Ballistics by the inch

There’s more than one way to skin a cartridge.

So, the beginning of July I posted an entry about some informal .44 data I had collected.  As I said at the time:

I was prompted to do so because I had picked up some new Buffalo Bore ammunition that I wanted to try.

Specifically, this ammo:  Buffalo Bore 340gr .44mag

Heavy .44 Magnum +P+ Pistol and Handgun Ammo

And I was VERY impressed with the performance of that ammunition, since it generated over 1653 fps/2063 ft-lbs out of my Winchester 94.  However, there was a problem: it wouldn’t feed in my levergun. Oh, it shot and extracted just fine, but you couldn’t rack a new cartridge from the magazine into the chamber — they would invariably get stuck. Thus making the gun a single-shot, at least as far as that particular ammo was concerned.

So I started thinking about ways around this problem.

My first thought was that perhaps I could develop a similar cartridge using a .44special case. I knew the history of the development of the .44magnum, so i figured that it was probable that the .44special brass would withstand the pressures involved, and give me about 1/8th inch (the difference between the case length of the .44special and the .44magnum) to play with. I found a suitable bullet, and did a little research to see whether anyone had recently tried to develop such power out of a .44special case.

My research pointed to the possibility of developing full .44magnum power out of a .44special case (which was what was done historically, so no big surprise there). And over the course of the last month I worked up two different flights of test ammo experimenting with that idea.

What results did I get? Well, let’s just say that you can indeed get some very powerful rounds using .44special cases. Indeed, using 240 grain bullets (which are fairly standard for the .44) I had considerable success. The rest of the equation is left to the experienced reloader to determine for themselves.

With the 330 grain bullets, though, it was a different story. When approaching the upper end of the published  data for .44magnum, I started to see indications of stress on the spent brass which made me … nervous. Enough so that I decided not to risk shooting the last couple of test rounds. Draw your own conclusions.

And the chronographed power results were only about half of what the Buffalo Bore ammunition I was trying to emulate demonstrated.  Hmm.

Now, it is possible that with a different type of gunpowder, I might be able to come to a different result with my shorter .44special reloads. Maybe.

But we all know how hard it can be to find preferred types of gunpowder these days. So I decided to reconsider my strategy. After all, what I wanted was to have the power of the Buffalo Bore loads, but in a cartridge which would feed reliably in my levergun.

The result? I decided to try to change the shape of the bullet in the Buffalo Bore cartridge, so that the hard leading shoulder would be rounded off in such a way as to properly feed in my gun. After a bit of experimentation this afternoon, this is what I came up with:


Note the rounded cartridge on the left, next to an unaltered cartridge on the right. In the pan for my balance beam scale you can see the bulk of the lead removed from the bullet in the cartridge on the left. Now, that’s not all of the lead I removed — but it is probably the vast majority of it, since I did the removal over a sheet of paper using a rasp, and then weighed the shavings (which turned out to be 10.5 grains, btw).

That cartridge feeds fine in my levergun. No problems. So the trick will be to experiment with seeing how little lead I can remove while still getting reliable feeding, and getting good at doing so uniformly so as to not really screw up how the bullet behaves aerodynamically. That should be a manageable matter. (Edited to add: see my solution here.)

But I also think I’ll drop Buffalo Bore a note, and see if I can get them to tweak the design of the bullet just a tad to make it more friendly for us levergun owners. Thanks to BBTI, I should have enough cred that perhaps they’ll take note.

We’ll see.

Jim Downey

August 1, 2013 - Posted by | .44 Magnum, .44 Special | , ,


  1. Now I know why you were using the special case instead of the magnum. No room in the case to seat deeper? Or do a combination of trimming mag case, deeper seat and bullet reshaping. I wonder if trimmed 445 super mag case is stronger?

    Sent from mobile device, please excuse grammar and spelling

    Comment by N2ail | August 1, 2013 | Reply

    • Any and all of those questions/comments/suggestions are good, and probably some combination would work. But I was looking for a relatively simple solution that would be suitable for most people without a lot of technical knowledge or tools. A rasp/file and some sandpaper is a whole lot easier than a bunch of reloading equipment, so I should have thought of this approach first.

      Better even, would be Buffalo Bore to do a slight modification on their end.

      Comment by James Downey | August 1, 2013 | Reply

  2. […] beginning of this month, I posted an entry about my initial experiment altering one of those heavy Buffalo Bore 340gr +P+ rounds for .44 […]

    Pingback by You want me to stick it *where*?? « Ballistics by the inch | August 24, 2013 | Reply

  3. […] in his lever action. His first attempt at modifying the (loaded) bullets was to use a rasp. He now uses a large pencil sharpener and the results look pretty good […]

    Pingback by Modifying A Bullet For Easier Feeding | State Of Tactical | August 27, 2013 | Reply

  4. […] to a link from The Firearm Blog about my experiments to alter the Buffalo Bore 340gr .44mag loads I’ve written about recently. So I wanted to say thanks to Steve over there, and to all his […]

    Pingback by Just take a little off the sides, leave the top alone. « Ballistics by the inch | August 29, 2013 | Reply

  5. “. I knew the history of the development of the .44magnum, so”

    If this was the case, you would know that Elmer Keith chose the parent case for the .44 mag to be the .45 long colt, NOT the .44 special, because the case wall is thicker on the .45lc.


    Comment by Keith | March 14, 2014 | Reply

  6. Your link to Wikipedia: Wiki is WRONG. Read Keith’s own writings on the development of the round for the definitive source.

    Comment by Keith | March 14, 2014 | Reply

    • You know, the good thing about Wikipedia is that you can correct wrong information, if you want to and can support your changes. Please feel free.

      Comment by James Downey | March 14, 2014 | Reply

  7. […] which includes the latter ammo out of my 94 Winchester AE can be found here, with subsequent posts here and […]

    Pingback by Reprise: Levering the Playing Field: a Magnum Opus « Ballistics by the inch | April 2, 2017 | Reply

  8. […] .44 magnum ammo on the market, and discovered the Buffalo Bore 340gr +P+ loads. Full info here and here, but let me just say Oh Baby! 1300 fps out of my Anaconda means almost 1300 foot-pounds of energy. […]

    Pingback by Reprise: Colt Anaconda review. « Ballistics by the inch | November 2, 2017 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: