# RECOIL: Taurus tracker m44 .44 mag vs glock 22



## jsm2 (Apr 17, 2013)

This thread is specifically to compare recoil between these two guns.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

I have never owned a Taurus Tracker but I have owned three revolvers in .44 Magnum... still do own one of them. This is a stout cartridge, excellent for its intended purpose; to hunt game. It does generate a lot of recoil, but certainly not unmanageable or uncontrollable. It is what it is. One of the best hunting handgun calibers available.

The Glock 22 is nowhere near the venerable .44 Magnum in recoil. Keep in mind that the Glock 22 weighs less than half of what a solid .44 Magnum revolver weighs, although the Tracker is a very light .44 Magnum. Too light for this cartridge, in my opinion.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

The .44 Magnum cartridge delivers more recoil than almost any other pistol cartridge of similar or smaller bullet diameter.
A .44 Magnum revolver (_e.g._, The Tracker) requires the shooter to receive and absorb all of the recoil that the gun-and-cartridge combination delivers.

The .40 pistol cartridge delivers more felt recoil than either the 9mm or the .45 ACP, but it does not deliver recoil that is anything like that of the .44 Magnum.
The recoil-driven action of the semi-auto pistol absorbs some of the recoil impulse, doing the work of operating the pistol's mechanism.

If you look up the bullet-mass and velocity figures for both cartridges, you can figure out the relative recoil impulse that each delivers. The math is pretty elementary.
Then, reduce the recoil impulse of the semi-auto-fired cartridge by at least 10% (and maybe even 15%), to account for gun operation.

There's your comparison.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Maybe it's just me......_*again*_, but I've never really thought about comparing recoil between a revolver and a semi-auto.

For me, it was pretty obvious which one was gonna have more. :watching:


----------



## DanP_from_AZ (May 8, 2009)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> The .44 Magnum cartridge delivers more recoil than almost any other pistol cartridge of similar or smaller bullet diameter.
> A .44 Magnum revolver (_e.g._, The Tracker) requires the shooter to receive and absorb all of the recoil that the gun-and-cartridge combination delivers. . . .


Well, I gotta agree that whatever is happening in a revolver cartrige is exactly "what the shooter gets". No help from "slides and springs" attemping to beat the law of physics.

But, oh crap Steve. Are we going to get into this AGAIN. Especially when I value your opinions greatly.

As you well know, I have a Ruger SuperRedhawk Alaskan 2.5" barrel snubby in .454 Casull. That is pretty close to "similar or smaller bullet diameter". You think ?
And what about those S&W "big wig" attempts at producing the "fastest big bullet" or the "most energy big bullet" calibers. Give the men money, and they WILL succeed.

I just can't evaluate "The .44 Magnum cartridge delivers more recoil than almost any other pistol cartridge of similar or smaller bullet diameter."
Don't have a .44 Mag. I'm very happy with a .454 Casuall that can also shoot .45 Long Colt. But, if you look at cartridge specs, it's pretty clear there
are a lot of "more go-power" pistol cartridges than the .44 Magnum. Whether you need one with "more" is just personal opinion. Open for debate.

But, I do wonder about folks who think the ".44 Magnum" is the REAL BIG BOY. I sure won't dispute that a revolver delivers "all the recoil the cartridge delivers". :smt1099

Let the fun begin ! :watching:


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

DanP_from_AZ said:


> Well, I gotta agree that whatever is happening in a revolver cartrige is exactly "what the shooter gets". No help from "slides and springs" attemping to beat the law of physics.
> 
> But, oh crap Steve. Are we going to get into this AGAIN. Especially when I value your opinions greatly.
> 
> ...


Don't know how familiar you are with the early versions of Dick Casull's .454 Magnum and I am certainly not an expert by any means with this cartridge. But I well remember, I have the issue, of a gun test in 1972 of the .454 Cusall in Guns and Ammo magazine. At the time, they were using a tri-plex load and getting 2000 fps at 2100 ft/lbs with that cartridge. I believe Freedom Arms made the 5-shot SSA revolver that was used in the test. I remember it fired a 300 grain bullet and would easily penetrate 1/4" plate steel like a drill (the article had a picture of this and it was on the front page of the magazine).

Quite impressive to say the least. By the mid-70's I was loading .44 Magnum 240gr bullets at around 1500 fps. Later, I found the 225gr 3/4 jacketed HP Speer more to my liking pushed by 23 grains of 2400 for 1600 fps out of a 7" barrel. That's as far as I was willing to go with that caliber.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Um, *Dan*, please note that, since my crystal ball warned me about you, I carefully included the word "_almost_."

To wit: "The .44 Magnum cartridge delivers more recoil than _*almost*_ any other pistol cartridge of similar or smaller bullet diameter."

Are we having fun yet? :anim_lol:

:watching:


----------



## DanP_from_AZ (May 8, 2009)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Um, *Dan*, please note that, since my crystal ball warned me about you, I carefully included the word "_almost_."
> 
> To wit: "The .44 Magnum cartridge delivers more recoil than _*almost*_ any other pistol cartridge of similar or smaller bullet diameter."
> 
> ...


Of course we are having fun. 
I'm almost ready "to call" you on your blatient attempt to weasel out from under ".44Mag" "delivers more recoil than *almost *any other . . .".
Well, I'd better check this out. We all know about "bring enough gun to a gunfight".

www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/almost‎

_Definition of ALMOST
: very nearly but not exactly or entirely <we're almost there> _

I will postulate that you would fire back as follows:

Something like adding up all the (.44 Mags in existence since Elmer Keith) divided by (all .454 Casulls + all S&W 460s + S&W 500s + the Limbaughs, etc.) equals "almost all".
OK, I think you probably end up near 2-3% or even less for the bigger boys. And I'll concede that the hypothetical "97%" could be characterized as "almost".

That "puking and mewling sound" coming through your computer speakers is me ducking and weaving trying to find "cover", not just "concealment" from the next volley. :smt1099


----------



## DanP_from_AZ (May 8, 2009)

SouthernBoy said:


> Don't know how familiar you are with the early versions of Dick Casull's .454 Magnum and I am certainly not an expert by any means with this cartridge. But I well remember, I have the issue, of a gun test in 1972 of the .454 Cusall in Guns and Ammo magazine. At the time, they were using a tri-plex load and getting 2000 fps at 2100 ft/lbs with that cartridge. I believe Freedom Arms made the 5-shot SSA revolver that was used in the test. I remember it fired a 300 grain bullet and would easily penetrate 1/4" plate steel like a drill (the article had a picture of this and it was on the front page of the magazine).
> 
> Quite impressive to say the least. By the mid-70's I was loading .44 Magnum 240gr bullets at around 1500 fps. Later, I found the 225gr 3/4 jacketed HP Speer more to my liking pushed by 23 grains of 2400 for 1600 fps out of a 7" barrel. That's as far as I was willing to go with that caliber.


I don't know the real details of Casull's "venture" to compete with Elmer Keith's love affair with the .44Mag. 
I do know the original .45 Long Colt case had to be significately strengthed to handle "Dick's experimenting".
And the current factory load cases are much more than just a "bit longer" .45 LC case.

And, I do see you were playing on on what I would consider "far upper end" of the .44 Mag. envelope.

For myself and my territory with no Grizzlies or big Browns, I'm perfectly content with quality standard "full-power" hunting loads.
Considerably more go-power than "equivalent" premium .44 Mag. factory hunting loads. Which I'd "guess" it is degraded enough
out of the 2 1/2" snubby barrel to fall back into the .44 Mag area. There is PLENTY of evidence that all of the powder is NOT
burned in the short barrel. Especially fun to observe at night. :mrgreen:

You can go "considerably bigger" with a couple of small companies touting their stuff for the "real big bears".
I'll just stick with .454 Casull Winchester or Federal hunting loads with premium bullets. At $2/throw downrange. :mrgreen:
These "hang around" 260 grains, getting about 1800 fps in a regular barrel. Less ??? with my snubby.
My Alaskan is not the biggest bully on the block by a long shot. So to speak. But, "adequate" IMHO. :smt1099


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Well, guys, I have to say that the ultimate handgun has yet to be achieved. But it won't be long now!

As I understand it, someone is—right now—busily engaged in modifying a Taurus "Judge" to accept 20mm-aircraft-cannon shells, of course necked down to 0.499" to keep it legal.
Results are expected to be spectacular!

We breathlessly await testing by the Box-o-Truth boys.
Jug-of-water penetration is sure to be amazing.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

DanP_from_AZ said:


> I don't know the real details of Casull's "venture" to compete with Elmer Keith's love affair with the .44Mag.
> I do know the original .45 Long Colt case had to be significately strengthed to handle "Dick's experimenting".
> And the current factory load cases are much more than just a "bit longer" .45 LC case.
> 
> ...


The 225gr Speer load I mentioned with 23 grains of 2400 was a little over maximum and not recommended for anything at the time other than the Ruger Super Blackhawk. I did notice that the primers tended to pick up machine markings from the firing pin "collar". But since there were no extraction problems, I felt okay with this load. Later when the Ruger Redhawk was introduced, no concerns at all. That was a VERY strong revolver. I still have my 5 1/2" barrel version.


----------



## DanP_from_AZ (May 8, 2009)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Well, guys, I have to say that the ultimate handgun has yet to be achieved. But it won't be long now!
> 
> As I understand it, someone is-right now-busily engaged in modifying a Taurus "Judge" to accept 20mm-aircraft-cannon shells, of course necked down to 0.499" to keep it legal.
> Results are expected to be spectacular!
> ...


Oh Steve, how you know how to raise my heartbeat so well !
Do you have an email address or phone number so I can contact the "someone" and try to move to the head of the line ?

Last night I had a wet dream about a .50 Browning bullet being propelled two miles by a 20mm casing, and arriving at 5,000 fps.
Although I don't hunt red meat (on principle), this could be the ultimate cartridge for thinning our local antelope herd.

I guessed it would take a crew of two to video tape the "two mile results" on my standard "water filled milk jug" B-o-T test of cartridge validity.
I approached my "significant other" (yes, in my case a female) if she would be willing to stand close enough to the "two mile jug"
to videotape the results. She declined, using terminology not suitable for a forum potentially viewed by children, and even youth.

And now I am in deep trouble. After this proposal, she has said "look, Dude, the split the cost deal when out for steak dinners is over". 
"You pay all, and don't expect any favors from me afterwards". Sometimes, I should just shut up, eh ?

On the negative side, I hope you understand you are "really close" to reviving the "hand" cannon and "man" cannon kerfuffle.

As an honorable and esteemed and properly authorative member of this forum, I am absolutely sure you understand the dire ramifications of THAT ! :mrgreen:


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Abashed, I have taken my man cannon in my hand—(does that make it a "hand cannon"? or a "man-hand cannon"?)—and I am slinking, red-faced, out the door.

But if you really want one of those "Judge" conversions, you will have to apply to the USAF. I understand that they are being developed for rear-seat gunner-radiomen, of which there still are a few, to go with the last remaining prop-driven ground attack aircraft, all in the capable hands of the FBI, the CIA, and the Civil Air Patrol.

And, while you're at it, you might ask to borrow an observation drone, to solve your long-range antelope and milk-jug problem.


----------



## DanP_from_AZ (May 8, 2009)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> . . . But if you really want one of those "Judge" conversions, you will have to apply to the USAF. I understand that they are being developed for rear-seat gunner-radiomen, of which there still are a few, to go with the last remaining prop-driven ground attack aircraft, all in the capable hands of the FBI, the CIA, and the Civil Air Patrol. .


You forgot the "maybe UN black helicopters" and the for sure Nat'l Guard black copters. I live just east of a MOA (Military Operations Area) and see them now and then.

Once, when I was one of five vehicles scouting out a Saturday trip for our local 4WD "No Club Club" (no officers, no membership, just an email list). 
We got to close to a forest fire that wasn't under control. We sere sitting around eating lunch, and watching the fire on the next ridge about a 1/2 mile away.
There were BIG helicopters dropping water, and some BIG fire-tankers. And a Beech Baron twin in "Fire Colors" directing traffic. Really, just a great show. :mrgreen:

Suddenly a Black Blackhawk appeared out of nowhere. Between us and the fire. There was all that "whup, whup" stuff and all the dust it was stirring up. 
It was directly on our level. Complete with helmeted door gunner and machine gun. He wasn't pointing it at us.

But, we all got his "arm pointing message", and bailed out of there pronto. Me holding a half-eaten PB & J. I'm a real wimp when faced with FAR superior firepower. :smt1099


----------



## DanP_from_AZ (May 8, 2009)

:smt179


Steve M1911A1 said:


> . . . But if you really want one of those "Judge" conversions, you will have to apply to the USAF. I understand that they are being developed for rear-seat gunner-radiomen, of which there still are a few, to go with the last remaining prop-driven ground attack aircraft, all in the capable hands of the FBI, the CIA, and the Civil Air Patrol. .


You forgot the "maybe UN black helicopters" and the for sure Nat'l Guard black copters. I live just east of a MOA (Military Operations Area) and see them now and then.

Once, when I was one of five vehicles scouting out a Saturday trip for our local 4WD "No Club Club" (no officers, no membership, just an email list). 
We got to close to a forest fire that wasn't under control. We sere sitting around eating lunch, and watching the fire on the next ridge about a 1/2 mile away.
There were BIG helicopters dropping water, and BIG fire-tankers dropping retardent. And a Beech Baron twin in "Fire Colors" directing traffic. Really, just a great show. :mrgreen:

Suddenly a Black Blackhawk appeared out of nowhere. Between us and the fire. There was all that "whup, whup" stuff and all the dust it was stirring up. 
It was directly on our level. Complete with helmeted door gunner and machine gun. He wasn't pointing it at us.

But, we all got his "arm pointing message", and bailed out of there pronto. Me holding a half-eaten PB & J. I'm a real wimp when faced with FAR superior firepower. :smt1099

Oops, sorry, I've done it again. :smt179


----------

