Inherently inaccurate?

JustJim

Well-Known Member
I don't think the 44 mag is inherently inaccurate. I think the problem is manufacturing tolerances in revolvers and the way they've carried over to rifles. And the twist rates--let's not forget about the twist rates.

I used to think the 45 Colt had rather lack-luster accuracy. I'd owned 7-8 of them, none of which were particularly accurate with any load I could find. Then I got my hands on a Linebaugh conversion built on a 44 Super Blackhawk. Tight chambers, cylinder throats +.001" over bore diameter, and all the same. A near-perfect forcing cone. With hot-loaded 456191s, it was the most-accurate long-range revolver I'd owned to that point. The same tight chambering, and a ball seat to the same diameter as the cylinder throats, gave equal accuracy in a re-barreled M94 Winchester.

There's no reason the same thing couldn't be done with a 44 mag, if someone was inclined to put the money into the project. Set up a single-shot with a 1:20 barrel, tight chamber, and go from there.
 

Bret4207

At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
Everyone said the 303 British was a dog and if you got a rifle that would hold a 3" group you were blessed. Then a guy built a 303 to benchrest specs +/- and viola! A 303 Brit that would shoot under an inch at 100 all day long. Works the same way with the 44.
 
Last edited:

BBerguson

Official Pennsyltuckian
The 44 mag seems to do well in handgun silhouette.
Is it the cartridge that is inherently inaccurate or the platforms it is commonly placed in?
I’m thinking it’s the platforms… I’m going to do some more testing with my CVA Scout and before I do that I’m going to take the scope mount off and check the length of the screws as suggested. I know this was said 8 or so months ago and I intended to do it then but got sidetracked.

I won’t play with it too much until I get more primers, trying to reserve what I have for my sons 45acp.