV?)

Pigs can't turn their heads and bite, which is about the only reason they don't eat bears