Buck,
I've argu....er, discussed the ML with people who think it'd be ideal for backpack hunting, home defense, and other similar uses, all of which struck me as looking for a reason to justify buying it more than buying it because it actually offers any realistic advantage for those uses.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
But, what do I know?
If people like the concept, by all means lay money down. My major concern is the idea of anybody trying to depend on one for HD; some shortcomings in life can be potentially fatal & best not discovered at the wrong moment.
I've worked with both of mine, I can hit my small steel buffalo silhouette at 75 yards freestanding with the Chiappa .44-40, and the gun is inherently accurate. But- I know I can hit the same steel buff out to at LEAST 100 yards with a 9.5-inch Ruger .44 Mag Redhawk with a scope, and undoubtedly farther if I wanted to. Could probably do it with irons at 100, but I was testing with a particular piece of handgun glass. Both guns are heavy & two-handed propositions, but the ML requires two hands not just to hold up, but to cycle, while the Ruger can be fired more rapidly & reloaded faster if necessary.
If both guns are .44 Mags, the Ruger will handle hot loads much easier on the hands than the ML will.
As far as the nostalgia thing goes, three guns I wanted bigtime in my childhood were the Rifleman's 92, the Mare's Leg, and the UNCLE Special.
I've got a ringlever 92 (minus the trigger screw, since I'm not real sure I want to risk it), I have the two Mare's Legs, and I've not been able to find anybody who'd agree to convert my commercial P-38 into the UNCLE pistol yet, but I have tried.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
Denis