Monthly Archives: February 2021

S&W .44 Double Action, 1st Model

Double-Action revolvers were popular in Europe, and while they were not unknown in the US they took longer to gain widespread acceptance. When Colt introduced their 1877 model S&W could not afford to be far behind. In 1880 they introduced double-action revolvers in .32 S&W and .38 S&W, and a year later they brought out their big-bore, the Double Action .44. The First Model used dual cylinder locks, one that was activated when the hammer was cocked, with a separate lock holding the cylinder after it was fired. This was later replaced by a single lock that filled both functions. .44 Russian was by far the most common chambering for these guns, but other cartridges like .38-40 were offered in smaller numbers. Barrels were available in lengths from 3-1/2″ to 8″, but most seem to have had 5-6″ barrels. An adjustable sight version was offered was well, but these are quite rare.

S&W .38 Double Action- introduced in 1880., This was a compact revolver designed for concealed-carry and chambered in the .38 S&W cartridge.

On a recent trip to Pinto’s Guns I found they had recently acquired a number of interesting old handguns, including two .44 Double Actions offered at quite reasonable prices. I discussed it with Linda and we determined it would not be financially suicidal to pick one up. After a hard struggle between the nicer of the Double Actions and a Model 1917 we pulled the trigger- so to speak- on the .44.

While not a small or dainty gun by any means, it really isn’t an awful lot bigger than a K-frame.
While there are a couple areas of minor pitting, notably on the cylinder, the gun retains much of it’s original blue finish.
Like all of the S&W top-break revolvers when the gun is opened the extractor-star extends, kicking out the empties before retracting when the gun is fully opened. This allowed the gun to be reloaded much, much faster than most of its contemporaries. though it could make partial reloads a bit problematic.
The sights are tiny but surprisingly usable.
The firing-pin does not retract after firing, and a careless reload, closed with sufficient vigor, could theoretically detonate a cartridge. The gun’s hammer should be pulled to the safety notch before reloading.
Easy to see if the gun is loaded without opening the action, in daylight at least.

The gun is in quite good condition; there are a couple areas of minor pitting but the gun retains most of it’s original blued finish. The cylinder has a bit of side-to-side play, but not enough to be considered excessive even in a newer revolver. The double action trigger is amazing; light and smooth. If you look for stacking carefully you’ll find it, but it’s nothing you’d notice in normal use. The DA pull isn’t particularly long, either. There’s a little take-up on the single-action trigger, but it breaks clean and feels light. The original composition grips are worn but complete; I’m likely to preserve them and make a set of replacements in stag.

The gun doesn’t feel heavy in the hand, and with the 6″ barrel it balances quite nicely. I’m very much looking forward to getting it to the range!

What’s up with this ‘Russian’ stuff?

S&W’s first big-bore .44 cartridge was the .44 S&W (now called .44 S&W American.) Typical for the era it used a heel-base bullet, where the projectile and cartridge are the same diameter, with a reduced-diameter section of the bullet crimped into the cartridge (like a modern .22 Long rifle.)

.44 S&W loaded with heel-base bullets. The cartridge on the far right has visible grooves to hold lubricant.

Both the cartridge diameter and the bullet diameter were .440. This mean the bullet had to carry lubrication outside the case, where it could attract dust and debris. This wasn’t just messy; in extreme cases it could accumulate enough junk to make chambering the round difficult. In high heat the lubricant could melt, creating even more mess and potential for fouling. The common response was an un-lubricated lead bullet, which meant leading the bore and harder powder fouling. It was not a terrific design.

When the Russian military was looking at the S&W Single Action revolver they liked it quite a lot… but the outside-lubed, heel-base bullets were a deal-killer. In response S&W developed a load with an inside-lubed bullet (with the lube inside the case) of uniform diameter. The size of the bore was also reduced to match, and this diameter, .429, has become the standard for ‘.44’ cartridges to this day. Also at the Russian’s request the case was made slightly longer and could accommodate a larger powder charge.

.44 S&W Russian became a very popular cartridge in the American West, and remains in production to this day.

The original .44 S&W used a 205gr. bullet propelled to 682 fps. for 212 ft./lbs of energy. The new cartridge, dubbed the .44 S&W Russian, fired a heavier 247gr. bullet at 750 fps. for 310 ft./lbs- a significant improvement. Though mainly of interest to Cowboy Action shooters these days, the cartridge remains in production almost 150 years later.

Of course that doesn’t mean that I had any on-hand, but I do have a fair amount of .44 magnum brass, and it was a simple matter to shorten some cartridges to .970″ to chamber in the revolver. I looked up load data in a few online sources, then loaded a nice, light load- a 200gr. LRNFP over 4.5 gr. of Unique. This gave me an average of 624 fps. and 174 ft./lbs., so it’s a very soft-recoiling, low pressure load. This didn’t stop the bullets from passing completely tho0ugh 16″ of Clear Ballistics 10% ordinance gel, but the sections of 4×4 backing the gel up stopped the bullets easily.

What’s Next?

No I am not going to shorten the barrel. I’ll be loading more of my ‘powder puff’ loads initially, followed by a trip to the range to do a more extensive test. I’ll also likely try to replicate the original black-powder factory load, mainly to see what it’s like shooting it at ‘full power.’ Of course it will also need a holster, so there’s that too. Anyway, I have a new gun to experiment with and shoot, and if the test shots are any indication it’s a gun I will very much enjoy shooting. Best yet it’s a gun I never expected to be able to afford.

Good Saturday!

Michael Tinker Pearce, 6 February 2021

If you like what you see here please consider clicking on the link above and supporting me on Patreon.

7.8x19mm… Trials Without (too many) Errors

Thanks to Steve Gallacci for generously providing me with small pistol primers so testing could continue!

When we last left Our Her… er, our gun, the barrel was lined for .308, but my crappy make-shift chamber reamer did not do a very good job, so while I could fire the gun the cases would not extract.

Monday the .32 H&R Magnum reamer arrived, and required no modification to ream the chamber. When fired the cartridges now ejected just fine, and the brass showed no signs of unusual pressure. Furthermore the gun fed from the magazine and locked back on empty.

What a difference a proper reamer makes! Empties now extract and eject just dandy.

Naturally the first thing to do was to test the existing loads; I anticipated some loss of velocity (from the force required to operate the mechanism) and I wasn’t wrong. The 100gr LFP over 3.5gr. of Unique made 939 fps. and 196 ft./lbs, and the 78gr LFP made 1114 fps. and 215 ft./lbs. Not bad, and I expect I can push these faster.

So, it turns out I checked one of the wildcat boxes; the 78gr. load basically has performance identical to 7.65 x 20mm French Long, which was used in the MAS 35 service pistol. While the French gun has a locked-breech it apparently doesn’t need one, given that the Helwan works fine as a straight blow-back.

OK, time to digress. A few years back when I started reloading .32 S&W Long the only .32 brass available locally was .327 Federal. No worries, I bought that and shortened it… but I shortened some of it a little too much. I set those aside, thinking that at some point I would convert them to .32 Long Colt. Remembering those I hunted them up and examined them. Very strong base, so I decided to rework them. I turned the rim down to the correct size and cut an extractor-groove. Worked a treat.

7.8 x 19mm brass made from .327 Federal Magnum. Note that there is a fairly heavy crimp; these headspace on the extractor so the crimp works fine.

Today I was at Pinto’s and came across a box of .32-caliber 100gr XTP hollow-points and decided to make the jump to a jacketed bullet load. I checked Loaddata.com to see if there was data for the 7.65 French Long and lo and behold there was. According to them a 100gr. Speer Plinker over 3.1gr of Unique makes 1030 fps. Estimated. Yeah, I was seriously skeptical; after all I’m getting 939fps out of a 100gr. lead bullet over 3.5gr of Unique. I loaded the XTPs over 3.2gr of Unique, fired up the Chronograph and had a go.

My skepticism was justified. My one shot before the Chronograph’s battery died showed 904 fps. for 181 ft./lbs. Not bad, but I’m pretty sure I can do better.

The 100gr. XTP JHPs are loaded a bit shallow in the interest of feeding easily..

The bullet penetrated 14-1/2″ into Clear Ballistics 10% ordinance gel. To my surprise it actually expanded slightly. Mind you, I wasn’t firing through denim as I was really only concerned with the velocity. If fired through four layers of denim I’m dubious it would have expanded even this much, but we’ll find out soon enough.

I might be making this sound too easy; believe me there was plenty of fiddling along the way, particularly with the magazine feed lips. I had discovered that if I loaded more than five rounds in the magazine rounds tended to nose-dive instead of feeding. Some subtle alterations to the follower, improving the feed ramp and fiddling with the magazine feed-lips seems to have corrected this problem. Time will tell. More load development is needed, and serious shooting will probably reveal other issues to deal with.

Definitely time for a trip to the range to see what’s what, even though I only have forty pieces of brass so far. There’s more on the way, though, so it’s all good.

One issue I have discovered after I had modified the Helwan magazines to work with this cartridge. Magazines for M1951s aren’t cheap, and now I have an M1951 and a rare M1951 E that don’t have spare magazines. Oops… I think I’ll be thanking my Patreon supporters again, because I like to have at least two spare magazines for each gun.

Naturally I’ll keep you posted… and try to give you a break from this cartridge!

Michael Tinker Pearce, 5 February 2021

if you like what you see here, please consider clicking the link above and supporting me on Patreon.