I’d appreciate seeing your 44-40 box pictures. My earliest box in this caliber is a UMC box that I included a picture of some time ago - perhaps in the old version of the cartidge forum. I have included it again here. I just love this old box, in spite of its being in 6 or 8 pieces. I keep it intact with styrofoam and plastic wrap. The latest of the patent dates at the bottom is Hobb’s Oct 31, 1876 primer patent

Guy - great label. Mine is not nearly that old. As I say, I think the winchester box is from just before WWI. It is a two-piece box with red label and black print. Hope it will scan. It won’t reproduce legibly on my Canon copier but I have never tried scanning it in color. I will scan them tomorrow, and have Joe put them on this thread.

John M.

Here are the box photos I promised. The Wincester box contains rounds headstamped “W.R.A.Co. .44 W.C.F.” and the UMC box has cartridges with the headstamp “U.M.C. .44 C.F.W.” If anyone can pin down there age better than I did, chime in, by all means. I don’t know a lot about this caliber, collector wise. I just like to shoot it, and I have a small collection of rounds to go with my guns. I only have four or five boxes in my tiny accumulation.

John Moss

I have a 44-40 cartridge headstamped REM-UMC 44 REM. It was supposed to be Remingtons version, without any reference to Winchester. Anybody know what the box for it looked like??

PS - Old Ammo Guy, that is another great box! :) :)

Yours too John.


John–I can help date the U.M.C. box. The nomenclature “.44 Winchester” with a 217 gr. FN Lead bullet was marketed up to at least 1901. I do not have the 1902 or 1903 catalogs, but in the 1904 catalog the name is changed to “.44 W.C.F.” with a 200 gr. FN Lead bullet. The only 217 gr. loading is called “.44-40 Marlin”.

John…as near as I could ever pin it down, the black, “filled in” UMC “Cough Drop” logo was used from about 1887 until 1905 or so. My 1903 catalog still shows the cartridge being called 44 Winchester, but, as Ron said, in 1904 this changes to 44 W.C.F. Your UMC 44-40 box would have been made during those years…Randy

Ray–Here are 2 pages from the Rem-UMC 1917 catalog listing all the .44-40’s. Note that they list it as .44-40 Colt L.M.R., .44 Remington, .44 Winchester and .44-40 Marlin.

I don’t know if the headstamps reflect all these names, but I have seen “REM-UMC .44 C.L.M.R.”, “REM-UMC .44 W.C.F.” and “REM-UMC .44-40 MAR”, so there is no reason to think they did not use “REM-UMC .44 REM” at this same time. It appears they considered the .44 Rem. and .44 Winchester as seperate loads.

I got curious and looked at a couple of firearm references re: the 44 Rem cartridge. Note: I said references, not catalogs.

They indicated that the M 1875 Remington SA Army revolver (1875 - 1889)was chambered for the “44 Remington” but that some late production specimens are known chambered for the “44-40”, and bring a premium.

If you look at the Rem Sporting Rifles for that same time period they are shown as being chambered for the “44-40” or “44-40 Winchester”.

My REM-UMC 44 REM cartridge looks and measures exactly like a 44-40. So what the heck does this all mean? Were the revolvers simply stamped differently but used the same cartridge? This alone would account for the “premium” in value.

But why would Remington consider the cartridge different from the Winchester? I initially thought the reason was to keep Winchester’s name off of the cartridges but that doesn’t appear to be the case.

I’d like to see a 44 Rem box to see what the label says.

Guy - I hope I didn’t go and hijack another one of your threads.


Were any of these used at Little Big Horn?

Ray–The .44 Remington Revolver cartridge is a completely different cartridge than the .44-40. It is a straight wall round with a 248gr. blunt round nose bullet. This round was not made after about 1887. If you have Suydam’s book “U.S. Cartridges and Their Handguns”, go to pages 202-203 for a discussion of the .44 Rem. Revolver round. Suydam states on page 203 “Listings of .44 Remington cartridges in catalogs of the early 1900’s refer to Remingtons loadings of the .44-40 Winchester cartridge, not to the cartridge shown here”.


Aha, that explains it. Thanks.

Now, why was Remington producing 2 identical cartridges with different names as your 1917 catalog shows?


Ray–Actually it was 5 different names: .44 C.L.M.R., .44 Remington, .44 W.C.F., 44 Marlin. and .44 Winchester & Marlin, High Velocity. 6 if you include .44 Marble’s Game-Getter Round Ball load. All of these use the same case and they all came in 200 gr. bullets. I would guess each had different ballistics.

Were the headstamps on the five “different” .44-40 type loads different too? Or, just the boxes and catalog listings? Clever marketing to convince dealers (and end users) to buy several boxes of “different” ammo instead of just stocking one type.

John S.–It appears that each type of 44-40 had it’s own headstamp as the only one of the 5 types I had not seen was the Rem and now Ray has come up with that as well.
It may have been “Just” advertising hype, but I am more inclined to think each series had different ballistics optimized for that gun.

There was also a REM-UMC 38 REM headstamp used on .38-40 WCF as well as the 44 REM Ray M. mentioned. The cartridges are not common.

It looks as tho the 38 REM and 44 REM headstamps were introduced in conjunction with Pedersen’s 14-1/2 rifles circa 1913, thereby creating some cheap advertising at the cost of thoroughly confusing everyone. JG

John Moss,
Regarding your Winchester box, Ray Giles & Dan Shuey (One Hundred Years of Winchester Cartridge Boxes, 1856 + 1956) say that this label style was used until 1920. The label date code obviously indicates it was made no earlier than 1909, and they show one with the same 11-9 top label and a 1914 side label. You might check the side label on yours to see what date code it has, which might help narrow down your date range a little better. I highly recommend this book. In addition to the information it provides, every box in it is in color, and there are hundreds of them. Pictures of Dan and Ray, the only problems I can find with the book, are even in color. Fortunately, they are on the inside back of the dust cover, so the reader is not forced to look at them every time he opens the book. :-)

Guy - I have the book on box labels. I just get lazy sometimes and let you guys answer the question for me! Sometimes I am so busy researching something for some other collector, or a police department, that I get lazy in researching answers to my own questions. I love researching stuff for others more because it gets me into areas of my library that I don’t use much. Yes, I know, sometimes that shows!

Hey, Dan isn’t so bad looking. think if I posted my own picture with everything I publish. Half of the IAA would be blind!

John M.