Is the 44mag more intrinsically accurate than the 45LC?

[DanWalker]

What is your opinion? I'm a 45 guy at heart and always will be. Just wondering if 44 mag is a more accurate caliber than 45LC or if this is just another old wives tale.

[Grmps]

The most appropriate answer to this question is -- It depends on a myriad of variables

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

I can't imagine either design having enough of a flaw over the other, to make a measurable difference, if all things are equal. Although, there is the obvious larger bullet drop(trajectory) of the 45 colt, due to original specs. Maybe you are asking something I am not understanding?

[DanWalker]

I am asking a simple question. All things being equal, does the 44 cartridge have any advantage in pure mechanical accuracy over a 45LC? I don't think it does, but was wanting others opinions.

[CHeatermk3]

But since all things can't be being equal, the answer is yes and no.

Yes if you're talking factory loadings and BC.

At 7 yds, no
At 25 yds, maybe.
At 100 yds, probably.

[Bohica793]

Uhhhhhh.........no

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

ok, I think I now understand better.
My opinion is that 44 mag is much more accurate.

[Petrol & Powder]

OK, this is just opinion but it’s based on actual experience. I always found it easier to dial in 44 mag (and 44 Special) than 45 Colt. That’s NOT saying that the 45 Colt is an inaccurate cartridge but it is saying that I found the 44 to be easier to get good results from. This was done before my casting days so the reloads were assembled with commercial cast bullets and jacketed bullets.
I know people have achieved excellent results with the 45 Colt but for me the 44 Mag and 44 Special are the winners. This is by no means Holy Writ.

[Nueces]

I think that the rep earned by the 45 Colt for poor accuracy and difficulty in loading is due to the historical variation in internal diameters: loose black powder chambers, yawning throats, varying bore and groove diameters. For example, in the 70s, dies intended for original 0.456" bullets would not size a case enough to hold 0.452" bullets. The 45 Colt was birthed in the 1870s, the 44 Magnum in the 1950s.

A modern 45 Colt, with reasonably tight chamber, 0.452" throats and bore to match, as seen on late production Rugers, is every bit as accurate as any 44 Magnum. Or, so I say.

[BK7saum]

I think that the rep earned by the 45 Colt for poor accuracy and difficulty in loading is due to the historical variation in internal diameters: loose black powder chambers, yawning throats, varying bore and groove diameters. For example, in the 70s, dies intended for original 0.456" bullets would not size a case enough to hold 0.452" bullets. The 45 Colt was birthed in the 1870s, the 44 Magnum in the 1950s.

A modern 45 Colt, with reasonably tight chamber, 0.452" throats and bore to match, as seen on late production Rugers, is every bit as accurate as any 44 Magnum. Or, so I say.

+1

If you are talking current production revolvers of the same manufacture held to equally tight tolerances, then I'd say that accuracy potential is the same between the .44 and .45

[mozeppa]

yup....the 44 mag wins hands down!....because it has laser guided hammers. hi-tech medallions in the grips!

and let us not forget the hyper tuned trigger daphus!

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

M! .

[Tom W.]

I have better accuracy with the .44. My Blackhawk convertible was inaccurate from mild to wild with the .45 Colt loads, but would shoot the acp loads wonderfully. All of the Ruger super Blackhawks and the SRH are or were surprisingly accurate. None of my .44s or .45s ever fired a factory load, but I really don't think that is an issue with the accuracy, especially considering the length of time I owned them, and the different loads that I tried.
Let​ me edit to say that I did find a boolit that finally shot well in the .45 Colt, the RCBS 45 -270- SAA.

[DanWalker]

I will simplify further. Suppose you had MGM make you a pair custom barrels for a contender, one in each caliber. Would one be more inherently accurate than the other? Assume you sent them a dummy round for each chambering, and they did all the accurate machining they are known for.

[35remington]

It's a gun thing, not a cartridge thing.

[shooting on a shoestring]

DW in your last rendition, no.
They're both straight walled cartridges of close to the same case volume and roughly the same boolit weight using the same primers and powders and can be loaded to close (loosely used) to the same pressures. No mysteries. Expect the same results.

Nueces said it well. It's not the cartridges, it's the guns and the component manufacturers.

[DougGuy]

I will simplify further. Suppose you had MGM make you a pair custom barrels for a contender, one in each caliber. Would one be more inherently accurate than the other? Assume you sent them a dummy round for each chambering, and they did all the accurate machining they are known for.

When you put the same rate of twist in each barrel, you are doctoring each round with consistency in crimp, weighing each charge, seating force (case neck tension) same primer, I think the only advantage the 44 has is that it may have a bit better BC but using the same boolit styles, both using heavy for caliber RF boolits with the same alloy and same lube, I am under the impression that each will be within 10% of the other one at 50yds.

Shooting light j words, in the 180 to 200 grain range, I think the 44 may just edge out the 45 strictly on BC of the bullet. I think the 44 has a slight advantage over the 45 in this measurement, and that's about it, all else being as equal as you could make it.

[DanWalker]

That's pretty much what I figured, but lacking any real experience with the 44's, I thought I would ask.

[35remington]

Simply increase 45 bullet weight until BCs are equal. Problem solved.

[Bazoo]

I dont know that it really adds to the discussion.. but frank barnes said that he had seen several 100 yard, 1" groups from 44 magnum chambered rifles. I've never heard of that kind of accuracy from a 45 colt rifle.