I was going to get another redhawk in 5.5"(already have .454srh)but can't decide on caliber either 44mag
or 45LC.had a 44 redhawk and loved it,but 45LC would be easy since all .454 stuff would work with it .From what I see in load swap the .44 mag has a slight power advantage. How hot can a 45LC go

I SHOULD NOT ANSWER THIS BUT I GOING TOO, IN THE REDHAWK THE 45 COLT WILL OUTPOWER THE 44 WITH EASE, WITH THE RIGHT LBT BULLET THE 45 CAN BE PUSHED CLOSE TO 454 PERFORMANCE. IE 325GR @1400 FPS + THE 45 WILL DO WHAT THE 44 WILL WITH LESS PRESSURE. I LOVE THEM BOTH. I AM NOT GOING TO SAY ANYMORE IN FEAR OF GETTIN EATIN ALIVE BY THE 44 BOYS.           JIM.

I've shot the .44 mag since 1957 and have killed a ton of game with it, and still do.....but as real heavey weight handguns have come on the market in .45 Long Colt there has been a steady shift over it that caliber. A week on so ago, Sonnie and Linda Youngblood, owners of Manatee Sports in South Florida (one of the biggest down there) were up visiting. Since I like to keep up with buying trends, I ask about sales of .44 Mag Vs .45 LC.....They said the Ruger in .45 Long Colt sold 4 to 1 over the same in .44 Mag. Just what this shift means, I'm not sure since these are just general retail sales. It may be that the shooters can control the .45 LC more?
Best Regards, James

Having shot, owned, and loaded for several different S&W's, Rugers, and Colts in each cartridge, I still prefer the .44 Magnum. Yes the .45 Colt has more potential power at the top, but to what end? It is no trouble at all to assemble .44s that will shoot through a bull elk, breaking both shoulders along the way. The .44 has brained African elephant in the hands of Larry Kelly, Lynn Thompson, and many others. What more could you want from a handgun cartridge?

At the opposite end of the ballistic spectrum, I've found it easier to create ultra-accurate medium loads in the Magnum than the Colt. Then there is also the added versatility in using the .44 Special as well.

This is not to say that the .45 Colt is a bad cartridge. Far from it. I hope when I'm as old as it I'm going as strong! I just think the .44 Magnum is an awfully hard act to follow.

But really it's all a moot point, as everyone knows the .41 Magnum is the best bigbore handgun cartridge.

:biggrin:


(Edited by Bill Lester at 5:10 pm on May 16, 2001)

Grrrrrrrr...

My 2 cents -
I have shot a .44 for many years and I love it. I think the .454 has gotten a lot of press and people want to shoot it in a single action. They can't afford a Freedom Arms or acustom gun so they buy a blackhawk in .45 lc and hot-rod it. Thank Bill Ruger for making the strength of gun he does. That's all that keeps people from blowing themselves up. Now if he would just make a .454  5 shot single action!

As to .44 or .45 - Ford or Chevy in either case the critter won't tell the difference in what hit them.

I just got back into town and can't resist the urge to "jump in" to the string. *So far I have resisted leaving my 44 mags for the 45 Colt. *It is not because I find anything wrong with the 45 Colt. *What I can't find is where it does anything better. *I know these are fight'n words but hear me out.

Most reloading manuals that show data for the 44mag and 45 Colt +P show effectively identical velocites. *The 45 Colt does it with less pressure in identical guns. *Of course that's because the handgun has bigger holes in the cylinder and barrel with less surrounding metal.  All things being equal, the 45 Colt handgun simply will not take the same pressures. *Nothing wrong here, just parity with the same design and weight bullets. *When you step up to the Ruger Redhawks and Super Redhawks you get a big strength gain in both 44 mag and 45 Colt. *The 44 mag is still the stronger and the 45 Colt still does the same work with less pressure. *It was mentioned that the 45 Colt in a Redhawk will give 1400 fps with a 325 gr bullet. *The Redhawk will in 44 mag will do the same and more (I presume Jim was quoting a safe working load rather than a max load, just as I am). These are velocities over my chrono. * I have read with the author's great excitement that a 45 Colt will give 1500 fps with a 300 gr bullet. *In identical guns, the same is true of the 44 mag with the same style bullet. *

Though I do not see it on this wonderful forum, I have often seen writers compare their very custom 45 colts to very standard 44 mags. *It makes for big differences but the examples are built more on deceit than truth. *It's like comparing a stock car engine to one that has been blueprinted and runs custom pistons and timing. *If you take a custom 6 shot SBH in 45 Colt and the SAME gun *but in 44 mag, what performance level to you think you'll get. *Right, *the same performance. *I think the 45 Colt handles 350gr bullets better than the 44 mag but it appears the 44 mag handles 300 gr bullets better than the 45 Colt. *We are splitting hairs really.

When you go to 5 shot custom handguns, the story is the same. *The 44 mag can run at higher pressures because it is stronger. *The 45 Colt can do the same thing with less pressure... and it must do it with less pressure. *

For hunting big critters, the 45 Colt has a nice increase in melplat. *For hunting big critters, the 44 mag has a nice increase in sectional density. *As it has been pointed *out already, both have been well proven on big game around the world. *

I wish the 45 Colt had a big advantage over the 44 mag. *It's always fun to play with a newer and bigger toy. *When we keep the conversation to apples to apples, I can find no effective difference in the two. *Near as I can tell, the increased effeciency of the 45 Colt is pretty well matched by the increased strength of 44 mag handguns of identical make/mods. *There are certainly more subjective differences that are individual among each of us but that is true with everything. *

Both are versatile. *Both get the job done. *Match the bullets and handguns and the differences are too close to call. *

Just my 2 cents worth

God bless...................... *Bill M

The key here is this.  Given the same bullet weight, the 45 Colt does the same thing with lower pressure.  Lower pressure means less stress on the gun and the shooter through less recoil.  Which would you rather shoot, a gun that kicks like a mule, or one that does the same thing, and in some cases, more, with less kick?

Given the same bullet weight, the 45 Colt does the same thing with lower pressure



Assuming you can hit the same velocity. I've put an untold number of 240@1800+ and 300 and  330s @1500~1550fps thru a 44 SuperRedhawk. That > .01 inch of extra metal make a big difference (as does the long cylinder)

Its funny how the same pundents of the &quot;lower pressure&quot; crowd are also the same that graduate to the 475 or 5shot 45s(both of which are of much higher pressure). &nbsp;Why have they all of a sudden decided the the pressures are no longer a problem ( even though the same frames are used?<!--emo&???--><img src="http://beartoothbullets.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt='???'><!--endemo-->)


Lower pressure means less stress on the gun and the shooter through less recoil. &nbsp;


Do you think that a frame that can withstand a hot 475 will have a problem with a 44mag? &nbsp; &nbsp;

The 44 only has 8% more thrust at Pmax than the warm 45 so we aren't talking a whole bunch of difference.
Anyways, how many people do you know that have shot the barrel out of a Ruger 44mag or streched the frame?



If you want a performance oriented 45, get a 454.

If you want 44mag performance, get a 44 not a 45. &nbsp;

If you are asking the question of what is better then get the 44. The fact that one is asking the question in the first place tells me that they are &quot;newbies&quot; in a sense and would be better served by a round that can be easily found on the store shelf and cheaply reloaded.

There are no merits in discussing the ballistics or pressure of a hot 45 and the 44Mag. &nbsp;A 44 can be loaded hot too!


-CAL

Hey CAL,

You are da man. I could not have said it any better. I am referring to the pressure issue that you said from your post. &nbsp;

I currently own a 44, 454, and soon a 475 Linebaugh and 500 Linebaugh Max and still don't understand why would anyone want a hot rod 45 LC while a 454 can be had with a much better performance. Good shooting people.

Cheers!
Ming

Ok, here's my 2 cents worth from the peanut gallery. *My next Ruger Blackhawk will be a 5.5&quot; 45LC. I will not be loading it for T-Rex, but the handloads will be somewhat warmed over. *Absolutely nothing wrong with the 44 Mag. I just prefer the 45LC for more than adequate big-bore performance (bigger hole, more lead, lower pressure, ad nauseum). *No need for a 5-shot conversion or 454 Casull/475 Linebaugh performance when all I will hunt with it is whitetails and maybe a black bear someday.

But as Bill Lester eloquaintly stated: * &quot;But really it's all a moot point, as everyone knows the .41 Magnum is the best bigbore handgun cartridge. &quot;




(Edited by BlackHawk1 at 11:11 am on May 27, 2001)

Good Morning, Gents:
&nbsp; &nbsp;Interesting discussion. &nbsp;I'm mentally flipping coins on which one to buy myself.

Bye
Jack &nbsp;

Blackhawk 1,

I was wondering if anyone noticed that! Even though I've owned, shot, experimented with, and greatly enjoyed a bunch of .44 Magnums and .45 Colts, I still like the .41 best. My uses parallel yours- whitetails and black bear. To me the .41 is more than enough for either. Plus a bit more gentle and cheap to shoot compared to the .44 and .45.

Bill Lester,

I have a very soft spot in my heart for the most under-rated magnum. &nbsp;It was the right cartridge at the wrong time. While it's not as potent as it's bigger breatheren, it stands on its own merits, it really can't be compared to a .44 Mag or a .45LC, it has it's own niche. &nbsp;As you stated, a bit less recoil, a bit more frugal, and a bit flatter shooting.

There are a few of us .41 afficienados around, .41fan, Contender, you, and myself. &nbsp;I have a 6.5&quot; Blackhawk and a 14&quot; T/C Contender barrel, both in .41 Mag. &nbsp;What iron do you shoot? &nbsp;

At the present I am 41-less. Due to some tough economic times a few years back I had to sell most of my guns. I was down to one .357. I've only been able to begin rebuilding the last two years. When I do get another .41 I have about 1200-1500 assorted handloads ready to go. But in the good old days I owned two S&amp;W Model 657's, a fixed-sight Model 58, a Ruger Blackhawk and Redhawk, and GULP... I hate to admit I got rid of it... a Marlin 1894. To replace that one will be both a chore to find and at a premium once located.

This is kind of interesting, we start out with the 45 Colt/44 Mag discussion and end up on the 41 Mag, which is, as stated earlier, the best of the bunch. I'm getting ready to wring out identical Rewhawks in 44 Mag. &amp; 45 Colt, to compare them as fairly as possible. My first impression is that it really doesn't matter that the Colt operates at lower pressures than the 44, as long as the pressures are within the revolvers tolerances. I'm testing 310 (nominal) grain cast bullets, cast at the same time, alternately from the same batch of alloy. Powder will be from the same lot, as will primers. The only difference I really expect to find, is that the 45 makes a little bigger hole in the target. I doubt it will be a significant advantage. All my Redhawks (the 41 is a Redhawk too, but with a 5.5 in barrel), are capable of completely penetrating a deer, sideways of course, at 50 yards+. A bigger bullet won't help anyway, if you blow the shot.---------------------Bob

Pourboy...You are right on! The discussion of the .44 mag Vs the .45 Long Colt could, and will, go on forever! I also am fond of the .41 Mag! Any of the three, properly loaded is going to kill anything within reason graveyard dead! It it's too big for these three, one would be better with a long gun.It's beyond me why anyone would want to shoot handgun bigger than these three? I think when you get through with your tests....It's going to show that bottom line is which you just happen to like best.
Best Regards, James

James,

Two words,

357 OWC

:biggrin:


Regards,

:cool:

Contender...Equals two words...Dead Meat!
Best Regards, James

Contender,

Anxiously awaiting!

As James so succintly puts it, if any of the three can't get the job done you really should use a rifle or slug gun. For me the big Linebaughs, .454 and such are too much pistol. They are best suited to big, dangerous game. For me I'd be better armed with a long gun that I can shoot with greater precision, faster recoil recovery, and more power if needed. Now that's not to say anyone who shoots a .454, .475, etc. is a fool.

Things seem to have changed within the last few years regarding the issue of .44 Magnum vs. .45 Colt cartridges. &nbsp;My &quot;Complete Reloading Manual for the T/C Contender&quot;, Fourth Edition - Revised July 1997 has the following entries:

From Sierra Bullets: &quot;Questions of gun strength aside, .45 Colt brass is not as heavy through the web area as are newer developments, such as the .44 Magnum. &nbsp;As a result, we stronly recommend that the Colt be handloaded to pressures well below those of the more modern magnums.&quot;

From Speer Bullets: &quot;The 45 Colt case is not as strong as the 44 Magnum case and you must not attempt to load it as high, regardless of the gun model. &nbsp;The loads Speer developed are between 20,000 and 25,000 psi, or roughly half-way between standard 45 Colt and .44 Magnum pressures. If you need more power than this, buy a 44 Magnum or a 454 Casull!&quot;

Apparently, the 44 Magnum vs. 45 Colt is not as complicated as it appears? &nbsp;Are the magazine articles leading us down a dangerous path? Is the money I'm spending for a custom 45 so I can &quot;approach&quot; 454 loads being wasted? Or has the 45 Colt brass been redesigned recently? &nbsp;Somethings amiss here folks!

Respectfully,

DOK- I'm just not convinced that a 300 grain, .452 diameter bullet, with a meplat of .360, at a muzzle velocity of 1350 fps. is going to be so much more effective than a 300 grain, .431 diameter bullet, with a meplat of .320, at a muzzle velocity of 1350 fps. I ordered 500 Starline cases for my 45 Colt. Most of the 45 Colt madness seems to center around the writings of Ross Seyfried. If anyone else were to make these claims, I'd laugh my head off. Since Ross made the claims, I'll try it for myself. If I like it, I'll tell the world. You asked about brass. Ross prefers Federal brass, with Starline coming in second. Winchester was third, Remington was better than nothing I guess. But I've never liked Remington pistol brass much either. You pays your money, you takes your chances.-------------Bob

pourboy, read what JDJones has to say about revolvers in the newest American Handgunner.

Pretty much on the lines of being no practical difference between the 44 and 50 caliber based on animal reactions and wound analysis.

I'd tend to trust the fellow myself given his vast experience in hunting with handguns. I never read a complaint about his hot loaded 44 SuperRedhawks on even elephant and cape (although I'd assume he'd say bigger guns than any revolvers are better)

-CAL

Pourboy,

&quot;300 grain, .452 diameter bullet, with a meplat of .360, at a muzzle velocity of 1350 fps.&quot;

My point is that if Sierra and Speer are correct, you can't &quot;safely&quot; achieve the above critieria. &nbsp;My question still stands, are the Sierra/Speer comments correct? Or have the Federal / Starline folks improved the 45 brass to equal 44 Magnum brass &nbsp;-- improved design and/or material -- or have the Redhawks/FAs improved to the point it masks the 45 brass's problem. &nbsp;I'll bet I've read a dozen magazine articles that are adament about the 45 brass being equal to the 44 Magnum brass. &nbsp;Just wondering who's correct -- or if it makes any difference with the quality/strength of the new revolvers?

Respectfully,

My limited understanding is that brass acts as a gasket. The inherent strength is in the support provided by the revolver cylinder. The exception to this is where cylinders have oversized chambers (which is often true with .45lc). When chambers are oversized the brass doesn't have the support and the pressure can cause it to seperate. Custom 5 shot 45's should have tight chambers which allows somewhat higher pressures. The larger case size of the .45 also generates less pressure for an equivilent load vs. 44 mag.

Though I doubt a critter would be able to tell which one hit him.

There have been quite a few posts on the subject so take a look back through the archives, I'm sure someone has explained the principles much better.

DOK,

It's been a long while since I last sectioned any brass, but it is the only sure-fire way to answer your question. Grab some unfired .44 Mags and .45 Colts, section the rear half and compare. Personally I doubt there has been any significant thickening of .45 Colt brass by the manufacturers.

Realistically though one doesn't need 1350 fps to get great good terminal performance on game. A .44/240,
.45/250 or .44/.45/300 at 1250 fps will do just as well with equal bullets. This load level would be much easier on both gun and shooter regardless of the cartridge that launches the bullet. Recovery from recoil will also be improved over the higher velocity level. And as stated before, I too sincerely doubt an animal will ever notice the .22 difference in bullet diameter.

(Edited by Bill Lester at 7:28 am on May 29, 2001)

Mr. Lester,

I've had the opportunity to read most of the various items and postings on this site and I find your responses to be consistently excellent -- a maturity with style -- and class. &nbsp;

Whoever choses the Beartooth advisors sure knows what they're doing.

Thanks,

An interesting point is raised. The hi-po Colt loads are overloads, according to the Hogdon #27 manual. 20 gr. of H-110 in a 44 mag. are listed at 38,600 CUP, with a 300 grain XTP at 1312 fps. The Colt is listed as 22.3 gr. of H-110, 29,900 CUP and 1202 fps, with a 300 grain Sierra. It appears I'll need to do some serious chronographing in my research. I smell fish. Also, the 44 mag barrel is about 1 in. longer than the Colts. Once again, the difference in pressures may be an issue to someone with an older S&amp;W, but Ruger owners need not concern thenselves unduly as long as they're being observant as to their excess pressure indicators.-------------------------------------------------------------------------Bob

I don't know DOK about the advisor <!--emo&:)--><img src="http://beartoothbullets.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'><!--endemo-->, I think an animal will notice a .22 difference in diameter. &nbsp;A 65caliber might be just enuff to make it want to do a little less dancing the following Saturday night.


-CAL

Gentlemen
.44 Mag or .45 Colt. I have the answer. Pick up both guns, close your eyes and ask yourself. &quot;Who do I most feel like today, Clint Eastwood or Wyatt Earp?&quot; Add me into the .41 bunch also. The .41 Mag and .454 Casull are my favorite revolver rounds.
Dave

Gentlemen, don't let yourselves get 'wrapped around the axle' on the issue of brass strength. &nbsp;It is a moot point with any sort of reasonable load, IN A FULLY SUPPORTED CHAMBER. &nbsp;Example - as many people know, the .45 ACP in a 1911, with part of the case hanging out over the feed ramp, starts to bulge cases to a rather alarming degree before 20,000 PSI is reached.

As we all know, revolvers SHOULD have concentric, fully supported chambers, with no cutouts for feedramps and so on. &nbsp;I'll not state this as an 'always' as no doubt someone out there can find a contrary example, but it would be unusual to say the least.

Anyway, if you have doubts, think about the thickness of a case mouth, and ask yourself, is that 0.015&quot; of brass really contributing to the strength of the gun? &nbsp;Of course not... look up the tensile strength of brass compared to even the weakest steel alloys and it's obvious that the brass is not an issue in terms of how much pressure a chamber can safely contain.

The case head, of course, is a different story, but they are also much, much thicker. &nbsp;Again - even the case head is fully supported by the breechface of the revolver. &nbsp;In this case the 'weak' point is clearly the primer. &nbsp;Pistol primers can and do hold up even in the 40,000CUP range without failing. &nbsp;Measure the thickness of a fired primer and tell me that at any sort of reasonable pressures, the case head is going to have a strength problem. &nbsp;So the case head, unless butter soft, is not going to be a problem either.

It is true that the manufacturers of the .45 Colt revolvers could stand to tighten up their chamber dimensions. &nbsp;But - on my revolvers, where I would really like to see a chamber size of say 0.480&quot;, they measure out at 0.486&quot; instead. &nbsp;Hmm.... given that I've currently loading some 'weak' Remington brass on it's 9th or 10th journey through the dies, with no signs of failure, I'll conclude that this is not the huge problem that some make it out to be, at least not in the 30,000CUP range.

It seems to me what generates most of the debate is the extreme range of published loads for the .45 Colt in the 30,000CUP range. &nbsp;Sierra says one thing, Hornady another, then Speer has a totally different set of loads, and we have a lot of data in the Hodgdon #26 which unfortunately doesn't show the exact bullet make. &nbsp;Plus a lot of data for lead bullets that varies still more.

But there is a fairly simple explanation, which is repeated in the loading manuals over and over again, and which we've all apparently read so many times that we've stopped looking at it. &nbsp;That is, to paraphrase the manuals, &quot;your results will vary based on the components that you use&quot;!!!!

Sierra uses their bullets for their data, and so on.... they are not all constructed the same, they do not all load to the same OAL (meaning they do not all take up the same powder space), the companies use different lots of powder and primers.... so even when all companies try to come up with 30,000 CUP data they get different load data. &nbsp;It would in fact be more surprising if their data did not vary so much.

To complicate matters, some of our favorite powders for this exercise, namely WW296 and H110, tend to not burn uniformly much below 30,000CUP. &nbsp;So it's a delicate balance to get 'enough' but not 'too much'. &nbsp;In this respect the .44 mags and .357s and so on have a little advantage, they are burning the powder in the range that the powders were designed to work in.

But what you will notice is that they end up with remarkably similar velocities.... all in the 1200-1300fps range for 300 grain bullets in Ruger and other strong guns... that is really the end result that we are after.

Especially when we load lead bullets, like the LBT designs that minimize powder space intrusion, it is simply imperitive that we get a chronograph, use it, and measure our loads against it. &nbsp;That is not to say that this will be our only measure, but clearly it is one of the more useful indications of what is going on.

Anyway, to try and wrap things up, if we could sum up the debate, the .45 Colt may need slightly more care and preparation when feeding. &nbsp;In contrast you can buy an awful lot of very good .44 mag ammo right over the counter. &nbsp;The end result will be the same. &nbsp;I have both and they are both very useful.

Mike,

I must disagree and do so only because of my own personal experience with excessive handloading. I will not say what the load was for obvious reasons, only that it was made with once-fired .38 Special brass and 158-grain JHP's. This was during a period where I believed every cartridge was being vastly underloaded by the factories and was certain I could make it into a .357. Yes, I was very foolish in those days. To make a long story short, the first round blew a chunk of case head and rim to kingdom come, bulged the cylinder, and slightly flame-cut the recoil shield. Thankfully I was smart enough to wear heavy leather gloves, but even those were quite scorched.

So obviously the case was the weakest link in the equation. It gave first and caused the subsequent damage.

Bill, how can we obviously conclude the brass is the problem here? &nbsp;Am I missing the obvious? The brass has almost no supportive strength to it and only provides a &quot;gasket&quot; or seal.

Just by the brass having a blowout in no way causes the cylinder to buldge, that is just a condition where the loads pressure was greater than the cylinder (which happens to be greater than the tensile strength of the brass) &nbsp;It could be that the cylinder buldged, caused the brass to expand past its elastic limits and blew.


What type of gun was it? A 38 loaded hot or a 357 with 38's loaded hot?


-CAL

CAL,

Let me try to create a mental picture for you. Imagine you're looking at the rear of the cylinder as you hold the gun in a shooting grip. Of course the round that is in front of the firing pin is obscured by the topstrap, but think in terms of Superman's X-ray vision.

:wink:

Now Herr Brainiac Lester drops the hammer and very interesting things occur. Roughly 15-20% of the fired case's head and rim disappear. Completely gone except for a smudge of brass against the recoil shield, presumably as the chunk took off for parts unknown.

Now to me that is clearly a failure in the brass, possibly a defect in that particular case. If the cylinder's pressure limits had been exceeded I would think the entire base of the cartridge would let go. After all if the supporting steel failed then the much weaker brass would go quite easily. Using your analogy, the gasket blew from excessive pressure while the head remained largely intact. &nbsp;If it wasn't the &quot;gasket,&quot; then the entire &quot;head&quot; would've let go in dramatic fashion. A reasonable assumption?

The gun was a Smith &amp; Wesson Model 10.

Ouch!!!

Bill, I'd hate to think what pressures could have caused such a thing. &nbsp;

Then again all it takes is a tiny leak and the high-pressure gas just vaporizes soft stuff like brass. &nbsp;My guess is there weren't pieces flying out, just dissoved brass. &nbsp;But that's just a guess. &nbsp;Was there anything left of the primer?? &nbsp;I would guess that it's the first thing to go, 9 times out of 10.

Anyway, thanks for sharing, glad that you were not hurt. &nbsp;You have a valid point that everything has its limits. &nbsp;I did not mean to suggest in my post that .45 Colt brass or any other was indestrutible - far from it. &nbsp;But modern .45 Colt brass, in good condition, loaded to 30,000 CUP in a fully supported chamber (in a gun that will take it), should not be considered any great risk.

Mike,

I would agree that new .45 Colt cases in a stout firearm aren't much to worry about at ~30,000 CUP. Now after several loadings at that level, you may see some splits. I know I did when loading hot for the Colt.

You could very well be right regarding vaporization vs. a blowout, although to me it seems like the later. The damage was jagged and there was a linear smear of brass along the recoil shield heading out at 10 o' clock.
To me that indicates a piece of brass was blown out. I wonder how an older gun with recessed cylinder holes would've handled the situation?

The primer was completely flattened flush with the case.
The case damage never penetrated the primer area. Surprising eh? I can't explain it.

I too would like to know what the pressure level was for this load. After the fact I discovered part of the problem. I was using a different, longer bullet than I typically did. But still used the same OAL as the shorter 158's I'd used previously. Would the load have self-destructed with the shorter bullet? Who knows for sure.
But you can see the pattern of stupid things I did that resulted in this incident. I only mentioned it in hopes that it may discourage bad handloading practices. I did just about everything wrong- excessive loading, interchanging bullets w/o backing down in powder, and worst of all experimenting with hot loads beyond established data on a range with other shooters close-by. Yep, there were people to either side of me within 20 feet. Stupid, very, very stupid. But it was a good lesson. I've never wanted to exceed known data since, over ten years now.

Very enlightening discussion re .45 brass -- the following data is copied from the Linebaugh &quot;Big .45&quot; conversion information:

240-260 gr. JHP
1700 fps
&nbsp;
260 gr. cast
1750 fps

310/320 gr. cast
1600 fps
&nbsp;
340 gr. cast
1500 fps
&nbsp;
370 gr. cast
1400 fps

They don't reference pressures, nor do they indicate use of special brass, thus apparently if the revolver has tight tolerances, we can make exceptions?

Respectfully,

Obviously I should have referenced special 5-shot cylinders in addition to the tight tolerances, the point still being, the use of regular .45 brass.

Respectfully,

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><!--QuoteEBegin-->Now to me that is clearly a failure in the brass[/quote]

Let me repeat again, you cannot fault the brass with its failure in the cases you cite. &nbsp;

You load was obviously over the limits of the cylinder.

Mental picture time:

Put a std 38spl round in a 45 cylinder. What happens when you fire it. It fireforms to the much oversized cylinder and possibly tears where the case head ends if its elastic limits are reached. &nbsp; Is this a brass failure?

Don't be so quick to answer because the same round works perfectly fine in a correctly chambered 38spl.


In the case of your gun, if the pressures were so high that the cylinder failed (you said it buldged), the brass is gonna follow suit and form to the now oversized chamber. The brass ultimately expands so much that case head separates and blowout occurs. Had the cylinder not buldged, you have definate brass failure However because the cylinder did fail, you cannot place blame on the brass because there is no way you can determine if the brass would have blown had the cylinder limits not been breached.

Put the same round in a FA353 where you can assume the cylinder is not the weakest link and chambers are cut very tight. Do you think it would blow?

Keep in mind the case head is only as thick as necessary to account for the headspace of the cartridge. If you push the cartridge so that the rim touchs the recoil shield, all brass you see will be the case head. The case head *is* the breach plug and it will take upwards of 70000psi to upset it. &nbsp;If any brass forward the case head is subjected to any pressure without a support, it is likely the case will blow(even at mild pressures).

Just look at what happens in a copper crusher test in the area that the chamber is drill thru. Even with low 10k pressures, the brass has a nice hole round hole in it.
The second the cylinder opens up, a portion of thin brass forward the case head is exposed to pressure without any support. It will do the same thing a 45 with its feed ramp opened up too much will, the case will likely rupture.

This is not brass failure. It is cylinder failure. This is the same mistake that Elmer Keith made in blaming the 45 Colt brass of being weak.


If you don't take my word here is an excerpt from John Taffin's article <a href="http://www.sixguns.com/range/beyondthe44.htm" target='_blank'>http://www.sixguns.com/range/beyondthe44.htm</a>:

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><!--QuoteEBegin-->The problem for one hundred years was the fact that the sixguns chambered for the .45 Colt were relatively weak. Examine a Colt Single Action Army or any of the replicas now being offered in .45 Colt and one immediately sees paper thin walls between chambers. No one with the least bit of common sense whatsoever would try to load these sixguns heavy. A very young Elmer Keith may have inadvertently started the problem of 'weak brass' in the .45 Colt as one of his first, if not the first, articles he wrote concerned blowing up a .45 Colt Single Action. Everyone soon forgot the details, namely that he was probably using a worn out black powder sixgun from the 1880's, his cases were stuffed full of all the black powder they could hold and a .458&quot; .45-70 rifle bullet was then seated over the charge. This in a sixgun made to handle .454&quot; bullets. The top strap blew and Keith looked for a better cartridge and found the .44 Special, which he had never seen up to that time in 1925, and the rest, as they say, is history.
[/quote]

-CAL

There is another downside to pressure other than the &quot;gun blows up&quot;. &nbsp;Mr. Lester referenced one that hits home to me -- &quot;easier on the gun&quot;. &nbsp;My cases retracted O.K., the primers were O.K., but the 轜 S&amp;W wasn't O.K.. &nbsp;I worked up the load (21.0 Lil'gun/325gr bullet) in my Blackhawk and everything was O.K. -- no indications of excess pressure. &nbsp;Because the S&amp;W Masterhunter has been the more accurate gun, I used it to verify the Blackhawy accuracy results. &nbsp;The S&amp;W cylinder unlocked at least 80% of the time, that is, after the shot was fired, the cylinder was not locked and could be rotated forward or backward without opening the cylinder. This effect is now being displayed in lower pressure loads that previous had not been a problem. &nbsp;I will be honest with S&amp;W when I send the gun in, and will pay for being not too bright. &nbsp;Obviously, there are downsides and indicators &nbsp;to pressure other than primers and hard retraction that are expensive. So there are indicators for cartridges, but what's the indicator for the revolver --and I suspect &quot;use Ruger&quot; is an oversimplified answer, maybe it's don't exceed max. loads?

On the other hand, I never came back from a motorcycle trip that the success of the trip wasn't based on the number of near misses as well as the beautiful scenary :-)


Respectfully,

Yes DOK, you can shot a gun loose. &nbsp;The S&amp;W symptom you had is fairly common hence the introduction of the endurance package. &nbsp;

For example, my DW 445 has a 100ksi frame and a 70ksi cylinder. &nbsp;The Smith has a cylinder that is as strong as a blackhawk but a frame (pre endurace mod)that can barely withstand 40ksi over a period of time.

So yes, if you shoot a gun loose. You must take that into account if you got over spec.

-CAL

Cal,

I've not seen reference/information pertaining to the Smith's pre-endurance mod you reference. Are you referring to an upgrade to their off-the-shelf revolver that has occurred recently, or an option that's available? &nbsp;My MasterHunter is only three years old and I thougth had all the latest mods. available.

Appreciate your response and I'd be interested in your shooting background, your inputs are always precise and to the point and sure cover a lot of ground.

Thanks,


Dan

The July, 2001 copy of &quot;Guns&quot; magazine has &quot;Taffin's Top 30 .45Colt Handloads&quot; article.

Regards,

DOK,

Was that Lil' Gun load you referred to in your Smith used in the 44 Mag cartridge?

If it was, I checked Hodgdon's data and they list 17.7 grs. of this powder as a max loading with a Hornady 300gr. XTP bullet and at 37,600 CUP.

21 grs. is considerably over that max loading, especially with a bullet weighing another 25 grs. more.

While we all refer to the strength of the metals in the gun being able to take the pressure, it is not the be all and end all of the story.

What you are experiencing with the Smith is a failure of one or more MECHANISMS of the pistol due to overloading the cartridges fired in it. I would bet your loads are approaching the mid to high 40 thousands CUP range or perhaps more. And that's just it. There is virtually no sure way to tell what pressures are being generated in that loading in a practical way for the home reloader.

I remember reading about Ross Seyfried having his 45 Colt loads tested that he had been using for quite a long time and learning to his amazement that they were pushing 50,000 CUP+. All this without showing any inordinary pressure signs.

Regards,

:cool:

I'm glad Contender mentioned Seyfried's comments. I thought I remembered him writing this, that once tested Seyfried's loads &quot;surprised&quot; him, but wasn't certain. I didn't want to mention it and be wrong, thus looking rather foolish in the process. It wouldn't be the first time the grey matter got a bit hazy when it came to recalling which gun writer said what.

But to the point at hand. 50,000+ CUP is an awful lot of pressure even if you consider the strength of the Ruger Blackhawk. When you consider the questionable amount of improvement in realworld terminal ballistics, why would you batter perfectly good guns by excessively loading the .45 Colt? If one really believes there is much to gain over the .44 Magnum, why not get a 5-shot Freedom Arms .454 and be done with it? A much better situation all around. Unless one is fooled into thinking a hotrodded Blackhawk can be made into a poor man's Casull.

Contender,

I afraid it was Lil'gun at 21grs.. I had followed a trail on the web to a site that had had good success with that powder in the .44mag.. &nbsp;The site information listed the bullet weight and velocity, but not the powder weight. I asked about the powder load and it was 21.0 -- but the gentleman specifically stressed it was a heavy load and to start lower and work up. &nbsp;I used the Super Blackhawk, starting two grains lower and, using the Chrony, worked up to 21.0. &nbsp;The velocity increased linearly and no warning signs were visible to me. &nbsp;So, just to test the accuracy and use another gun as validation, I used the S&amp;W -- didn't make it through the first cylinder before the unlocking occurred. So, as you said, sure appears that while I didn't exceed metal limits, sure did with the mechanism. &nbsp;As CAL said in his recent post, that's one of the more common risks you take when you exceed specs and I will be honest with S&amp;W when I send it in -- not that they wouldn't know anyway. One of the mistakes I also made was the assumption that the reduced pressure (Lil'gun vs. H110) would help. &nbsp;Further checking reveals that pressure reduction in the .44 is not nearly as significant as in the .454.

I posted the problem to forewarn others that there are risks other than flying metal. Obviously not one of my smarter or prouder moments -- corny as it may sound, my guns are family to me and the Smith is a very nice revolver -- not to mention the 轜 I spent for it. &nbsp;The first thought is to stay with the Blackhawk/Redhawks for testing...... but realize they have limits also.

Bill,

You're absolutely correct with one exception. You were being nice when you said, &quot;fooled into thinking a hotrodded Blackhawk can be made into a poor man's Casull.&quot; &nbsp;At my age (63), any error in judgement was 100% my doing ... worse yet, I have a .454 and custom best grade five shot .45 and FA .454 on order, so it wasn't the money. &nbsp;I'm afraid that for better or worse, I'm an unrepentant tire squealer (but I do keep the car radio down :-). &nbsp;I'm lucky in being retired so I get to the range early when nobody is there and do not do this kind of testing with neighbors around.

Appreciate the comments,

DOK,

Actually I wasn't pointing fingers at you, rather the many souls who think they're getting a Casull on the cheap. From your previous posts I knew you already owned a .454.

I took my Rossi Mod. 92 and Colt Anaconda, both 45 Colt, out to the range yesterday to do some load testing and to get away from suburbia. The site that came with the Rossi was a piece of junk, so I had replaced that with one I got from Dillion, and that needed to be adjusted.
I went out with sack full of ammo loaded with a 300 grain gaschecked Saeco bullets, sized .454, and 19.5 grains of H110. I have plans to use these for some feral hogs in S.C. next fall.
The rifle range was cluttered up with guys shooting AR15s so I went over to the pistol range and started with the Colt. It shot very well, but the muzzel flash was pretty impressive even in the day light. I borrowed my buddies Taurus Raging Bull to try the loads in while I was there. That pistol loved those loads, also.
Once the guys with the pea shooters finished up I took up shooting the rifle. The mod. 92 seemed to like the same load but the new site proved to be loose and required a bit of field expediate repair to finish up the afternoon. I'll work on it some here at home and take it back next weekend for some more testing.
The high light of the day proved to be the Winchester 1886 in 45-70, shooting a 350 Grain gas checked Saeco.
I'll save that for tonight, I had a reciever site installed on.
Jim

Arkypete,

Curious, with the background from your posts, do you shot Cowboy? If not, sounds like you're well prepared.

Respectfully,

DOK, personally I *myself* would try the 21gr load in the my Smith without fret, but not longer term. &nbsp;As a backup round nprblm at all. &nbsp;The only one I have currently is a PC 629VComp and it is a shooter. If it loosened up too much I'd really be disgusted. Having a ball detent lockup and all the other goodies helps a little (as does the mini expansion chamber comp), I don't feel like sacrificing it even though I have a little gunmption that it wouldn't have any problem at all.

Especially if Lilgun is true to its nature and is at a lower pressure than H110 &nbsp;with &nbsp;these charge amounts. Shooting it from the 4incher may not be really fun on the thumb though.


-CAL

Cal,

My primary interest in Lil'gun was the reduced pressure. I noticed that Hodgdon offers the following data for the .454:
.454 &nbsp; 300gr FA JFP &nbsp; H110 &nbsp; 1716 &nbsp; 53,700CUP
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Lil'gun 1746 &nbsp; 45,900CUP

The pressure reduction realy stood out. So I assumed
(at work we always said assume = ***-u-me) that the same level of reduction would be available in the .44mag. -- and of course I didn't check the Hodgdon data for the .44, which is
.44 &nbsp; &nbsp;300gr STP &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; H110 &nbsp;1325 &nbsp; 38,800CUP
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Lil'gun 1280 &nbsp;37,600CUP

So my conclusion is I'm still interested in Lil'gun for the larger bore/bullet weights but don't see any advantage for the 44mag.. Every once in a while, I've noticed a posting that references &quot;measure twice, cut once&quot;, maybe less &quot;assuming&quot; and more measuring?

Dan

I'm from the moderation in all things crowd.
Back when I started the handgun thing I had experience with the 45 auto. Eastwood had done Dirty Harry and a 44 mag was not to be had.
I bought a Ruger 45 Colt and played with it for a lot of years. I got a bunch of molds and several die sets. Then several more 45s by S&amp;W and piles of brass.
I have 44 available and shoot it occasionally. I don't like the recoil and blast. When I shoot a lot of 44s I get a wrist ache where I don't with a like number of 45s.
When I go out to shoot I'm burning up 200 or more rounds. There's a bunch of guys shooting and we end up with a impromtu match going on. The 44 would have worn me out.
I feel that if I do my part in aiming the target will not know what I shot it with.

Jim

Well, I was going to keep my mouth shut on this one cause these &quot;your favorite&quot; things have been known to get rather bloody!LOL! But it seems to be going quite well so for what little its worth, I prefer the 45 Colt....Why?...'Cause it IS the 45 Colt!No great scientific reason, I just like it!

SSGT
Like to old time cowboy said when asked why he carried a 45 Colt...........................
Because they don't make a 46 Colt!
Jim

Arkypete,

You said, &quot;I'm burning up 200 or more rounds. There's a bunch of guys shooting and we end up with a impromtu match going on. The 44 would have worn me out.&quot;

When I was working up a .44mag. cowboy load, I found 4.3grs. &nbsp;of Clay with 200gr. bullet to be accurate and so mild you have to listen for the sound to know it fired! The famous 8.0grs. of Unique is still mild recoil and certainly manageable for 200 rounds or more. I'll typically shoot 100 rounds of 8.0 to 10.0 Unique and 50 rounds of 95/100% max. (per the book) loads.

So I appreciate the reasoning for the .45 usage, I understand the &quot;romance&quot; attached to the .45, but do respectfully suggest you can use the .44mag. for the same enjoyable competitions and have additional options available should you decide to abuse yourself :-)

Respectfully,

DOK, How are are? &nbsp;I agree with you 100%. &nbsp;I had a 44 mag, and it was great. You can load them hot or mild. &nbsp;I took mine when I went backpacking in bear country (griz that is). Within reason, if a shot goes clean thorugh a target then it doesn't matter much what you hit it with. &nbsp;Wound channel is important, however, especially when there isn't complete penetration. What your aiming at is also... a rabbit or an elk. &nbsp;I liked the 44 mag because you could also use 44 specials in it if you so chose. &nbsp;Personally, if I'm going to point a gun at something big and dangerous, I want it to be very scientific and not in the least romantic. &nbsp;By the way, I'm still waiting for some components before I try out my RB. Also could you let me know what distance you were shooting when you did you tests?

God bless,

Southpaw,

The velocity tests I posted were with 50yd targets. I've watched your deliberations re fire lapping and will be interested in what you do. I haven't tried to slug either of my Taurus .454s --same problem you referenced, the muzzle brake.

I'm shoveling river rock this week, but next week I'm going to load 10 rounds (.454) each of 5 different primers to see the impact on velocity. I remember when experimenting with the primers for my .44mag loads how amazed I was to find a different primer could move the point of impact 1 1/2&quot; at 25yds! And with the sensitivity of igniting the H110 powder for the .454, I thought I'd see what the Chrony tells me -- as well as any accuracy impact.

Respectfully,

DOK, Thanks for the info. &nbsp;By the way if you're using H110, Hodgon has big cautions about not reducing loads more than 3%. &nbsp;They caution about inconsistent ignitons. &nbsp;As far as the lapping goes, I think I'll do as Jack suggests, shoot a few hundred rounds and see what happens. &nbsp;I don't know if you'ver heard of a guy named 'Greybeard'. &nbsp;He has a site at 'www.graybeardoutdoors.com' click on product tests. &nbsp;He's tested ammo (jacketed and hard cast) from Corbon, Winchester and Buffalo Bore in his RB and FA 454's. &nbsp;He also, did a test on his new RB 8 3/8&quot; with his own cast slugs. &nbsp;I mentioned this before, but like you he's getting 2-2.5&quot;, or less, at 50 yards, less than 5&quot; at 100 yards with open sites. &nbsp;From everything I read he indicates the same accuracy for the RB as for the FA. &nbsp;John Linebaugh, when talking about accuracy from his custom guns, says that he's gotten 1 1/2&quot; at 25 (TWENTY FIVE!) yards for the 475, 4&quot; groups at 100 yards. &nbsp;He also says he doesn't guarantee that accuracy for every gun. &nbsp;It sounds like are our RB's (by the way I've also purchased an 8 3/8&quot; and will pick it up in about 2 weeks) are capable of shooting in the same accuracy range as the custom guns. &nbsp;The only concern for me is excessive barrel fouling. &nbsp;...DUH, me!... Why didn't I just ask you! &nbsp;What did you see? Did you find a lot of fouling? &nbsp;If I can get 2&quot; inches at 50 with minimal/ normal fouling, I'm not going to mess with with a good thing.

God bless,

Southpaw,

I've never had a problem with fouling and I agree with you, shoot them for a while and observe the results. I would assume you will do the normal break-in of shoot one, clean, shoot two, clean, etc.? Will you use jacketed or lead to do the break-in?

My results have been good enough that I've never been concerned about slugging the barrel. &nbsp;With the muzzle break issue -- wonder if a person couldn't find a soft lead, round ball used by the black powder shooters that would make it easier to slug the RB?

Anyway, anxious to see your results.

Respectfully,

Like everyone elses seems to feel I also was going to stay out of this one, seems to be a lot of very strong opions in this. &nbsp;However; I just couldn't let it go anymore.

I have seen people write about the weak brass, I have seen people write about the pressures, etc.
These are all very good points in their own right.

#1 If Ruger would have had a single action in 45 Colt when Elmer Keith was working up hunting loads we wouldn't have the 44 in the since that we do now. &nbsp;Sure someone would have made it but it never would have been as popular as it is now. &nbsp;But Elmer new the benefit of the larger caliber and that is why he tried the 45 first.

#2 From what I have seen from Linebaugh, if Ruger would make their cylinders with a .480 diameter chamber then this would be a 40,000 cup gun. &nbsp;And Oh what the 45 does with 40,000 cup. ( And this isn't a custom high dollar gun). &nbsp;Many quality smithys &nbsp;do re-chambering of a tight 45. &nbsp;Using a 44 cylinder and punching it to 45 with a tight .480 dia. reamer.

#3 Diameter of the 45 is .452 the diameter of the &quot;44&quot; is .429. &nbsp;This is not .010 difference this is .023. &nbsp;The 45 rounds its caliber down and the 44 rounds its caliber way up.

#4 Brass can be loaded many times even with 30,000 cup loads. &nbsp;Now this is the WW brass. &nbsp;And when it does fail all that is does is crack at the neck from being crimped so many times. &nbsp;Just like the 475 and the 44. &nbsp;Of course you still have to use common sense when inspecting your brass.

I realize that many people truly love their 44's and that is great but the 45 can be loaded way down and way up just like the 44. &nbsp;And it is absolutly impressive to see the effect of the 45 on a game animal. &nbsp;Even a very slow 300 grain punching through a large bear. Wound channel is very impressive!!! &nbsp;

Well that is my 2 cents worth from the peanut gallery

Well I guess here is my input. There is a lot of debate on the 45 vs the 44 and I will continue until I am old and grey with out a winner both rounds are out standing if loaded right and both can be cripplers if used wrong. The 44 can reach amazing speeds the same can be said for the 454 but what does that speed do? Nothing that I can see the bullet doesn,t act like a rife mushrooming and dumping the energy in the animal. Pistol bullet normally cut a hole clean throught the animal leaving a wound chanel to bleed. Veral smith of LBT designed pistol bullets I have read his book and talked to him in my conversations with him I sold my 44 and bought a 45 for the simple reason the 44 with a LBT bullet will cut a .429 hole and cause a 1 1/4&quot; to a 1 1/2&quot; wound channel the 45 will cut a .452 hole and cause a 1 3/4&quot; to a 2&quot; both round will down any animal but I'd rather have the bigger hole. Also if you look on sixgunner under penetration tests from linebaugh seminar &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;44 penetrated 27&quot; 250gr KT at 1200fps
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 45 penetrated 38&quot; 300gr LBT at 1180
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 454 penetrated 34&quot; 300gr JFP at 1625
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 475 penetrated 40&quot; 420gr LBT at 1050
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 500 penetrated 38&quot; 435gr LBT at 1270
I don't see any of these loads that will stay in an animal do you? Well I've sturred the pot enough I'd better go. Have a nice day and god bless.

I read the many responses on this interesting subject and appreciate that the conversation has been conducted with first class input, both from a courtesy and content standpoint. A conversation we could offer the general public and I think they’d be favorably impressed.

My only subject comment is that it appears the .44 and .45 people are talking “past” each other. The .45 talk about the hunting prowess and the .44 people talk about speed potential (slight exaggeration on my part). The .45 folks say “don’t need that extra 100fps – and they may well be correct if you’re assuming hunting deer is the criteria – might even be better! And it may well be. *But I suspect hunting isn’t the only criteria, or maybe even the main one for many .44 shooters. *I have 300 h.p. in my automobile, do I need it, nope, but I want it. *I shoot .454 Casull, about 100/150 a week. *It hurts my hands and sometimes I don’t thoroughly enjoy the sensation, but I love the performance. Didn’t say it was mature, didn’t say it was logical, I said, “I like it”.

So when we say, “this one is better”, we may want to define our criteria and it all may be simpler. *Just a thought.

Dan


(Edited by DOK at 5:49 am on July 13, 2001)

Well put Dan!

It comes to mind that there are three different four-letter words that seem to have synonomous meaning when discussing firearms and fishing gear.<ul>
<li>Need
<li>Want
<li>Like

When we consider &quot;needing&quot; a new firearm chances are we would either like a new one, or simply want something different. *It's funny, having the type of business that I do, I have found it easy to justify the &quot;need&quot; for a new gun, (testing you know), but in truth it's just fulfilling a Like or Want. *I think the same is true about the .44 Mag or .45LC.

In truth if we all posessed a .30-06, 12 guage shotgun and .22LR we could hunt anything in North America for the rest of our lives and be quite well prepared to harvest any game efficiently. *However, gun companies would go out of business, gunscribes would lose their jobs as gun magazines lost their appeal, bullet makers like ourselves would be at a great disadvantage and campfire discussions would become boring as well.

Come to think of it, perhaps those three, four-letter words are synonomous!

God Bless,

Marshall

A true story (slightly modified)

Three shooters about to be executed

Three &nbsp;handgunners, one a .357mag shooter, one a .44mag shooter, and one a .45Colt shooter were about to get executed by firing squad.

To create a distraction, the one .357 Shooter yells, &quot;TIDAL WAVE!&quot; &nbsp;While the firing squad was looking around the guy escapes.

Then the .44 Shooter yells, &quot;FLASH FLOOD!&quot; &nbsp;The firing squad gets distracted while he escapes.

Then the .45 Shooter comes up with a fool proof way of
distracting them and Yells, &quot;FIRE!!!!!!!!&quot;

Very respectfully submitted,

Dan

So what you are saying Dan is that the .45 shooter was Promoted to Glory while the .357 and .44 shooters had to skulk around like escaped convicts?

Scotty

Coldfingers,

Absolutely, exactly what I had in mind (actually, a much better response than anything I could have thought of).
If the .45 shooters are that quick, I may have to convert.

Good Shooting,

Dan

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><!--QuoteEBegin-->44 penetrated 27&quot; 250gr KT at 1200fps[/quote]

I can't think of the last time I shot &nbsp;a 44mag at 1200fps and considered it a representative load for the caliber. Especially when you have &nbsp;300gr bullets at almost 1400fps as a factory load.

CAL,
I think that the 250gr @ 1200 fps represents the caliber comparitive to the rest of the list. &nbsp;These velocitys were probably the result of true chronograph rather than a load listing a 7 1/2&quot; pressure barrel.
Granted they could have used a different bullet in the 44 but this bullet is what the 44 has made its reputation on in the past 30 years.

This discussion reminds me somewhat of the Ford/Chevy arguements down at the race track, only w/o the bad words. *I just know that in my case when I desire more power than the .44 mag delivers I pick up my .454 or .480. *:biggrin:
Good Shooting
Mark

(Edited by mcassill at 10:18 am on July 18, 2001)

I am going to push my ideas your way, been there done that kina thing. &nbsp; &nbsp;I owned a new model black hawk, in 44 mag. &nbsp;Went to go get a 45 colt, got a 44 mag instead. It was a good buy, so I got it. Always wished I had gone with my first instinct, and got that 45. Colt. &nbsp; Well, sold that gun, only put 6 rounds through it. &nbsp; &nbsp;My mind was made up, .429 vs. .452 Just did not fit in my book… &nbsp; &nbsp; What my point is, diameter, and why the 45acp was derived. &nbsp; Slap, or the transfer of kinetic energy to a given point. &nbsp; The 45 colt, is just that, controllable energy delivered to a given point… &nbsp;Your target… &nbsp;Also like being bonked with a cast iron fry pan…. K.O &nbsp; &nbsp;Just my perspective is all...

Will, I kindly disagree. Personally to match the loads shown for the 45, I think the 44 with a 300gr (or even &nbsp; 320g SSK stly) would have crossed a few eyes. Since Garrett has factory ammo shooting &gt;300gr bullets at over 1380fps from a revolver, this is a fair comparison

(then again the 395gr bullets from my 6inch FA454 @1515fps would have shown well too- but that is not you traditional load either)

-CAL

Cal,I have to agree with you on that respect, because as a handloader I would also use the 300 gr bullet in the 44. &nbsp;But with the 45 I would use the 325 or 350 gr bullet. &nbsp;And with those loads that you mentioned the penetration would definitly be deeper than a 45 at same velocity due to the B.C. &nbsp;However, the distance probably wouldn't be but a few inches and the wound channel would definitly be noticably bigger on the 45.
And Buffalo Boar has 325 gr LFN 45 Colt loads at over 1300 fps. &nbsp;This like the Garrett could and are considered factory loads.
All I was saying is that all of those velocitys seem a little low to me. &nbsp;As far as that SSK bullet when compared to the WFN's and even the Keith style bullets, these bullets seem to be to pointed and tend to turn sideways and the penetration is lost. &nbsp;Even that 250 gr Keith bullet would go 32 inches in wet phone books and the 330 gr SSK would only make 22 inches. These were all 44's shot out of a Super Redhawk. (Ross Seyfried: Ultimate Cast Handgun Bullets, Guns and Ammo Oct 1993)
I would much rather have two holes than one. &nbsp;And with that much weight (330) it should punch deeper than that.

Cal
Thats my point. Who cares how fast you can get your 44 or my 45 for that matter. All those loads I listed will compleatly shoot through an animal so what does it do to gain more? Take for instance, the 500 Linbaugh, it will never be as fast as a 475 Linbaugh but it cuts a bigger hole. &nbsp;On the other hand, the 475 will penetrate deeper than the 500. &nbsp;It's all how you look at things. &nbsp;If you want high speed, fine. &nbsp;I like big holes. &nbsp;If a bullet passes through an animal at 1100 feet per second, why do I need 1500 feet a second? &nbsp;The point I was trying to make was the wound channel that the 44 and 45 made in animals and those rounds were from Linbaugh's tests on six gunner and they were to show various loads for the different calibers and their penetrations. &nbsp;That was the only load they had for the 44. &nbsp;I know there are better loads, but that load would pass through any animal standing broad side. &nbsp;It wasn't to belittle the 44 with a low velosity light bullet. &nbsp;

Steve, nothing was meant by it. &nbsp;I love John's work but he doesn't always give the 44 a fair shake. Even though your point (and his) is well taken, &nbsp;velocity does play a role. &nbsp;He has put too much into the 45 vs 44 argument to allow me to believe there isn't a little bias in the arguments

If you match the bullet to the velocity you gain the ability to increase the wound channel without comprimising penetration. &nbsp;Penetration just isn't a problem with the bigbores. &nbsp; However the size of the wound cavity increase greatly as the velocity edges up. To use JohnL's terms, the .500 at 1300fps is a long range punch (a 500 Long will beg to differ). &nbsp;The hole it creates is not exagerrated with regard to the bullets caliber. If you push the 44/45 &nbsp;at 1500-1600fps you will notice a disproportionate increase in wound cavity size. &nbsp;Now jack it up to hot 454 levels and the cavity can approach a couple inchs. All in all I take exception to arguments stating that pistols are different that rifles in that they don't respond to velocity increase as do the longguns

I want someone with a straight face tell me a 454 with a 260@2000fps doesn't open up a deer (and have a greater effect) &nbsp;than a 45 @1200fps. &nbsp;Sure they all kill but we &nbsp;also realize the advantage of velocity, otherwise we wouldn't be shooting 444 or 45-70s that gain 200-300fps over normally accepted 454 loads


If one can master a pistol in the std brush gun velocity range, I do not see and problem with them shooting it and hate to hear the &quot;velocity doesn't matter&quot; arguments. &nbsp;We already know what the guys that do big 5 pistol hunting use, and they aren't wimpy 1200fps loads.


{rant mode off} <!--emo&:)--><img src="http://beartoothbullets.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'><!--endemo-->
-CAL

I have the 454 and 44 SRH. They are both superb and will take any game you want BUT you are just not living first class unless you are packin a 45. Just my 2 cents worth.

I have a FA454 &nbsp;and many &nbsp;other branded 44s (44SRK too)

THEY BOTH STINK!

IF YOU AIN&quot;T SHOOTIN&quot; A 44/50 JUG YOU MIGHT AS WELL USE SPITBALLS!

<!--emo&:D--><img src="http://beartoothbullets.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'><!--endemo-->

Leadslinger, that's the first reference to the 44/50 jug I've seen in a long time. I still have a issue of shooting times that had that article in it. They don't make writers like him no more.
Just so I'll have my two cents noted: I own both, I like both, but there's just something that seems right about having a 45 colt with you.
Anyway everyone knows bigbores don't start til you get to 45!!! Joey Sanders

O.K O.K., &nbsp;:^)

Lets get back to the question he has a 454 SRH, and wants to know what caliber to get 44 or 45 in a 5.5&quot; Redhawk.
Putting my bias aside, 45 that is, common sense says to buy the 45 due to being able to use the 45 colt bullets and loaded 45 ammo in the 454 if needed. &nbsp;Also if he purhcases a custom bullet mold, again used in both calibers. &nbsp;This just makes sense to me.

God Bless

Will &nbsp;

OK,

I'll be serious this time. I LOVE both cartridges but since he's got a .454 already the .45 makes more sense.

Bullet commonality is a big plus. Unless the moulds are gas checked you might have to adjust your alloy but hey, thats just part of the fun.

J Sanders, Skeeter was one of a kind. He's the only gunwriter who ever brought tears of laughter to my eyes. Terry Murbach comes close with his Wes Dakota alter ego, watch out for him in these forums! &nbsp;<!--emo&:)--><img src="http://beartoothbullets.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'><!--endemo-->

Since you're going to be serious, I going to &quot;backslide&quot; a little.

One of the more enjoyable books I've finished recently is &quot;The Log of a Cowboy - A Narrative of the Old Trail Days&quot; by Andy Adams. &nbsp;It's an actual diary of a young cowboy on his first trail drive, and covers the day by day efforts of the trip from Mexico to Montana. One particular section is pertinent to our discussion. The boys had caught a female brown bear in the open with her two half grown cubs and had lassoed the female.

&quot;But while there were plenty of good shots among us, our horses had now become wary, and could not, when free from ropes, be induced to approach within twenty yards of the bear, and they were so fidgety that accurate aim was impossible. We who had ropes on the old bear begged the boys to get down and take it afoot, but they were not disposed to listen to our reasons, and blazed away from rearing horses, not one shot in ten taking effect. There was not telling how long this random shooting would have lasted; but one shot cut my rope two feet from the noose, and with one less rope on her the old bear made some ugly surges, and had not Joe Stallings had a wheeler of a horse on the rope, she would have done somebody damage.

The Reb was on the opposite side from Stallings and myself, and as soon as I was freed, he called me around to him, and shifting his rope to me, borrowed my six-shooter and joined those who were shooting. Dismounting, he gave the reins of his horse ot Flood, walked up to within fifteen steps of mother bruin, and kneeling, emptied both six-shooters with telling accuracy. The old bear winced at nearly every shot, and once she made an ugly surge on the gopes, but the three guy lines held her up to Priest's deliberate aim. The vitality of that cinnamon almost staggers belief, for after both six-shooters had been emptied into her body, she floundered on the ropes with all her former strength, anthough the blood was dripping and gushing from her numberous wounds. Borrowing a third gun, Priest returned to the fight, and as we slacked the ropes slightly, the old bear reared, facing her antagonist. The Rebel emptied his third gun into her before she sank, choked, bleeding, and exhausted, to the ground; and even then no one dared to approach her, for she struck out wildly with all fours as she slowly succumbed to the inevitable.&quot;

A number of thoughts crossed my mind when I read that portion, one of which was all you .45 Colt cowboys can do what you want, but me thinks I'll keep a rifle pretty close at hand and a .454 on my person when in bear country. Maybe an extra change of underwear?

Dan

Splendid Indeed!!!! This Forum reminds me of the Soap Operas sometimes...You can be gone for six weeks, come back, and the same old plot (or pot) is boiling. As am Old De-Fanged Mossey Back taht has put down deer and hogs (some of the hogs in the 400 pound class) since 1956. That and 26 years working for the Gun and Ammo factories...I have noticed some things. I have hunted with both the .44 Mag and the .44 Long Colt and never was able to see a bit of difference in their putting reasonable game down...dead is dead! Of course the Long Colt was heavy loaded with Keith type bullets!
Now, think about this...
(1) If a man harps about a product(read caliber) enough with wild claims, he is seeling something!
(2) A bullet of equal weight, and near diameter, flying through the air doesn't know what it came from
(2) All these calibers, weights, and velocity have more than enough penetration to shoot lengthways through any animal that you shold be using it on.
(3) The difference in Wound Channels for the lowest to the highest velocity are not really that much difference.
(4) It is human nature to defend what he owns (since he was stupid enough to be convinced to buy it) against what someone else bought.
(5) And above all, remember &quot;Quality is As The Customer Percives!)
Now, with that said, let's move on. I am inclined to speak from the position of a meat hunter and one who derives some warped pleasure of pitting myself against something than can due dire damage to my Cracker ***. I have no plans put yhis Old Cracker up against a Griz with a handgun, whether on purpose or as a backup. I can think of much more pleasant ways to commit suicide!
A hundgun that fits into my plying field has to have the folloing:
(1) Controllablility-if you can't control and hit with it under stress, your dead meat! Both the .44 Mag and the .45 Long Colt with bullets from 250 gr to 280 gr at 1200 to 1400'/&quot; fall in line.
(2) A large enough meplat, at those velocities, to cut as large a whound channel as possible. both the .44 mag and the .45 Long Colt will do that with LBT or the newer OWC bullets.
So...I don't have bones with any shooters who want to play with their hand cannons or those who continue to walk the edge of pressure detonation seeking the ultimate in their mind. That's their forte, but what about the new handgun shooters coming aboard who want simple answers? They can't plop out the bucks for these latest Super Specials. And what about the boy down in Palm Harbor that is still crippled from 110 stiches from a Boar Hog because a #### dealer but a gun in his hand that he could control?
So...Let's validate ourselves right up front where addressing issues on this forum. I give you my personel assurance that when I see pratices that are dangerous to the new shooter and person does not validate his responses...I will delete them, as long as Marshall have me as a Forum Moderator. Just say that these are experimental tests, etc.
Best Regards as Always, James

Watch soap operas often do yah? <!--emo&:)--><img src="http://beartoothbullets.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'><!--endemo-->

Amen, Brother James!!!

We needed that reply about 8 pages ago!

I agree whole heartedly with James also, but I have to put in my two cents about the bear story.
1. The ammo of the day consisted of round nose bullets, if there has ever been a more poorly made projectile for transferring what energy the bullet possesed, I can't think of it, well maybe a fmj if it penetrates straight.
2. There is a vast diff in the effort it takes to kill a critter that has it's adrenilin pumping, (I think you will agree the ma bear is very much in this group) and what will kill the same animal if it is totally relaxed. If you don't belive this you ain't killed enough stuff.
3. Sometimes I think we fergit that the reason we pack a pistol is its handy enough to have when doing other things besides looking for big mean angry things to stop! and there is a big diff in killing something and stoping it!
If I wanted all the power and accuracy I could accurately place I would not reach for a pistol!!!
Ok I stop ranting for now, I just returned from S Fl and I needed to vent a little: Joey Sanders

Joey,

Well said, and I appreciated your points before posting the story, just thought it would be of interest to some folks, not as a recommendation for the use of revolvers to hunt bears. Sometimes when reading the posts, it appears some of us may get a little carried away (over confident?) with all this &quot;BIG&quot; stuff available today. If a female bear, with her dander up comes charging, I'd probably not even clear leather, and would miss -- and even if one or two connected, would lose the uneven contest. So I was trying to offer a picture that might make us a little less foolish.

And my final comment on .44 vs. 45. I'm think some folks have misunderstood the conversation. I thought it was fun, a lot of well intended comments were made, a lot of reasonable points were offered, no one appeared to be offended -- I sure thought it was good clean fun that &quot;didn't put anyone at risk&quot;. And I strongly suggest that the large majority of the readers understood and enjoyed the jesting back and forth -- doubt if over 3000 accesses were done because they were bored, offended, or unduly influenced.

Respectfully,

Dan

I did not mean to step on any toes, I hope I didn't at least. Forgive me if I sounded that way.
Either gun will work if the feller holdin it will.
As I mentioned earlier I own and enjoy both, &nbsp;With either one a person will have made a excellent choice.

Joey,

Thought your comments were well reasoned and well worth commenting and sure did't step on my toes. The way I'm built, I can't see them anyway, so as far as I can tell, they're just fine :-).

Hope to see more comments from you in the future.

Dan

I gotta admit I enjoyed the banter a bit (that is how I took it anyways) but can also see James's point.

Having had more than my fair share of run in's with Mr. Bruin and his lovely spouse &quot;Ursulla&quot; (not to mention them troublesome teenage hooligans they booted out of the home) I would concure that ANY handgun used for defensive purposes should only be used in the event of something much more potent being just out of reach.

In my book, that flat-faced scowl they give you makes everything seem inadequate and has caused me to retreat on more than one occasion. Course, I am whimpy (but still alive and un-mauled!)

Blessings All,

Scotty

Scotty,

I've always wondered if there are guidelines that people experienced with bears use as to when you have to shoot and when you will be allowed to retreat. Do you wait for a &quot;charge&quot; or do you assume that if they're within a certain distance you have to take action. I remember a TV report on bears that told of a very experienced bear photographer that was found with his .44 drawn and cocked, but obviously too late. His film showed a female with her two cubs about 100 yards off and that was the last picture.

Anyway, any typical guidelines offered by folks that bump into the magnificant animals?

Dan

DOK, I enjoyed your article very much. &nbsp;It was an example of real life and it's dangers, as it was lived many years ago, and of how men had to cope with dangerous situations with the tools/weapons they had available to them. &nbsp;Personally, it didn’t make me feel like I had to run out and buy rope and round nosed bullets. &nbsp;However, I do have to take some exception here seeing that we’re not trying to create any misimpression of a particular caliber’s ability, especially to newbie shooters. All these calibers, weights, and velocity do NOT have more than enough penetration to shoot lengthways through any animal that you should be using it on. &nbsp; Certain animals, yes! &nbsp;All, no! &nbsp;According to an article on Garrett Cartridges web site, a fellow shot an attacking griz with a 330gr LBT style hard cast bullet with a .320 meplat and a 1330fps velocity. That’s about max for a 44mag, at least one that you don’t want to have to pick pieces of out of your hide. The shot was at about 15 feet and at an angle. The bullet did not penetrate completely. &nbsp;It went through the shoulder and lungs and lodged under the skin on the opposite side. &nbsp;Even Garrett won’t make the claims that his ammo will penetrate any animal you use it on lengthwise. &nbsp;If we’re going to say things penetrate completely, let’s say exactly what is penetrating what completely. &nbsp;Particular loads in particular handguns will perform particular tasks. &nbsp;I think we need to be more specific and less general in outlining the particulars… for all our sakes.

God bless,

In comparing a 44 Mag to a 45 Colt I probably should not be &nbsp;addressing/comparing my experience. I have shot the 44 Mag. for quite a few years and find it to be an extremely capable caliber. The biggest game I have ever killed with it has been white tailed deer. I have taken them with various jacketed bullets from 200 to 240 grains, all hollow and flat point. I was ready to give up totally when I put a 240 grain hollow point into the shoulder of a buck that went down, got back up (just then I fired again), down he went. Then up again, and ran for approximately 300 yards through Eastern woods. After about 4 hours of tracking and looking (Yes, 300 yds can take that long!) we found him. The front shoulder showed both hits had completely destrowed the entire shoulder. He was runing on addrenilin or whatever big bucks run on!!
Now, those fantastic jackeded bullets had only penetrated enough to completely wreck the shoulder and &quot;NO&quot; futher!, without penetrating &nbsp;enough to get the job done!! I made up my mind right then and there to NEVER use another one!!!!!!
The above was just to show you where I am coming from! The caliber that you use in hunting is very important. Don't send a boy to do a mans work. Does this mean I don't use the 44 Mag any more?? Get serious, I researched the caliber and bullets available. I found and talked to Viral Smith (LBT Owner and founder). I found some 280 LBT LFN GC bullets (200), hand poured) at an auction and decided to give it a go. They shot absolutely great, especically at higher velocity. I shot two deer with those bullets with devistating results! Drop in there tracks, to 1 or 2 steps like a blown out drunk! Don't ask me what they looked like because they went through like Scotch at a press conference.
Bottom line, in bullets of similiar caliber (44vs45) let your bullet type and construction be your guide.
Am I a 44 mag fan, yes!! Am I getting ready to build a 45 Colt, Yes!! Why, because I want one.
What bullets will I use in the new 45? Beartooth LBT WFN, I plan to start with a weight in the 275 to 350 range. You can bet I won't be worried about blowing up on the shoulder either!!
Changeling

I gave my serious posting above!

When I saw this question posted I couldn't help to jump in, as the term go's and tell what I THINK! I try to make it a point to say what I think before viewing &quot;anyones&quot; comments.

After posting my experience I went back and read all of the posts regarding this caption. I was extremely impressed with the orderly progression of responsible and for the most part intelligent responses that came forward at this site. I have never been at a site or talked with a group of individuals with more experience or expertise. Great job!

I gave my serious posting above!

When I saw this question posted I couldn't help to jump in, as the term go's and tell what I THINK! I try to make it a point to say what I think before viewing &quot;anyones&quot; comments.

After posting my experience I went back and read all of the posts regarding this caption. I was extremely impressed with the orderly progression of responsible and for the most part intelligent responses that came forward at this site. I have never been at a site or talked with a group of individuals with more experience or expertise. Great job!

I've been following this topic for quite some time now. Definitely a lot of genuine experience and expertise in most of the posts. I just thought of something interesting. Never have I read nor has anyone ever told me that the .454 Casull is a better killer than the .475 Linebaugh. This is almost an identical comparison to the .44 Mag versus .45 Colt arguement although on a larger scale. The .475 uses bullets .023&quot; larger than the .454 (the same difference between the .44 and .45) and it operates at lower pressure than the .454. Any thoughts?
Dave

I'll tell you, I've always been a 44 mag fan, but won a little Ruger Vaquero chambered in 45 Colt at an NRA Banquet last year. I was hoping to develop a loading that I could use in the new short barreled (4 5/8") revolver. I finally settled on the 260g Nosler Partition HP and a load of 20g H li'l Gun for my loading. I finally got to try out the combination last week in texas. The little 45 Colt performed every bit as well as my 44 mags do.
Here's a picture:
http://www.boomspeed.com/gilamonster/dall.jpg

John,

I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw this topic was on top again, but very glad I looked at the new addition. Great picture. You must be very pleased with the new Ruger, it doesn't get much better than a great hunt with a free revolver.

Thoroughly enjoyed your excellent web site, and appreciate the invite.

Dan

Dan;
Thanks!!!!
I was actually hunting with a rifle and carrying the revolver in case I got close enough. I got lucky and he stepped out about 20 to 25 yds in front of me. He never knew what hit him.
You knew I couldn't let this topic die a slow death!....Hahahaaa

John,

Your response and the web site answered two obvious questions:

1. What kind of person goes sheep hunting with a 4 5/8" revolver? There are several answers to that one :-)

2. Covered all the web site and then asked, "Is this guy married?"

You're a very lucky fella, in more ways than one.

Dan

Yes Dan, I am one "lucky guy". I have a fine, beautiful wife who is understanding and lets me get away with murder. (figure of speach) hahaha
and the whold family is healthy! I've been blessed, to say the least!
John

John,

Must be all that clean living paying off?

Dan

I love my 44 Mag. I shot real hot loads and decided I wanted more. I now also own a 454 Casull. I would never try to make a 45 Colt shoot like a 454 Casull, the cases are not made for that. If you 45 Colt shooters want to make your 45 Colt shoot like a 44 Mag, why not just buy a 44 Mag, and if you want it to shoot like a 454 Casull go buy one. I wish people would quit trying to make a round do what it was not designed for. I have to laugh when I here people say my 45 colt can shoot as hot as a 44 Mag or a 454 Casull. When "not" if your gun blows up in your face, you will have no one to blame but yourself. Just my 2 cents. <!--emo&:D--><img src="http://beartoothbullets.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'><!--endemo-->

If you will allow me to rely on memory rather than rereading all 10 pages of this post, a few comments.

I don’t remember anyone suggesting they expected their 45LC to shoot like a 454 Casull,,,,that one confused me a little. *I do have a five shot 45LC that comes within 90+ percent of the 454 (of which I have two), but that’s because I prefer the single action (fits my hands much better) than the double action Taurus or Ruger that I have. By the way, the regular 45LC brass works just fine with the five shot .45LC at levels the 44mag will be challenged to reach.

As for the .44 vs .45 “who’s the hottest” topic, my memory of the conversation is that the 45LC operated safely at the level required for hunting the same animals you’d hunt with the .44mag.. *If your goal in owing a revolver is bullet velocity, then a .44 may be a better choice than the .45LC. If your goal is functionality, then I thought the series of comments in this post indicated the difference between .44 and .45 is mute. *But then I may be mistaken. *

Certainly, the original .45LC wasn’t originally designed for current .44mag velocities, but a lot of things have changed and I’m sure we don’t expect that to not be taken advantage of. So I’m not sure the design issue is pertinent any longer.

As you say, “my 2 cents worth” is that when I’m at the range with full loads in either .44 or .45LC, *I can’t tell the difference between them and I seriously doubt if whatever’s on the other end can either.

But if someone say’s, “My Chevy will outrun your Ford”, now that’s different!!


Dan

DOK, go to page 1 and 8 just to give you a few. There is posts of 45 colt close to 454 levels. My whole confusion is why buy a certain gun and then try to either push it or make it into a more powerful gun. (Example) Buy a .38 and load it to 357 Mag specifications. Why not just buy a 357 Mag??? &nbsp;Do you understand where I am coming from? &nbsp;<!--emo&:)--><img src="http://beartoothbullets.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'><!--endemo-->
Load safe...

Redhawk1,

Gotcha. But I think we fighting human nature (it'll never happen to me) here. Part of the problem is Ruger's reputation for making such a strong gun that everyone feels safe exceeding common sense limits. Also, if Ruger would help us out by offering the Blackhawk in .454, I suspect many of the hot loading .45LC people would do as you correct suggest.

Appreciate your enthusiasm,

DOK

Gentlemen:

I just bumped into the forums a couple of months ago and have been enjoying them greatly. I am very pleased with the intelligence, experience, comradary and courtesy displayed by the majority of members, especially the moderators. I personally read about guns a good deal more than I have the opportunity to shoot them.

On page 3 of this thread, the point was raised that both Sierra and Speer bullet companies consider 45 Colt brass unsuited to the pressures that produce high-performance loads, despite the fact that they are used in custom 5 shot revolvers handling 50,000 c.u.p. pressures. Is it possible that these opinions, (prejudices?), were formed during the days of balloon-head cases and have never been updated, even though the brass has?

Excellent point and question. I copied below several exerpts from the Linebaugh web site that addresses your question.

"The Myth of The "Weak" .45 Colt Case

There has been so much written about the "weak" .45 Colt case. This probably started when The Grand Old Man of the Shooting game, Elmer Keith made this statement in His excellent book Sixguns. "While shooting a 300 gr 45/90 rifle bullet in my .45 Colt SAA with 35 grains of black. Finally a weak .45 Colt case head blew off with this load. The gas blew the loading gate off the gun breaking its shank and cutting through the flesh of my trigger finger. From this experience I decided the bullet was a bit heavy for the thin cases and thin chamber walls of the cylinders. I cut one band and groove from the mould leaving it to cast a 260 gr flat point bullet. This worked very well with 40 grains of black. It was a very good game killer and flatter in trajectory curve than the 300 grain slug with 35 grains of black" ( Sixguns by Keith page 129)

I have no doubt in my mind the weak case came from corrosion due to shooting corrosive primers and black powder. Elmer was also shooting old balloon head cases, not the solid head we have today. The fact that he said, Quote: a weak case,, not, finally one of the WEAK cases let go, means a singular case, not a common recurrence. Modern writers often picture a fired .45 Colt case with a noticeable bulge just above the web of the case. They continually protest the .45 Colt case is "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 Colt chambered arms 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 reseized and the process repeated till the case fails. And fail it will, and more than likely prematurely due to overworking. Modern MAGNUM brass will do the same if fired in too large a chamber. Shooting a .44 magnum round in .45 colt chamber (NOTE; THIS IS A PRACTICE I DEFINITELY DO NOT RECOMMEND) will bear this out. Cartridge brass does not have the tensile strength of modern steels. ITS MERELY A GASKET."

(Note: It's my understanding that what allows the 5 shot revolvers to operate at a higher pressure is not just the extra cylinder wall thickness, but also the tighter cylinder size tolerances that support the brass better than mass produced revolvers.)

"The .45 Colt case is just as strong as any handgun case on the market. Especially in the Federal brand. I have proof load data here from Hornadys pressure barrel that goes over 62,000 CUP. I have shot this load hundreds of times in my special 5 shot custom revolvers and with our tight chambers case life is excellent. And primer pockets remain tight till the case is discarded due to split necks. This comes from repeated crimping and case mouth belling."

Dan

Hi Dan,
No, I'm not just following you around the forum, but do you have a "pet" load you use for your .45colt? *Mine is a spanking new Stainless Blackhawk 4 5/8". *Had an EMF clone and sold it, Bought a 625 mountain gun to replace it, but was compelled to another SA...
*I read on Rugerforum.com that the cylinders are undersized from the factory... * .450...jumping to a .452 bbl.
*I would guess this would cause excessive leading without the right load. *I've been shootin' the Sierra 240's, but just ordered Marshall's 265's , 285's, and 300's...

By the way, I know you can't load the Smith like the Ruger.

<!--QuoteBegin--DOK+April 12 2002,06:44--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DOK @ April 12 2002,06:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><!--QuoteEBegin-->"The .45 Colt case is just as strong as any handgun case on the market. Especially in the Federal brand. I have proof load data here from Hornadys pressure barrel that goes over 62,000 CUP. I have shot this load hundreds of times in my special 5 shot custom revolvers and with our tight chambers case life is excellent. And primer pockets remain tight till the case is discarded due to split necks. This comes from repeated crimping and case mouth belling."

Dan[/quote]
That's absolutely correct, and in the modern (Ruger) revolvers, there is absolutely no problem with loading the 45 Colt to the same pressure as the 44 Mag. The end result is nearly identical. I've used them both and just can't tell the difference in vital performance. Now Redhawk1, how would you take it if I suggested you underload your 44 Mag? I wouldn't, but if I did? That's exactly what you're suggesting that owners of fine modern 45 Colt revolvers to do. Hey things change. The older 45 Colts were designed for low pressures, the new ones are not.

m141a,

I can recommend four loads I've worked with that covers several levels of performance. The first one I'm embarrassed to list because it gives new meaning to the term "wimp". For the indoor shooting I did this winter I found 4.0grs. of Bullseye with the 250gr SWC to be very accurate. This is lower than the typically recommended 45LC Bullseye loads, but certainly no risk of the bullet not getting out of the end of the barrel and it shot very well. The next mini step up is 5.3grs. of Clay. This is in the cowboy (some would say it's closer to cowgirl) range, again shot well for me. For the next velocity level (> 900fps) I use a 272gr. SWC with gas check that I buy locally. When I was reviewing a number of sources for recommeded loads, I found HS6 seemed to be a consensus accurate load for the 1000fps level. I found 13.0grs. to be more accurate than the 13.5gr. load. Many people recommend the old standard 7.5/8.0gr of Unique, but I've not had the best results so don't use it much. *My max load is 22.5grs. of H110 with a 335gr. LBT. I got the load information from one of the Beartooth contributors who included all the technical data with it. The 10 rounds pressure averaged 29,438 PSI with a HIP of 31,127 PSI. The average velocity was 1303fps with a 7 1/2" barrel. It's a max load for the factory 6 shot and a good starting load for the 5 shot conversions. I've never taken the time to Chrony this in my 4 5/8" but it would be noticeably less -- but then it is a 335gr. bullet! *For this one, I'd start a little lower and work up.

We've all read about the Ruger factory 45Colt undersized cylinder throats a zillion times. So I checked mine and found the barrel lands to be .452 and the cylinder throats to be .452. For the standard rule of thumb, this is .0005/.001 undersized throats. But it is within .0005 and the 13.0gr. HS6 does give me consistent 1.5" five shot groups with no leading, so I've not been particularly concerned. I plan on sending the revolver to Bowen for tuning and will ask what they recommend. Since I can't assume the bullet will transfer from the cylinder to the barrel with perfect alingment, I suspect they'll say they need to be a little larger. Everything I've ever read about undersized throats says it really affects you accuracy. Obviously, undersized bullets in the barrel will not perform well.

I had a 22.5gr. Lil Gun / 320gr. LBT 44mag. load that shot well in the Super Blackhawk. Tried it in the S&W Performance Center Masterhunter and it did bad things to the S&W. The cylinder will not advance to the next cylinder cavity, is just loose which requires me to manually advance the cylinder. And the action is not the same smooth, crisp as it was. *

Apologize for the length.

Dan

What have I done??next will be .475 vs .500
Thanks for the info and then some

I just waited till I thought it was over. I have never shot the 45 but I hope to own one one day. I am sure the 44 is fun and I would think the 45 is too. But so is the 32 ACP.

I just read the whole section. Very entertaining.
One thing I would like to add concerning pressure. I have had guns lock up when using the start load from a manual. Yes, I checked the componets and they were correct. I also have The bottom half of a S&W model 19 357 cylinder that someone blew up at the range. It blew on the first shot and later I found the part in my gun box that was open at the time. I keep it on the shelf right in front of me when loading . The guy said that he was distracted when he was loading and did not know what load was in the round.
Concerning the 44 vs 45, remember that gun writers need something to write about.

I now have one of each 44 Mag, 454 Casull and 45LC and would not trade any of them.. All have a purpose.. :)

All I can say when it comes too power, better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it;) as long as you can control it, what good is it if you can't hit the side of a barn;) 454 Casull for top end power hands down, for best accuracy and good power the 44 mag. the 45LC can put out a little more power than the 44 mag but accuracy is lacking compared to the 44 Mag, This is what I have observed. Aim small hit small. RAMbo.

When I started reading this post I had definite opinions now I am really confused, everybody here makes really convincing arguments. It is only 4 weeks to whitetail season here and I stew endlessly on which load and pistol to take. It must be like a Sheik trying to figure out which of his 50 wives he will visit tonight. :D

I didn't read every post in this thread (only the first 4 pages) so forgive me if this has been covered. I like the 45 Colt, it's a great fun round that can do a lot in the right guns, and you can certainly use it to push a 300 gr bullet to the same speed as a 44 Mag pushs a 300 gr bullet. But if you push a 325 gr to 1,400 fps don't fool yourself that you're running anything less than 44 Magnum pressures. Sure the Redhawk can easily handle such loads, but you're still right up there pressure wise. To get the same ballistics in the 44 Magnum if the Redhawk you'll be pushing pressures well over max for the 44 magnum. Still safe in the Redhawks, but over max none the less.

As it's been more than 4 weeks since the last post, what was your decision redhawk44p? 44 or 45? :)