Why The Claim That 45 LC is More Versatile Than 44 Mag

COSteve · Post by **COSteve** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 10:45 am

Everyone here seems to agree that the 45 LC is a more versatile caliber than the 44mag. They cite that it can be downloaded to puff loads or loaded heavy to 'near 44 mag levels'. I don't understand why you don't believe that a 44 mag can't also be loaded lightly.

It seems to me that because the 44 mag has a higher pressure capability than a 45 LC and both can be downloaded so low that the bullet won't make it out of the barrel, that the 44 mag is more versatile. I understand that a 45 cal can be loaded really hot but it's called a 45-70.

What am I missing?

m.wun · Post by **m.wun** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 10:55 am

I have to agree with you.I know its fun to juice things up but most of the time I think
if you want more power or speed its better to go to a more apropriate cartridge.Its just easier
on equipment and cases last longer.I save the hotter loads for "special purpose" times...

Post by **Hobie** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 11:05 am

Not everything said on the internet is based on reason, but you know that. I think that many are really looking at the available factory loads. In factory loads the .44 Mag is really just the .44 Mag even though there is a Remington medium velocity loading. Handloading can give any cartridge a wide performance range (within reason).

rodeo kid · Post by **rodeo kid** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 11:13 am

All you have to do for lighter .44mag loads is shoot .44specials. That's what I do 90% of the time. And if you want to go in between, Buffalo Bore makes a warm .44special. God Bless.

RIHMFIRE · Post by **RIHMFIRE** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 11:24 am

To me its does not matter.....how versatile either one is.....
They both do pretty much the same thing....
Both have more than enough power to kill a deer or hog...
and i can make the reloads light enough for enjoyable plinking too!

olyinaz · Post by **olyinaz** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 12:06 pm

Well I think you're mostly right Steve. .44 actions have the benefit of a bit more steel and .45 loaders have the benefit of a bigger bullet to push so there's that consideration (it theoretically takes a bit less pressure to push a .45 bullet of the same weight to an equal velocity) but I have a question: Does the .45 have better heavy bullet availability and load data? That's about the only area I can think of where the .45 might have an edge.

Oly

Post by **Hobie** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 12:20 pm

olyinaz wrote:Well I think you're mostly right Steve. .44 actions have the benefit of a bit more steel and .45 loaders have the benefit of a bigger bullet to push so there's that consideration (it theoretically takes a bit less pressure to push a .45 bullet of the same weight to an equal velocity) but I have a question: Does the .45 have better heavy bullet availability and load data? That's about the only area I can think of where the .45 might have an edge.

Oly

A good point. I think the .45 Colt (in the rifles at least) USUALLY has a twist rate that better handles heavier bullets. 45Stomp (what's your handle now?) used 335 gr. cast over 26 gr. H110 (IIRC) while the 300 gr. is about tops for the 1:38" twist .44 Mag barrels. Not a lot of the .429-.431" commercially swaged ball out there either.

Pisgah · Post by **Pisgah** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:07 pm

One big advantage to the .45, particularly at the upper end of the load scale, is that .44 Mag performance can be equalled, even slightly exceeded, with lower pressures. This makes the use of heavier bullet a good deal less complicated, assuming the action you are using can handle the longer bullet. A handloader, with a strong firearm, can do more with the .45 than he can with the .44, even though the .44 is no slouch, and if I had to choose between the two the .45 would be my shoice.

JohndeFresno · Post by **JohndeFresno** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:16 pm

I don't know that the 45 Colt is MORE versatile - that would be setting my limited experience against a serious handgunner like Elmer Keith and others. However, as the owner (and a handloader) of two .44 Mags and a .45 SA convertible, I suspect that it is more versatile for MY INTENDED USES. I am impressed with the .45 for these reasons, within the limits of what I expect out of a large bore revolver:
1 ) The .452-.454 caliber versus the .429 caliber
2 ) Less pressure for similar loads, less muzzle blast
3 ) Less wear and tear on the handgun and barrel for most loads (due to less pressure)
4 ) Larger caliber with light loads appears to have the edge as a manstopper, with proper bullet
5 ) Adequate penetration and range for what I would use it for (no scope)
6 ) Good enough for hogs, deer, two legged vermin
7 ) Its history - nostalgia factor is a huge plus when shooting for fun!
8 ) Convertible cylinder in same gun fires all .45 ACP rounds - great survival factor
9 ) Related above - can practice cheaply with .45 ACP handloads, lead bullets!
10) Shooting standard to medium high pressure .45 loads, gun should outlast a .44 Mag with its standard "factory" pressure loads. I am using a Ruger New Model Blackhawk convertible with 4.63 inch barrel.

My favorite fun shooting load has been a 240 gr. Magnus #701M SWC-BB moly coated .44 mag bullet over 9.0 grains of Unique for a chronographed 1,078 avg. fps MV in a 6.5 in Taurus Model 44 Stainless (double action); it is very accurate (from my hand and as tested by my brother-in-law) and a joy to shoot. But the .45 Colt will probably romance me away from my pet load, once I develop my "perfect" .45 plinking load.

BigSky56 · Post by **BigSky56** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:21 pm

In any of the load manuals you will find that the 45 can push the same weight bullet as the 44 50 to 100 fps faster with only 80% of the psi of the 44 that makes it more versatile. I see alot of 44's for SD for hunters in bear country,S&W DA, but if hunting with a handgun they go 45 in rugers. danny

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:35 pm

Since I've decided that a .44mag with either a 240, or a 300 grain @ about 1100fps each will more than cover my needs, I've taken myself out of that arguement. If I need to open a can of serious whup-butt, I'll get some Garretts stuff...Randy's .44 stuff seems to be able to traverse a bear full length, so that's more than I'd ever need.

Catshooter · Post by **Catshooter** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 4:44 pm

"Why some claim the the 45 Colt is more versatile than the 44 Mag?"

'Cause it is Steve.

I don't know that it is actually more versatile, but you can get more power out of it. The case is bigger, and in vehicles of the same strength if you load both to the same pressure levels of course you can get more out of bigger.

The Winchester 94 is chambered in both. And you can load both to the same levels easily. I don't load to the very top, but the top is pretty impressive. Go to the articles section of this site and read what Paco has to say about the Colt in the 94.

There are guys shooting 450 grains out of the Colt in sixguns. I don't, and don't see any need, but you ain't gonna do that in the .44.

In a short sixgun, it holds quite a bit more shot for shotshell loads.

In something like the H&R single shot you can load bullets as long as the throat will allow. It would take some work, but I could get as big as 550 grains in mine.

Now why one would want to be able to do all this in one caliber is a seperate question and should be exaimined seperatley. I'm just answering the OPs question, don't throw rocks at me.

Cat

86er · Post by **86er** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 5:02 pm

I've shot a dozen animals with each from a handgun and rifle respectively (48 total). The 45 Colt with the same weight bullet, or within 10 grains, makes a greater visible impression and over the course of all the animals the 45 has proven to cause more terminal damage. However, each animal was in incident unto itself. There were multiple hits with both, DRT's with both, etc. All the shots in the right place were fatal regardless of which, so there's no clear winner there. Probably the visible difference and terminal difference is there for the same reason a 300 Win Mag with a 180gr has a greater visible effect and overall terminal effect than the 7mm Rem Mag with a 175 grain - the .024" bullet diameter difference, the same difference between the 44 Mag and 45 Colt. That doesn't make one stand out as better than the other. I've also shot a bunch of animals with a muzzleloader that fired a .429 or .452 diameter bullet at 1650 -1885 fps. This is similar performance that you would get with the metallic cartridge version from a rifle. Again the difference was negligible. I always put my faith and trust in the 45 with 300gr and even 335gr bullets because if the chips were down I wanted the most terminal performance I could muster from that platform. It really was a personal choice based on observations and speculation. You could give me either one for an intended task and I would tackle it with the same confidence. The only caveat here is that for human predators with 44 Spl or 45 Colt "defense-type" loads I'd choose different bullets and weights for each, where for big game I'd pick the same bullets in either the same weight or some of them come with 10 grains difference in the different diameters. So, to me they offer the same versatility.

Post by **AmBraCol** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 5:26 pm

Take a gander at this article, "The .45 Colt - Dissolving the Myth, Discovering the Legend" from someone who knows a little bit more than the average guy about high performance six (and five) guns... If, after reading the article, you "still don't get it", that's OK. We won't hold it against you.

http://www.customsixguns.com/writings/d ... e_myth.htm

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 5:41 pm

I don't think either has a definitive advantage; both have decent 'vintage'-style firearms for the nostalgic shooter, both have super-strong 'modern'-style firearms for the power shooter, and with the cast lead and jacketed bullet selection, many useable powders, and reloading, you can do about anything you need to do in North America with either cartridge. Both are available in 'hunting' handguns as well as 'concealed-carry' handguns.

There ARE some minor differences, and for a particular individual, perhaps some of those differences could seem 'decisive':

The .45 caliber guns could possibly use easily-available sabots in a pinch, to fire other projectiles,
The ".45 Colt" just sounds less 'violent' that the ".44 Magnum", if a jury is deciding a self-defense case,
The factory-made 'light loads' for .44 Mag are mostly in shorter .44 Special cases, and could gunk-up chambers,
While a ".45" shooter has to stock .452" bullets for handgun and carbine, the big rifles in ".45" (so far) use .458"

So, until I get a .460 S&W Lever-Rifle, and can use .452" bullets for the whole ".45" family, I'll prefer the ".44" family:

Rifle length Levergun - Marlin 336 in .444 Marlin with 4-16x scope
Carbine length Levergun - Marlin 1894 in .44 Magnum with Williams FP/Firesights
CCW - Charter Arms Bulldog Pug in .44 Special with Crimson Trace grips
Farm/Hunting - Ruger Redhawk in .44 Magnum with aperture sights

wecsoger · Post by **wecsoger** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 6:40 pm

All this over .023".

(grin)

rimrock · Post by **rimrock** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 6:53 pm

I have to say if you don't reload, .44Mag or .44special ammo is much easier to find locally. I like my .45C Bisley Vaquero. If I had bought the .44Mag instead of the .45C I think I would be just as satisfied. The lower pressure, lower recoil for mid range loads is why I bought the .45C. I do admit I forgot about .44 Special when I was learning. No turning back now as I've got the stuff for reloading .45C and too stingy to also buy a gun and stuff for .44Mag.

rimrock

.45colt · Post by **.45colt** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 9:22 pm

AmBraCol got it right with Linebaugh. If Ruger would have been around in the 1920's then the .44 mag would have prolly have took a seat next to the .45K. (KEITH) only the thinner cylinder walls kept Elmer from wringing out the .45 Colt. that being said Keith did several times write that the .44 special was the most accurate sixgun He had seen.

Old Time Hunter · Post by **Old Time Hunter** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 9:27 pm

45Stomp (what's your handle now?) used 335 gr. cast over 26 gr. H110 (IIRC) while the 300 gr. is about tops for the 1:38" twist .44 Mag barrels.

Why does everyone state this twist rate, neither my '94 Trapper or my '94 BlackShadow have a 1:38. One is 1:24 I believe and the other 1:20, bought both because of this.

2X22 · Post by **2X22** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 9:53 pm

BlaineG wrote:Since I've decided that a .44mag with either a 240, or a 300 grain @ about 1100fps each will more than cover my needs, I've taken myself out of that arguement.

We think alike on this for sure.

I use'ta kill a lotta deer and a few dozen big heavy Roosevelt elk with .44's and cast bullets from 240 to 330grs with zero losses or problems.

I imagine the same thing could be done with a .45. But anymore, I tend to run things at 255's at 900-1100fps from revolvers and 1250-1400fps from rifles and that gets the job I need done for me nowdays.

2x22=?

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 11:17 pm

Old Time Hunter wrote:Why does everyone state this twist rate, neither my '94 Trapper or my '94 BlackShadow have a 1:38. One is 1:24 I believe and the other 1:20, bought both because of this.

...and don't forget the Ruger's...!

I'm pretty sure that both the 96/44 lever-action, and the 77/44 bolt-action, have 1:20 twists.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 1:31 am

I say it ALL the time. For all the reasons stated above, plus the biggie for me, in my bullet cabinet, I have .452 bullets in the followings weights & styles (which ain't a near complete list of all available):
155gr SWC
160gr Big Lube™ TC
160gr SWC
180gr WFN
200gr SWC (short nose)
200gr SWC (long nose)
200gr RFN
200gr JHP (2 different styles & mat'l)
225gr TC
225gr JHP
230gr RN
230gr ball
240gr JSP
240gr JHP
250gr RN
250gr RFN
250gr JHP
260gr JHP
300gr JHP
300gr JSP
325gr JSP

In my book, that equates to a whole lotta versatility; how's that .44 do in bullet selection? Yep, pretty close, Hodgdon's lists loads from 165gr to 355gr, vs. the Colt's 155 to 360. And, as far as loads go:

.45 Colt:
240 GR. SIE JHC Hodgdon H110 .452" 1.600" 27.2 1483 27,900 CUP 28.0 1532 30,000 CUP

.44 Remington Magnum:
240 GR. NOS JHP Hodgdon H110 .429" 1.600" 23.0 1413 25,200 CUP 24.0 1522 36,200 CUP

Whoever sez, "..pretty close...", is short changin' the Colt.

txpete · Post by **txpete** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 2:53 am

with some people you can staple it to their forehead and they still won't get it.

Chas. · Post by **Chas.** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 5:17 am

txpete wrote: with some people you can staple it to their forehead and they still won't get it.

Right. Just like Ford makes a better product than Chevy - always has, always will.

buckeyeshooter · Post by **buckeyeshooter** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 5:22 am

COSteve wrote:Everyone here seems to agree that the 45 LC is a more versatile caliber than the 44mag. They cite that it can be downloaded to puff loads or loaded heavy to 'near 44 mag levels'. I don't understand why you don't believe that a 44 mag can't also be loaded lightly.

It seems to me that because the 44 mag has a higher pressure capability than a 45 LC and both can be downloaded so low that the bullet won't make it out of the barrel, that the 44 mag is more versatile. I understand that a 45 cal can be loaded really hot but it's called a 45-70.

What am I missing?

the fact a lot of people like the old time 45 colt. I shoot 44 mags. I do own 2 45 colts-- one unfired and the second bought to shoot blackpowder in sass. I have been shooting 44 mags too in sass-- rifle and handguns, but i don't want to dirty my nice 44's with black. I think the 44 is as versatile and I like it better.

gundownunder · Post by **gundownunder** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 6:33 am

Old time hunter wants to know where those twist rate figures come from and I think he may find them in Glen Fryxells article on the 1894 Marlin and they probably don't apply to the Winchester.

As everyone else has already said, they can both be loaded down till the bullet only just falls out the end, or both be loaded up to max loads which will probably be pretty much alike. This would then give the advantage to the 45 because of bigger diameter, lower pressure, and the ability to load heavier bullets.

At the end of the day I wouldn't think one would kill something that the other wouldn't, given equal conditions, but if you don't already have a 44 and you're tossing up between the two, you might as well get the better one.

Post by **Hobie** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 6:41 am

Old Time Hunter wrote:
45Stomp (what's your handle now?) used 335 gr. cast over 26 gr. H110 (IIRC) while the 300 gr. is about tops for the 1:38" twist .44 Mag barrels.
Why does everyone state this twist rate, neither my '94 Trapper or my '94 BlackShadow have a 1:38. One is 1:24 I believe and the other 1:20, bought both because of this.

Because for YEARS that was the standard. While there are others (such as the Rugers and Winchesters) they simply aren't as widely distributed. You can't get a 96/44 and we're only just starting to move some 77/44s (have sold 6 and have 2 in the racks) and the Winchesters just aren't as common as one would think they would be. One very seldom sees one. I had one back in 1973 but it was one of THREE I've seen in a gun shop in all these years (although I wasn't looking for one for years either). I don't know what twist rate the Rossis have but one sees more of those or the Marlins by a wide margin. So, right or wrong, this is the common perception and affects the way most (not necessarily the well educated shooter such as yourself) view the two cartridges.

Then again you'd likely be somewhat surprised at all the folks who feel that a .300 magnum is necessary for deer hunting.

cowboykell · Post by **cowboykell** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 8:42 am

Any cartridge that has been around for 130+ years....has to be better.

rogn · Post by **rogn** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 9:48 am

My personal preference is for the 45Colt, probably just because at this point in my life(?) Ive become interested in larger calibers(??). Right now I think a 300 magnum might just be adequate, but barely, for woodchucks. And as my eyesight works its way south it's so much easier to see the bigger holes in the target paper. As far as larger game goes, Ive only shot one deer with a 45 Cal and it was a frontloader. The nervous animal turned as the trigger broke and my shot was NOT AS INTENDED. In fact is was lousy. But the dooe only went a 100 yd before expiring. I think the real reason I like the 45 over the 44 is just nostalgia from all the westerns I watched as a kid. would a 44 caliber bullet have made any difference in the above bad example, sure maybe about 2 more yd. Its kinda like comparing a Chebby 3/4 ton to a Ford 3/4 ton, where ones rated at 300# more capacity than the other. The load still gets there and nothing's broken. So in the overall analysis, ignoring the academic differences, the conclusion is so what?

txpete · Post by **txpete** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 9:57 am

I like the 429 mag and own a couple but my fav is thumping cast bullets in a 45 colt bisley.

fisheadgib · Post by **fisheadgib** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 10:37 am

AmBraCol wrote:Take a gander at this article, "The .45 Colt - Dissolving the Myth, Discovering the Legend" from someone who knows a little bit more than the average guy about high performance six (and five) guns... If, after reading the article, you "still don't get it", that's OK. We won't hold it against you.

http://www.customsixguns.com/writings/d ... e_myth.htm

Thank you for that link. The article is now printed and has a home in my reloading binder.

Post by **AmBraCol** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:19 am

fisheadgib wrote:
AmBraCol wrote:http://www.customsixguns.com/writings/d ... e_myth.htm

Thank you for that link. The article is now printed and has a home in my reloading binder.

You're welcome. What John doesn't know about powerful, packable, practical sixguns isn't hardly worth knowing.

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 3:39 pm

I need another BFR....the 45-70 is better than the Colt or the .429 mag.....greater or same power, much less pressure and noise. I personally promise that if you can shoot full house .45s, you can handle a 525gr .459 out of a BFR, in fact it's not as painful, IMHO.

txpete · Post by **txpete** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 3:54 pm

blaine I think the meanest revolver I have shot was my smith mountain gun in 44 mag with full power cast loads.the muzzle jump and flames was something to see

.

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 4:58 pm

Wanna sell it? Something that horrible, and you being so old, I'll be glad to sacrifice 350 bucks so you don't suffer anymore with it.

txpete · Post by **txpete** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 5:40 pm

350.00 nope I couldn't rip off a friend

firefuzz · Post by **firefuzz** » Fri Mar 18, 2011 6:58 am

I think the .44 mag vs. the modern .45 Colt debate is like the .444 vs. .45-70 debate, either one will generally get the job done....it all depend on which one either party has. (in this one I'd lean toward the .44 caliber, of course the .45-70 just kicks the snot out of that wannabe .444

)

Rob

pdawg.shooter · Post by **pdawg.shooter** » Fri Mar 18, 2011 7:19 am

The 45 Colt, (I dont have one myself) outperforms the 44 the same way a 45.70 outperforms a 444. I have both in Marlins and the 45.70 is measurably superior to the 444.

Post by **Old Savage** » Fri Mar 18, 2011 10:07 am

These are 360 gr at 1350 out of my rifle. Record show that Cowboytutt also brought me some other loads that went over 1500. Pretty tough to equal that in a 44.

Catshooter · Post by **Catshooter** » Fri Mar 18, 2011 10:48 am

Indeed. That the .45 can be loaded to some serious power doesn't mean it has to be. I mostly run nine grains of Universal Clays in the Colt for both sixgun & rifle. runs about 1200 feet out of the Trapper. Pretty much does it.

Now if I were using the Trapper for silhouette that'd be different. Those Rams are heavy and at 200 yards out you need the power the Colt can delilver.

Cat

Chas. · Post by **Chas.** » Fri Mar 18, 2011 6:35 pm

BlaineG wrote:I personally promise that if you can shoot full house .45s, you can handle a 525gr .459 out of a BFR, in fact it's not as painful, IMHO.

Fella over on graybeard is shooting a 405gr 45-70 at 2500fps. I will promise that you won't shoot but one or two of those in a BFR.

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Fri Mar 18, 2011 9:10 pm

Why is .45 Colt more versatile?

'Cause not only can you load it UP to stupid levels (Hi, Ross Seifreid) you can shoot it out of more/older guns & conversion units as well.

Take That Dirty Harry...

El Chivo · Post by **El Chivo** » Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:22 am

Why is .45 Colt more versatile?

I would say it's because you can either call it 45 Colt or 45 Long Colt.

w30wcf · Post by **w30wcf** » Sat Mar 19, 2011 7:38 am

It also holds more black powder.

w30wcf

JohndeFresno · Post by **JohndeFresno** » Fri Mar 25, 2011 1:33 pm

AmBraCol wrote:Take a gander at this article, "The .45 Colt - Dissolving the Myth, Discovering the Legend" from someone who knows a little bit more than the average guy about high performance six (and five) guns... If, after reading the article, you "still don't get it", that's OK. We won't hold it against you.
http://www.customsixguns.com/writings/d ... e_myth.htm

For the first time, I have really studied this article, and I am concerned that one might just glance over it and assume that, because Mr. Linebaugh extolls very high pressure .45 loads, that they can safely shoot "magnum" type loads accordingly.

Unless I misunderstood Mr. Linebaugh's writings on the subject, it is NOT SAFE to push the limits of the .45 loads too high, unless you have TIGHTER CHAMBERS in your cylinder than the ones that come with your Ruger or most other high strength, modern revolvers. Mr. Linebaugh talks about the Seville in .45 Colt that worked well, but he also states that its chambers are tighter.

Just as a note of caution, before some reloader goes hog wild with a Colt .45 Load, please review these sections of the above cited article:

(From Linebaugh's article)
"'weak'. The only thing weak is their limited research on the subject. The cartridge case in any firearm is simply a gasket to seal the hot gases away from the shooter and the firearm. Yes, it's critical that this component be of best quality and design. But overall the firearm itself contains the pressure. The reason the .45 Colt case bulges is the chambers in NEARLY ALL modern .45 Colts are grossly oversize. The case simply has to stretch beyond its elastic limit to reach the support of the chambers of the firearm. The modern .45 Colt case measures .476 diameter at the case head web area. Most modern chambers run from .486 upwards to .490. This means the new case has to expand from .010 to .014 to seal the chamber and be supported by the firearm. It is then resized and the process repeated till the case fails. And fail it will, and more than likely prematurely due to overworking..."

"Our next test vehicles were the fine old Abilene models in .45 Colt. Only about 500 of these guns were made in this caliber by the New York firm. It went bankrupt and what was left of this outfit became Seville and El Dorado. When the Seville arms became available we soon went to work on these. The Abilene and Seville both were bored with minimum Industry standard chambers. the diameter being .483 but the chamber throats were still oversize at .457 diameter. This was a help with proper size chambers and the strength the guns offered over the Colts was the biggest breakthrough we had so far. Before in all other loadings the chambers and throats were so oversize that our powder charges, (especially H-110 and WW 296) would not even begin to burn properly with the recommended charges the load manuals printed. The tighter guns helped this somewhat but performance was still at best 3rd rate...."

"Since this load data and report is about Ruger Single actions lets take a look at these. The Rugers are undoubtedly the strongest most well thought out modern sixguns in the world. They are an engineering marvel but why they won't tighten up their tolerances and chamber proper size charge holes in the cylinder is beyond me. Ruger .45 Colt chambers are BIG. I have seen and measured hundreds of them and they are .486 to .490 in dia. This is the maximum allowed by the industry. The camber throats are .457 to .458. Recently the new Bisley models had .455 throats but the chambers are still oversize..."

* * *
Now, correct me if I'm wrong. But it sounds to me like you face disastrous consequences if you get too enthusiastic with some of the listed high pressure loads unless you change out your cylinder for a tighter-than-factory cylinder.

Post by **Old Savage** » Fri Mar 25, 2011 2:10 pm

Because it has more upper end power - like the 444 Vs the 45/70.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Fri Mar 25, 2011 2:35 pm

John,

I've read "The .45 Colt - Dissolving the Myth, Discovering the Legend" a couple times. And I've loaded some smokin loads for my Old Model Blackhawk with it's .... umm, lets say generous chambers, from the Hodgdons #26 manual. These loads produce 30,000 CUP according to the manual and are a good handful.
Not one case failed, no splits, no cracks, nothing. As a matter of fact, I've reloaded all of them several times since the heavy loads and none have failed.
I do not load Ross Seifreid level loads, I thought that was insane years ago when I read his article, and I still do. But he used a specially constructed custom revolver and that's the difference.

Much is made about the pressures generated by these loads, the long disproved legend that the .45 Colt case was weak, and the big chambers. I don't find those things to be a problem at all.
The one thing I do acknowledge is that with heavy loads approaching 30K CUP, brass life will be shorter, and the wear and tear on the gun ~AND~ your wrists and elbows will be greater.

What it comes down to is that the .45 Colt and the .44 Mag are both very versatile. But in opposite directions. To get added high performance loads from the .45 Colt, you have to load it "UP". To get milder loads from the .44 Mag, you have to load it "DOWN".

I'm of the opinion it's a wash, they're equal.

Joe

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Sat Mar 26, 2011 11:08 am

J Miller wrote: Much is made about the pressures generated by these loads, the long disproved legend that the .45 Colt case was weak, and the big chambers. I don't find those things to be a problem at all. The one thing I do acknowledge is that with heavy loads approaching 30K CUP, brass life will be shorter, and the wear and tear on the gun ~AND~ your wrists and elbows will be greater.

Yep. Lots of the 'problem' is simply that so many .45 Colt firearms have oversized chambers, so the brass is 'worked' quite a bit more.

J Miller wrote:What it comes down to is that the .45 Colt and the .44 Mag are both very versatile. But in opposite directions. To get added high performance loads from the .45 Colt, you have to load it "UP". To get milder loads from the .44 Mag, you have to load it "DOWN". I'm of the opinion it's a wash, they're equal.

Yep; same 'debate' as:

.45-70 vs. .444 Marlin
.30-06 vs. .308
.223 Rem vs. .222 Rem
...and many others...

With a velocity difference of +/- 10% or a bullet weight difference of +/- 20%, you're splitting hairs anyway.

The REAL issues are typically shot placement and bullet construction, anyway.

A .222 Rem steel-core bullet at 1,000 fps placed into the eye-socket and to the brain, would probably do more to stop a charging elephant, than a .460 Weatherby soft-nose a few inches in either direction. (disclaimer - I'm not an experienced African hunter...

).

On the other hand...

It is so much FUN to debate things like ".45 Colt vs. .44 Mag" that I can never resist...

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Sat Mar 26, 2011 12:33 pm

AJMD429 wrote:<snip>

It is so much FUN to debate things like ".45 Colt vs. .44 Mag" that I can never resist...

I don't know about hunting eliefants either so we'll leave them for 86er.

What I would like to do myself is acquire two revolvers of identical design, one in 44 Mag and one in .45 Colt and then run them through all sorts of tests with identical weight bullets pushed at identical velocities and see which works the best.
In the end I'll bet it's a wash.

Joe

JohndeFresno · Post by **JohndeFresno** » Mon Mar 28, 2011 3:09 pm

J Miller wrote:John,

I've read "The .45 Colt - Dissolving the Myth, Discovering the Legend" a couple times. And I've loaded some smokin loads for my Old Model Blackhawk with it's .... umm, lets say generous chambers, from the Hodgdons #26 manual....

Joe

Joe,

Once again I precede my statements by saying that I bow to your first hand reloading experience, which far overshadows mine. And you and I are in agreement. I did not properly clarify my concerns. I am talking about 35+k pressures that some have espoused for the .45 Colt.

1) I, too, rely upon backup data from authoritative sources, where lab and field testing has been done, such as Hodgdon's or Sierra's or Hornady's or Speer's manuals. Then I feel comfortable experimenting within reasonable limits from there. However, I would add (for the newbie's information) that there have been a few glaring errors in even these manuals, which are hopefully covered by errata updates if you can find them. So nobody should use just one source!

I offered a correction to Hornady Volume 6 (to the company) on load data that was never addressed to readers: Page 493 shows an 8X57 Mauser load (#3236 SoftPoint) with COAL of 3.250", when in fact it has to be around 2.975" to fit. Their 8th Edition shows 2.994", but holders of Edition 6 will still have this inaccurate information. More glaring examples have taken place with several, if not all manuals, over the years. As I recall, I made a correction to the still-current Lee Manual, as well; but I don't have those notes and don't want to thumb through the book to find it!

2) I use QuickLoad as one of my safeguard tools. By the way, the latest update includes IMR's Trail Boss powder, which earlier the developer reportedly told somebody on one of the gun websites that he could not compute due to its strange variances at different load levels. (One such example of that apparent misinformation is found at
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthread ... 577/page/1.

But I digress. With QuickLoad, I have added a caliber designation - "45 Colt Blackhawk" - in addition to the "45 Colt (SAAMI)" and "45 Colt (CIP)" loadings. The "Blackhawk" (for my New Model Blackhawk) carries the same load figures but it is set at 35,000 Max PSI, so that the charts allow higher pressure loadings before everything is displayed in red with the Max warnings.

I understand that the metal in the .45 cases is good, strong stuff. But after a point, I subscribe to the explanation of larger chambers allowing it to burst. If you place a paper bag against the wall and punch it hard and fast, it won't break; your hand will. If you have somebody stretch it tight and move it an inch away from the wall, it will break, because of the velocity of your strike and the lack of support against the back of the bag. My pea sized brain can grasp, perhaps a bit dimly, that the inertia of a body likes it to say that way, so even a stretchable and non pinned piece of metal will burst if not supported firmly, when hit with a high pressure, violently quick expansion of gases.

Having exhausted my mental faculties to talk all that pseudo-engineering stuff, I am unsettled when I see articles that claim 40,000 psi loads as safe and tenable for the .45 Colt. As for me, I would rather move to the Casull or some other caliber if I want to move to the next plane of power, and keep my hands, fingers, eyeballs, and other body parts intact. Sure, the gun might handle the super hammering effect of dynamite loads once or twice. Then, how about the third time? No thanks on the offer to play Russkie Roulette.

Here is an example. Maybe, since I just read the article once, there is a proviso somewhere that says, "THIS IS A TEST OF BARRELS, BUT DON'T TRY THIS UNLESS YOU HAVE PROPERLY SIZED CYLINDER CHAMBERS - FACTORY GUNS ARE NOT NECESSARILY SAFE." I didn't see it. Here, I admit that I just stopped reading it after glancing over it once or twice, looking for warnings, and seeing the ridiculously high 40,000 psi loads for the .45 Colt. It was written by a respected expert, John Linebaugh, comparing .44 Mag with .45 Colt - but I note in other writings by him (and not here) that he uses carefully smithed firearms - those with tight clearances, including tight chambers - for instance - as belabored above.

The article: http://www.customsixguns.com/writings/h ... ullets.htm

Granted that Mr. Linebaugh is still walking and has the use of his limbs. But does he actually and regularly fire these monster loads in a store bought (off the shelf) Ruger Blackhawk or Redhawk or similar .45 Colt? I sure won't; at least not if the pressures shown are correct.