Big Boy don't like cast

[cbrick]

I remember seeing a forum where the 44 mag was referred to as the 45 Colts little brother as the 45 Marlin was said to be loaded to a level to be a 45-70 short. The Speer manual points out that case life is somewhat shortened by those loads.

DP, which Speer manual please?

I found most of the sarcasm to be based on ignorance of the caliber. DP

Hhmmm . . . That must be me.

Rick

[garym1a2]

Little brother link, quite interesting link on 45 Colt in rifles.

http://www.lasc.us/FryxellMarlin1894.htm

45 Colt, Cartridge dimensions

The .45 Colt chambering of the Marlin 1894 is blessed with a 1 in 16" twist. As a result it is capable of handling a wider range of bullet weights than is its .44 caliber little brother. Also, if my gun is representative, it seems that the fatter chamber opening is more forgiving in terms which bullet profiles cycle and feed properly through the action. Virtually everything tried fed slick as a whistle (the only feeding problem encountered was with a 265 grain NEI SWC, a variation on .451-275-PB, #317, a bullet with the forward portion very similar to the 452423; a very thick forward driving band, coupled with a very short nose, a tough combination for a lever-gun).

DP, which Speer manual please?



Hhmmm . . . That must be me.

Rick

[cbrick]

Great, I am rather familiar with Glen's articles, nowhere does it say to load two grains over book max. Little brother means simply the smaller diameter cartridge.

Rick

[Daddyfixit]

Just for the fun of it I dug out my old Speer Number Ten. They don't even list 2400 under any weight bullet for the 45 Colt,
but there is a section listed as "45 Colt for Ruger or Contender Only" under 250 gr SWC it shows using a mag primer with
17.2 min/ 18.7 max of 2400.
The 2012 Reloader's Guide from Alliant Powder shows 250gr LSWC @ 15.4 as max load

[jmort]

Here it is from Henry Repeating Arms, for the .45 Colt, and good for them for not taking the weenie approach, but telling it like it is

"Thank you for your interest in Henry. The rate of twist is 1:38. This does not matter for the larger rounds as our Big boy rifles are not made to be able to safely or properly feed rounds with bullet weights over 270 gr. Our Big Boy's can handle all the +P pressure out there even Big Buffalo Bore ammunition as long as the rounds are not to big (over 270 gr.) to feed through the action."

So I'm thinking 20 grains max

[jmort]

.45 Colt (Ruger & Contender Only ) (Speer Reloading Manual #14)

Load Image
Warning! Notes: max. case length: 1.285"; trim-to length: 1.275"; max cart. OAL: 1.600"; RCBS shell holder: #20; cart. case: Winchester; primer: CCI 300 (except where otherwise specified in remarks); test firearm: Ruger Blackhawk; barrel length: 7.5"; maximum loads should be used with CAUTION; NOTE: Do not use in any other make or model firearm. IMPORTANT SAFETY NOTE: Since Speer #14 Manual was published, Ruger has replaced the original Vaquero revolver with a smaller version called the New Vaquero. Ruger has advised the industry that the New Vaquero must not be fired with loads exceeding industry pressure standards (14,000 psi). If loading for a New Vaquero, use the standard pressure data in the .45 Colt Handgun Speer Data.
Be Alert: Publisher cannot be responsible for errors in published load data.
Wt. Bullet Powder Manufacturer Powder Charge Velocity (FPS)
250 Speer Colt GDHP Alliant 2400 18.0 1058
Remarks: start charge
250 Speer Colt GDHP Alliant 2400 20.0 1145
Remarks: maximum charge

[geargnasher]

Speer #11 has the same Ruger/TC-only data as was posted from #10 above. 18 grains doesn't scare me with a 255 at all, those rifles are well-built, and anything that can handle factory 44 Magnum should be able to handle sane +P .45 Colt loads comfortably. I don't like what I know just from what was posted on this thread about the OP's load workup methods at all, but I don't see where he was in any danger of blowing up his gun.

Y'all DO realize this is a modern, Henry rifle, not an Italian 1860 toggle-link repro, right? 18 grains of 2400 would probably pop one of those like a plastic grocery sack.

Gear

[quilbilly]

I sounds like you did the same thing I did with a Contender carbine in 9mm. For a long time I tried to make it into a mini 357 with slight over max charges to get 1500 fps but it did the same as your 45LC. Finally I became sane (at least temporarily) and backed off to a moderate load well below maximum (1200 fps in the carbine) and darned if it didn't suddenly become a fine shooter. Welcome to my world.

[jmort]

There is a sweet spot in all of this

[JSnover]

I'm guessing Henry uses the same receiver blanks for all of their Big Boys, so they should withstand 44 magnum pressures. The OP sort of put his foot in his mouth, is all. I'm still skeptical of their 'strong as steel' claim, though. All of the ones I've seen appear to have more material surrounding the breech than other lever actions with steel receivers chambered for the same cartridges. I'm sure they're safe but it looks like the HRAC engineers were less than 100% certain of their claim, so they added some metal... Just to be sure.

[jmort]

"I'm still skeptical of their 'strong as steel' claim, though."

I saw it put this way: "Some brass alloys are as strong as some steel alloys." Some steel alloys can be stronger than any brass alloys. So it is strong enough for it's intended purpose. As yes, the O/P did bollix this thread up, which is why we are at post #51

[geargnasher]

There is a sweet spot in all of this

More accurately, there is a useful range to every component. Get enough of them operating within that range, and it comes together. If one desires to alter the velocity or pressure window, one must engineer all components of the load to function properly at that level.

Or, as is more common a practice, run the alloy you brung and experiment with a few powders and charge weights to find it's "sweet spot". Where people get into trouble is trying to make something work that can't work, yet not caring to find out why it doesn't.

Gear

[northmn]

I found some data in I believe #47 that listed for Contender 45 Colt laods that were very impressive. Even Winchester ran into a similar issue with their line of 73Winchester cartridges when they also developed a line for the model 92. They had a 44-40 load at about 1700 fps, and some other higher speed loads for other cartridges, but dropped them because people could not be trusted to use them Peacemakers and 73 Winchesters. I had seen loads in manuals for the 44-40 that were also hotter for the 92 Winchester but now are not listed.
My Ruger is a Blackhawk and not a Vacquero, and has a stronger frame such that it can take a little hotter laods than a Peacemaker. Also these older cartridges date back to black powder days and some guns are still around designed for BP pressures. A very old Lyman manual that I had at one time listed about 1 grain more of Unique for a Colt revolver than one now sees. At one timewe were expected to know what we were doing in load development and not use max loads if they were contraindicated. Many loaders today seem to just load and use depending on the manuals as Bibles. I had a 357 revolver once that would take a max load of 2400 fine but hated Unique, even at a reduced listed load, and the shells would have very sticky extraction, but with 2400 they would almost fall out. I did not use Unique in that revolver.
One manual lists 3 levels of loads for a 45-70 starting with the trap doors at the bottom, lever guns in the middle and the Ruger single shot, etc at the top end. These old BP can require a little care in load selection tht depends somewhat on the savvy of the users.

DP

[charger 1]

^ You don't need colored type to understand the irony of a true statement made in a clueless post intended to be double sarcastic. Sarcasm by its context and very nature should be obvious. Use of color and a smiley face icon to boost the octane of the sarcasm is a dubious venture. Are our pens/wits so dull that sarcasm needs color and a smiley face icon?

In black and white, You're correct

[charger 1]

Speer #11 has the same Ruger/TC-only data as was posted from #10 above. 18 grains doesn't scare me with a 255 at all, those rifles are well-built, and anything that can handle factory 44 Magnum should be able to handle sane +P .45 Colt loads comfortably. I don't like what I know just from what was posted on this thread about the OP's load workup methods at all, but I don't see where he was in any danger of blowing up his gun.

Y'all DO realize this is a modern, Henry rifle, not an Italian 1860 toggle-link repro, right? 18 grains of 2400 would probably pop one of those like a plastic grocery sack.

Gear

No they have no clue Chum. If it isn't in a book somewhere their lost. I use manuals merely as the guides they were intended to be. Some places list as much as 24 grs of 2400 behind that bullet. Would I do that with a hot powder? He11 no, but 18 grs of 2400 behind cast is hardly a 45LC pressure issue. Get some real life experience OK guys

[charger 1]

Here it is from Henry Repeating Arms, for the .45 Colt, and good for them for not taking the weenie approach, but telling it like it is

"Thank you for your interest in Henry. The rate of twist is 1:38. This does not matter for the larger rounds as our Big boy rifles are not made to be able to safely or properly feed rounds with bullet weights over 270 gr. Our Big Boy's can handle all the +P pressure out there even Big Buffalo Bore ammunition as long as the rounds are not to big (over 270 gr.) to feed through the action."

So I'm thinking 20 grains max

Holy frig I got ranked by the cali-lefties for 2 grains over, now You're subscribing to 4.5 grs over. I say You're nuts, the folk who built the gun are clueless. The people on post 7 of the link below are nuts. The only people that aren't nuts are the cali-lefties. You see they've smoked just enough electric lettuce that their paranoia helps them to make far more rash decisions than all us other clunks put together. For them that were worried bout brass over steel. The yellow is just a pretty place to put them.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...it-for-45-Colt

[rhead]

452 is bullet dia. Have not slugged gun. Then again I have tons of unslugged guns that still shoot cast.

I mean lets me honest. If meant to shoot factory cast I can't see why it would not like the same dia cast

The problem there is that satisfactory results with factory cast is more of an exception than the rule. That is unless you are satisfied with the firearm going bang when the trigger is pulled.

I agree with why slug the bore and chamber when it is shooting good but if it is not shooting good slugging is my first action.

[charger 1]

1 or 2 thou under if shooting cast over 40 cal is fine. This whole "Veral Smith, run a 456 bullet down a 451 hole" is nonsense. Why has Lee sold their heavy 45 cal in 457? ANSWER, It'll bump to size. Never had luck in this "Let the bore do the final sizing" Garb

[singleshot]

1 or 2 thou under if shooting cast over 40 cal is fine. This whole "Veral Smith, run a 456 bullet down a 451 hole" is nonsense. Why has Lee sold their heavy 45 cal in 457? ANSWER, It'll bump to size. Never had luck in this "Let the bore do the final sizing" Garb

From the beginning of this thread, I knew there was confusion concerning lead projectiles, but I figured calm heads, experience, and actual knowledge would prevail. This post is the capstone of misunderstanding, and shows complete ignorance in the differences between smokeless powder and associated loading techniques, and black powder with associated loading techniques, not to mention alloy composition, etc, etc, etc. There isn't enough space here to point out all the ridiculousness contained in the tiny post above so I'll simply cease and desist. I'm flabbergasted!

Good day to you sir!