Good heavens, .450 throats in a .45 colt!?!?

[Tar Heel]

5.0 x Titegroup is a fairly mild, low-velocity load. Get that SWC running in the 900-1000 FPS ballpark, and there is a good chance that hits will strike lower on account of barrel time/recoil arc dispersion dynamics.

This rascal shoots high with them all. Slow and light-speed as well. Tried some 300gr bullets as well but no joy. Just have to aim low with this one.....or shoot farther out.

[tek4260]

Typical 45 Ruger.... Once you get the throats and forcing cone right, you are left with the TDS front sight....

I have a few threads about adding height or replacing the sight somewhere here.

[9.3X62AL]

My Bishawk's sights are quasi-usable with 250-260 grainers running 850-1100 FPS. 310 grains.......fuggedaboudit at any speed, they'll ladder-up and make the recoil a useless side-effect. And that's fine, that "envelope" makes the caliber useful and flexible enough for my needs. Ruger really should offer detent-secured swap front sight blades of varying heights as they do (or at least did) with their iron-sighted rifle variants. So adorned, all the weights from 185 grains to 300+ could be accommodated. No, I won't hold my breath.

[DougGuy]

So adorned, all the weights from 185 grains to 300+ could be accommodated. No, I won't hold my breath.

That would make TOO mush sense.. My own 7 1/2" SBH now trained in launching the Lee 310gr boolit, had the rear sight all the way down, then stood it upside down on a belt sander and took the blade down flush with the base and filed a new notch in the center. It groups dead on top of the front sight blade @25yds, nasty job but somebody had to do it!

Aaron, you just might have to relegate the Blackhawk to Ruger Only loads and keep them separate and marked from all the other .45 Colt loads, that thing is begging for a heavy boolit over a hefty charge of H110 or 2400. It would likely shoot to the sights with the higher pressure loads.

[Tar Heel]

Aaron, you just might have to relegate the Blackhawk to Ruger Only loads and keep them separate and marked from all the other .45 Colt loads, that thing is begging for a heavy boolit over a hefty charge of H110 or 2400. It would likely shoot to the sights with the higher pressure loads.

I suppose that's what will have to be done. I already have segregated loads for it. Had I known about the FS issue, I would have bought a longer tube to take advantage of the better burn time with H110 and such. As it is. the light RBH kicks like a MULE with the heavies and high velocity. I was hoping to get a tack driver like the FA Casull but with 45 Colt standard loads.

So I just have to ask....the darn thing is chambered for 45 Colt meaning they regulated the sights for that caliber. I wonder what 45 Colt load they used for that! I figure a 250gr bullet at about 850fps is "standard" for the 45 Colt. So what rocket scientist decided to get them to shoot 10-12" high at 25 yards?

[MtGun44]

Probably a self defense load. Remington is touting their High Terminal Performance (HTP) ammo
which in a .45 Colt is a JHP 230, probably a hot load. Winchester has their 225 gr JHP Defender
load, and Federal offers their 225 SWHP Premium loads. All light bullet and fast, so they will
go much lower than a 250 or 260 load.

Now days this is extremely common. Remember that 95% or more of today's shooters shoot
factory ammo exclusively. So, what ever is cheap or common or the latest self defense load is probably
what the majority are expecting the gun to shoot properly - both throat dimensions and sights
are set for this ammo. Handloaders are a small minority and casters are a smaller subset yet,
so expecting our needs to be the thing that is most interesting to the gun makers is a bit
foolish on our part. They will be satisfying the majority customers first.

My best example is a S&W .44 Spl 389 Night Guard. I want to use heavy cast HPs in it at hot .44 Spl
velocities. They shoot about 12-14" high at 25 yds, but a 210 gr JHP factory load is pretty close
to the sights. Sigh! I really need to call S&W and see if they can offer a taller front sight.

I would suggest that you try this with Ruger. They may offer a proper height front sight.

Bill

[9.3X62AL]

Bill might have hit the nail right on the head. I long ago abandoned attempts to discern gunmaker logic or mindset over some of the looney-tune stunt work they do with firearm accessorizing. I feel fortunate that my BisHawk in 45 Colt is relatively tractable in terms of where the sights look and the barrel directs--many others seem to not be so lucky.

I have found that generally I get along A LOT BETTER with firearms my own age (59 years) or older than I do with more modern renditions and contraptions. Current makes/models are often over-specialized and/or venue-specific, while older designs tend towards general usage and multi-tasking. Not that I wish upon gunmakers any more ill luck or poor judgement than they already labor with, but it is good to remember that from an evolutionary perspective to over-specialize often dooms a species to rapid extinction. Just sayin'.

[Cornbread]

I got my gun back today from the smith here in town with the cylinders reamed out to .4525 and the forcing cone re-cut to 11 degrees. I took it out and put 20 rounds through it. The load was 20gr of IMR-4227 under a 255gr Kieth semi-wadcutter. Lube was Carnuba Red and I am getting sub 1" groups with bullets touching bullets in the bullseye at 25 yards. Not a fleck of lead anywhere to be found. Functions perfectly. The man did an awesome job on my gun. I could not be happier.

[9.3X62AL]

Gotta love it when a plan comes together. Good news like this is always welcome.

[Char-Gar]

Just a few items of response, as I have two Rugers in 45 Colt and have had several more;

1. My favorite SA sixgun is a new Lipsey's Flattop convertible in 45 Colt/45 ACP. The cylinder throats measure .452 from the factory on both cylinders so they works just fine with cast bullets.

Ruger sighted this gun at the factory with a front sight blade for 300 grains bullets, which means shoots low for lighter weight bullets. Rather than replace the front sight, I bought a high rear sight blade for the Redhawk. It dropped right end and cured the problem. Ruger rear sight blades are Ruger rear sight blades and will interchange between models. You might want to check if Ruger offers low rear sight blades.

2. I have the tools and have reamed many 11% forcing cones, but never a Ruger as they came pretty good from the factory. There is nothing magic about 11%. Other angles work fine, if the cones are smooth and machine mark free.

[Cornbread]

I asked for an 11% cone because the gun I got basically didn't have one. The smooth area where there should have been a cone was there but it was at most a 2% - 5% cone if even that, it basically looked like a smooth straight bore transitioning to rifling with no perceptible angle. Now it shoots like a house on fire. I wish I could say I got a great one out of the box but I didn't and I had budgeted an extra $150 for cleanup when I bought the gun knowing the problems Rugers can have. I didn't end up spending that much because no lapping of barrel pinch was needed and the reaming of both cylinders and the cone was $50 cheaper than I had estimated. Now it's a great one though. I wouldn't trade it to anyone for anything.

[MtGun44]

All's well that ends well. Glad to hear you have a great outcome.

Folks grousing about .450 throats should think back to when SAAs in this cartridge
came with .458 throats. . . . . . Not a lot of fixing for that, short of a new cyl, and
that is a LOT more $ than reaming throats a touch. So - it is a minor PITA, but I'll
buy a "too tight" revolver, where I will NOT buy a "too loose" revolver. I take
my gage pins whenever I am contemplating a revolver purchase.

Bill