[chewybaca]

More specifically between the 5 shot Taurus Tracker and the Raging Bull? I'm decided to get a 44 soon since a recent suprise encounter witha' beauty cinnamon Black Bear over Memorial weekend. (Surprise encounter at 20 yards being key). Thanks!

 

[Qwiks draw]

Gray_Wolf
Honorary Member

Offline

Posts: 74



Re: Tracker Vs. Raging Bull
« Reply #1 on: May 20, 2007, 02:06:05 AM » Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size! Raging Bull is a bit larger. Also they look different and grips are different as well.

www.taurususa.com has pics of both guns

Report to moderator Logged



Taurus_9mm
Moderator

Offline

Location:
Louisville, Kentucky

Posts: 208



Re: Tracker Vs. Raging Bull
« Reply #2 on: May 20, 2007, 08:16:59 AM » Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have one of each and as Gray Wolf stated, the Raging Bull is a little larger and the grips are different -- the RB having more traditional rubber grips while the Tracker has the 'ribber' (ribbed) grips which conform to your hand.

The RB also has a 2nd cylinder release latch, similar to the ones on Dan Wesson revolvers.

The Raging Bull can be had in a greater variety of calibers as well than the Tracker, some of which have been discontinued.

Got this from another thread that is recent. Hope this helps.

 

[Steelheart]

Or to put it another way,

The 44 Tracker is a medium frame 5 shot gun thats easier to carry around without paying for hurt-your-handium materials.

The 44 Raging Bull is a large frame 6 shot gun with additional locking systems for additional strength.

And just to add it in as I think its still in production. The M44 is also a large frame (but not as large as the RB) 6 shot gun. I picture this closer to an N frame while the RB is an N+ but I don't think its quite an X frame.

Steelheart

 

[chewybaca]

Thanks, I was aware of the size differences, but now even more. What some of y'alls experience in shooting them with full house loads?

 

[Taurus_9mm]

chewybaca,

I haven't had an opportunity to shoot the .44 Tracker, however the .357 Tracker with full house loads is a pussycat. The ribber grip, the weight of the revolver and the porting all go a long way towards softening the recoil.

I own a Raging Bull, but it's a .500 Magnum. I never have had a RB in .44 Mag but I did once own a M44 with a 6' 1/2" tube. I primarily shot 180 gr. and some 240 gr. fodder with it. While having a bit more oomph than the .357 Tracker in perceived recoil, it still wasn't uncontrollable or uncomfortable. I'd think the RB in .44 would tend to be very similar, given the specs.

 

[Gray_Wolf]

never shot .44 Tracker either but I have a Raging Bull in .44 with 1550+ rounds down the pipe

with full power reloads it's still controllable (due to porting and weight), but firing all 6 rounds really fast might give you a slight concussion

 

[captainamerica]

I intend to purchase a 4 to 6 inch barrel 44 magnum in the next year or so and shoot it often. I am worried about the wear/tear and stress on a Taurus revolver as opposed to Ruger or Smith. Is this worry founded or unfounded given the large caliber pounding and frequency of rounds planned?

Sorry to highjack this thread.

 

[Steelheart]

Well, between the three I'd expect that the Ruger would outlast a Smith or a Taurus M44 or Tracker. I'm not sure about the Raging Bull, it might give the Redhawk a run in 44 Mag.

But, with the Lifetime Warrenty on the Taurus, does it really matter?

I had a chance to fire a 44 Tracker a couple of years ago. Even with me being out of practice with magnums I didn't think it was bad. The porting dealt with the majority of the flip and the ribber grips did the rest. FYI I find a 629 (3" heavy or 4" slim) very unpleasent to shoot, even with Specials.

Steelheart

 

[chewybaca]

Hmmm. Great replies. Thanks. I'm thinkin' I may lean more toward a Raging Bull for price, longevity, and it sounds like I'll shoot it more since it won't be a recoiling as a Tracker. I've got a Ti-357 Tracker and the ports and grip really tame a 357 mag load. But I don't think I'd like it in a 44mag. We'll see.

 

[Gray_Wolf]

Well, between the three I'd expect that the Ruger would outlast a Smith or a Taurus M44 or Tracker. I'm not sure about the Raging Bull, it might give the Redhawk a run in 44 Mag.

Double tap makes +p .44mag load 40000psi, here what is says on their website:

This +P load is a real barn burner! For use only in specified guns (below).

Caliber : .44 Magnum+P THIS 44 MAGNUM AMMO IS RECOMMENDED FOR USE IN RUGER AND DAN WESSON DOUBLE-ACTION REVOLVERS, AS WELL AS THE TAURUS RAGING BULL, T/C ENCORE, AND FREEDOM ARMS. THIS AMMUNITION HAS A CHAMBER PRESSURE OF 40,000PSI. NOT FOR USE IN ANY OTHER FIREARM!

Bullet : 300gr. Controlled Expansion JHP

Ballistics : 1500fps - 1499 ft./lbs. - 7.5" bbl.

Box of 50rds

NOTE: they don't mention S&W or Single action Rugers...

 

[Steelheart]

I think the single action Rugers have a shorter cylinder than the double action models. Then you run into an overall length issue with the heaver bullets.

Various custom revolver manufacturers (Linbaugh comes to mind) have put some serious wildcat calibers into Ruger single action guns.

Regardless, I don't think I want to fire anything like that. Whats that quote, "A man's got to know his limitations".

Steelheart

 

[doorgunner]

I've owned two Taurus M44's in 4-inch. Both were ported, and both were a pleasure to shoot. I always fire full house magnum loads in them, and they are a handful, but nothing that I feel would bother the average experienced shooter. By the way, I installed Hogue grips on both before I ever shot them. I have no idea if it made a difference or not, but I like the feel of Hogue rubber grips.

My gut tells me that the Tracker in .44 Magnum is a little light for the inexperienced 44 magnum shooter.

 

[Tracker Backer C45]

The Raging Bull is the way to go if you are a hunter, its reputed to be very accurate for the smaller investment it cost.

The little added weight over the Tracker is better for contol...I would think.

John Taffin is happy with it, if he's happy I'm happy. (John Taffins Gun Diegest on 44s.)

TB C45

 

[50/50]

i've got a ragin bull 454 6 1/2" ,and it is has some beef to it.
with 300 gr cast and it is a pussycat,with the 330 gr corbon you know you are shooting ,but is not uncontollable,and with 45 colt 300 gr. cast it is a puppy. in fact if it weren't for my srh i'd keep the rb. i've got it centered and it is starting to creep toward the bull ring. i'd venture to say with 44 mag it would be a piece of cake even with a 4" barrel if one is available for the 44 mag. good luck dan.

 

[Mouse07410]

A novice question. I'm considering getting into .44M. I've never handled anything bigger than Colt 1911 .45ACP (must add that I myself am of a small frame ). Does it even make sense for me to consider .44+ calibers and guns like Raging Bull, or would recoil make it useless for me?

Is it true that the longer the barrel is (and the heavier the gun is) - the less recoil I'd feel? And that 8" barrel would make .44+ palatable?

Also, I'd plan to use this gun for fun shooting (not shooting fun ), target practice, and - if the need comes - for SD. Is RB usable for SD (inside the dwelling), or recoil plus weight plus slow return will disqualify it outright, at least for a small person like myself? (I realize that for SD .357M is a better round and caliber, and .357 gun is probably is easier to handle - but I'm not sure whether model 608 with 8" barrel is as accurate and reliable as RB.)

Thanks!