44 special vs 9mm

[mickbr]

fellas, factory loads in 44 special in any standard barrel revolver. More or less harsh on the ears than 9mm auto? I used the latter in the military but too long ago to remember or compare.

[Scott Tschirhart]

The .44 Special is much less harsh on the ears in my (admittedly) unscientific experience.

[Bill in Oregon]

What Scott said. Part of it is the pressure difference -- 15,500 SAAMI for the Special and 35,000 for the 9mm.

[Paladin]

.44 spl for the win bang without blast and more THUMP

[AJMD429]

.
Yeah. It seems like the closer you get to a bowling ball ballistically, the quieter it is.

Short barrels and cylinder gaps kind of make revolvers noisy no matter what you're shooting in them but I think the concept still applies.

Also, the way decibels are measured a small numeric difference translates into a large difference in perceived sound.

I'm sure other factors like the frequencies and harmonics probably affect the perceived sound level as well as the potential for hearing damage.

It does seem like staying subsonic is a huge difference, and of course you can use subsonic 9mm ammo. However if you are limiting velocities to subsonic, then you are handicapping one of the things that you can do to compensate for lighter weight bullet and smaller meplat.

Maybe that's why the 1911 remains popular after over a century.

It is one of the best platforms for putting out a heavy and wide projectile at 900 ft per second or so. It is indisputably able to stop a bad guy from doing bad things almost instantly, at least within the realistic limits of any handgun versus a rifle or shotgun.

The main drawback is that 1911's are generally fairly large and heavy, and compared to the 9 mm most of them have a lower capacity. For those of us fortunate enough to have long fingers, the double stack 45 ACP firearms are pretty cool. I think the grip diameter of my Para Ordinance P-14 in 45 ACP is only something like 5/16 of an inch larger versus a single stack Colt 1911. It holds 14 to 20 shots depending on the magazine, and the "Officer Model" equivalent called the P-12.

I strayed into discussing the 45 ACP here because the Charter Arms Bulldog, which was my 44 Special carry gun for many years, is kind of in that size range between those two ('regular' & 'Officer') 1911s. So if you are looking at a 9 mm which is usually in a semi-automatic format, that is a direct comparison that can be made. If one's hands permit the double stack format, I think a strong case could be made for using the larger diameter cartridge, both in terms of stopping power, as well as avoiding the excessive noise, perhaps in exchange for slightly more recoil. So I guess if I wanted a tiny handgun I would opt for something like the SIG 938 in 9mm but if I wanted a full-sized one perhaps the Para Ordinance P-14, P-12, or a 44 Special revolver.

Of course there are Glocks and CZ's and lots of other options in the 45 ACP chambering.

Again, the reason I mentioned the 45 acp, is it is sort of what you would get if you could make a 44 special semi-auto.

Comparing the 44 Special versus 9 mm, unless one has a 9 mm revolver, like the Ruger LCR, that uses moon clips for 9 mm, involves a lot of other variables besides the cartridge, because of the cylinder gap in particular, and it seems like when you are dealing with firearms the size normally used for CCW, for the same bulk of total firearm, the barrel is usually a bit longer for a semi-auto versus revolver.

I think all else being equal, which obviously isn't the case for the reasons I mentioned, I would feel like a 44 Special would certainly be preferable vs the 9mm to rely on as a CCW firearm.

Having said all that, my first CCW firearm was a 7-1/2" Ruger Super Blackhawk in 44 Magnum - simply because I had no other centerfire handgun at the time. When relying on it working nights at retail pharmacy during undergrad years, I loaded it with 180 grain factory 44 special loads, feeling they were plenty effective and probably slightly faster follow-up shots, even in a single action revolver, and less likely to cause permanent hearing damage. Also perhaps if I had ever had to use it, my not using 44 Magnum loads might make it harder to portray me as a vicious killer.

After that I tried a 1911, but it was one of the first models made in stainless steel, and there was a lot of galling with the alloys they used then and the gun was not reliable enough, so I transitioned to a Charter Arms Bulldog in 44 Special. Later on, I even got Crimson Trace laser grips for it, so in many ways it was an ideal gun for CCW. Definitely lighter weight and easier to carry versus the previous options.

After that I got a Taurus PT-92, because I had seen a couple pharmacy hold-ups where there actually had been numerous shots fired, and I really liked the way the thumb safety is on a 1911, and did not like the concept of striker fired guns because I want control over the hammer and mainspring. If they made them in 45 acp, I would have gotten one, but the 40 S&W didn't look that much better than 9 mm, which was easy to find inexpensive ammunition for.

Then I re-entered the 45 ACP realm when I picked up a Para Ordinance P-14 at a gun show, thinking it was a 9 mm 1911...until I looked at the muzzle...! It fit my hand perfectly, and pointed naturally, so I had to get it. I had heard the usual stuff about how anything other than a Colt or Kimber was junk, but the P-14 seemed reliable, no matter what kind of ammunition I put in it. Once I fired 500 or so rounds of mixed FMJ, cast lead reloads, and so on without any malfunctions, I made the decision that it might be a replacement for CCW versus the PT-92, so I bought 1000 rounds of Golden Saber jacketed hollow points. My rule for a gun to bet my life on is that it needs to fire a thousand rounds in a row with zero malfunctions. Thankfully, ammunition hadn't gotten very expensive yet, but that was still several hundred dollars invested just to make sure the gun was reliable, but it was, so it became my CCW gun for a number of years, definitely giving me peace of mind when I was working 2:00 in the morning filling in at an all night pharmacy in a bad neighborhood while in medical school. Because the loaded P-14 is rather heavy, even when you use the aluminum frame version, if carried in a shoulder holster, you need a counterweight, so two extra magazines rode on the other side, giving me something like 42 rounds available.

Before having children, I would just leave the firearm on the nightstand in condition one, because my wife was familiar with firearms, neither of us ever got significantly intoxicated, and we lived out in the country so really didn't have anybody dropping in to visit, certainly nobody who would go into the bedroom. However once having children, I went back to the PT-92, since it required a bit more manipulation to fire. Also, since then I have gotten a shot timer and wound up acquiring a Rock Island Armory 1911 in 9 mm. So I took the 1911s in 45 ACP and 9 mm and in some rapid fire and double tap drills, and found that even though I was similarly accurate with both, there was a significant speed difference with the 9mm. Given the improvements in bullet construction and terminal ballistics over the years, I decided to stick with the PT-92 for now. It has also been a perfect firearm in terms of reliability.

I know that was a long rambling answer, but thought it might provide useful information, and answer some peripheral related questions in the realm of "9mm vs 44 Special".

Since a 45 ACP is pretty close to 44 Special, I think if you are considering switching from 9 mm to 44 Special, it would be a mistake not to consider the 45 ACP among your choices. However if you are wanting compatibility with a levergun, or simply prefer revolvers because they have some advantages over some automatics and some circumstances, then I would go with a 44 special.

Certainly I wear hearing protection whenever I shoot anything other than maybe a suppressed 22LR, so if you wear hearing protection for all of your practice shooting, in the rare event you need to fire shots in a defensive situation without hearing protection, I think 9 mm or 44 Special or 45 ACP would all be pretty similar, and not very likely to cause any permanent harm.

I know some people actually sleep with their bedside firearm at hand, along with amplified hearing protectors, which take maybe two seconds to put on, and actually can give you better than normal hearing if you are trying to figure out what's happening after you hear a window break at 2:00 in the morning.

[OldWin]

Subsonic big bores are always easier on MY ears at least. Of the cartridges I shoot, the 9mm and .357 seem worst. That sharp supersonic crack is brutal.

[samsi]

The 9 is definitely harsher on the ears. Regarding the 45acp-44Special comparison, I try not to shoot anything without ear pro these days but my younger self didn't find a 5" 1911 objectionable though a Commander would make my ears ring - both outdoors. Indoors anything is bad, some are worse.

[Ysabel Kid]

Agreed - .44 Special is much less harsh, noise-wise, than anything other than a subsonic suppressed 9mm.

[Sixgun]

Just ask Jelly Bryce…oh wait, you can’t.

[Scott Tschirhart]

What Scott said. Part of it is the pressure difference -- 15,500 SAAMI for the Special and 35,000 for the 9mm.

I didn’t know why but this makes sense to me.

[mickbr]

Thanks gents, rhe replies match my own experience with 44 special