Rifles in pistol calibers

[northmn]

Spring is coming slowly so I too much time to think. I have been noticing so many threads concerning the use of pistol cartridges in lever rifles. It is interesting as really pistol cartridges do not make good rifle cartridges. They lack the range and are underpowered for their bore size. A rifle should be usable at longer ranges.
I just bought a 357 recently so I find them as enjoyable as anyone. Probably the best 35 cal rifle cartridge to be developed for levers was the WW 356 which was a total flop, but was a good replacement for the old 348. The whole line of WW Big Bore cartridges were a flop and yet rifles using pistol cartridges thrive.
The 44-40 was originally a rifle cartridge that I think was adapted to pistols. Colt muct have picked up on the selling points of using both in a rifle and pistol. Yet a lot of Colts were made in calibers that never were made in rifles. The most obvious is the 45 which has only recnetly been made for rifles. Single shot rifles were used by many that felt that a rifle had to have a bit more authority. Winchester did finally adapt to the rifle cartridges with their 1876 and 1886. The interchangeability seemed even then to have limited use.
People are buying rifles in pistol calibers and having fun with them. I am one of them, but still am amused at how they prosper. My 30-30 can be loaded down to 32-20 performance and be loaded up to out range most revolver cartridges. I was told the old 358 Winchester (another dead duck) ws popular in the Savage in Alaska as it could be loaded with lead pistol bullets for small stuff but still have the power for moose. Who knows?

DP

[pmer]

Go to leverguns.com and read the article about the 45 colt in a lever action. From a Taylor Knock Out point of view you might be suprized about 44s and 45s from from a rifle with a cast bullet.

http://www.leverguns.com/articles/paco/45coltlevergun.htm

I found the link to his article, he hit 1700 FPS with a 300 WFN. Those are some pretty serious numbers to me. I think you'd have to be careful playing in that territory but you should be able to slam a white tale at 150 yards from any angle with a load like that.

I'm not slaming rifle cartridges but I would be nervous doing a Texas heart shot at 150 yards with a 30-30. This last year the deer on the right of my avatar was a 300 yard shot with a heavy barreled 308 Win. bolt action. He ran when I hit his shoulder and on the fourth shot (350 yard Texas style shot) the 150 grain spire point was found in its guts. I was lucky to find him.

[kawalekm]

Let me check my freezer.



Nope, it's gone! All the venison I had in the freezer from last year's deer I shot with my .44 carbine. Guess that shows it's not as effective as a regular rifle for deer hunting.

[August]

I'll pray that Spring gets here soon.

[ReloaderFred]

What really brought the pistol caliber carbines to popularity was Cowboy Action Shooting, which is in it's 29th year. The requirement for a pistol caliber carbine made the major manufacturers sit up and take notice. When Boyd Davis loaned an original pristine Winchester 1873 rifle to Aldo Uberti, and convinced him to duplicate it at a reasonable price, the trend really took off. Marlin immediately saw the market and joined in with the 1894's in .357 Magnum, .41 Magnum, .44 Magnum and .45 Colt. Winchester joined in, but not to the extent Marlin did. Rossi also saw the market and joined in with it's replica of the 1892 Winchester.

There are roughly 85,000 SASS shooters, and they all have friends who have seen how much fun it is to shoot a pistol caliber carbine. Others, like the OP, have also found that it's fun to shoot an inexpensive round in a carbine. You get more shooting for less money, which is a win-win situation.

I have roughly a dozen pistol caliber carbines and I have them because they're fun to shoot and it doesn't break the bank every time I go to the range. I've also come up with a load for the .357 Magnum that pushes a 185 grain cast gas check bullet at 1,710 fps and is deadly accurate using Lil'Gun. That's pretty respectable for a little pistol caliber carbine.

Hope this helps.

Fred

[Throckmorton]

One of the great things about these 'rifles' is the light recoil.They are just soooo much fun to shoot,and even kids and the ladies can handle the cartridge sizes mentioned.
I was grinnin' like a kid yesterday when I was ringing steel with my rossi,it's just a hoot to shoot these 'peashooters'.

[lonewelder]

Me too:groner:

[cajun shooter]

Try shooting a full load of Unique in a Rossi 92 carbine at 6 1/2 pounds and tell me how many you fire before the fun factor leaves. The history of the rifles in revolver calibers is a good read. The only reason that the 45 Colt was never used is because of the design of the original balloon head case. It was almost rimless and therefore had no area for the extractor to grab onto to remove it from the barrel. You would be surprised at how many moose, Elk, Bear and other game was taken by these revolver guns. Even the 32-20 and 25-20 took game to feed families. The 44WCF was loaded by Winchester at one time with a 217 gr bullet that was over 1500FPS. Read Mike Venturino's book Shooting Lever Guns of The Old West for a great history of the lever rifle.

[northmn]

I read the article on the 45 colt loaded up with a 320 grain bullet. Almost as powerful as the factory 45-70 300 jacketed load. If you really want to whomp something, get a Marlin 95 in 444 or 45-70 and use a rifle built for it. Also you would not use that load in a Colt. The Colt pistols wre also made in calibers like the 41 whcih did not see a rifle. A 30-30 at 150 yards is going to have a little more punch accordingly than a normal loaded 44 mag at the same range and shoot a bit flatter. I do not like Texas heart shots at any range with anything. Pistol bullets do not retain velocity very well. One of the issues of using pistol calibers in rifles is that they commonly are loaded very hot, beyond pistol limits to get rifle performance. No denying they get game but so do rifle calibers. The 45 Colt also did not gain much in power with BP in a rifle and it was specifically designed for revolver use. the early 44-40 ammo gave sticking problems in revolvers. The 44-40 started out as a rifle and was an improvemet on the old Henry 44 cartridges. Its really a grandfather of cartridges.
I have a great deal of fun with the 357 and agree that it would be good for starting shooters. That being said my son got his first deer at 15 years with an old 303 British and my duaghter rolled 3 deer her first year hunting with a 30-30. She now uses a 300 Savage. The Cowboy shooting is probably fun and a good reason for the rifles. I would guess compactness of the ammunition is another advantage. A careful shot could harvest a lot of game with the more compact cartridges. Back when they used to charge by the component cost of ammo also. Remember when 20 gauge shells were cheaper than 12 gauge and 22 shorts cost less than long rifles?
Rifle calibers tend to have bullets that retain velocity better than pistol bullets whcih may not be an issue for a lot of shooters that get their game up close. A 45-70 with a 400+ grain bullet does not slow down much and is very effective on larger game. The 38-55 was a Schuetzen cartridge that was deadly at 200 yards.
Please remember that I think it is interesting how popular they are and understand that they work.

DP

[Jack Stanley]

If everybody was a reloader then the 356 might be a common round these days . Some people will use whatever they happen to have which I suppose is why eskimos will shoot about anything with a thirty-thirty . Some folks that are pretty good shots could take deer with a 32-20 but on the other hand . Some guys around here are convinced that since the deer they shot at with the 300 Winchester mag didn't drop the deer on the first shot ........ They "need" a 35 WSSM with rocket motor bullets .

It's just amazing that the 32-40 held on for so long and just kept on killing deer with energy that is , what ? less than the forty-four magnum ? I think you are absolutely right a rifle in a "rifle" cartidge like 270 or '06 will reach right out there . If your area is anything like the rest of the country east of the big "missy" there can be a lot of hills woods and swamps that can shorten the ranges . So unless you are posted on the edge of a beanfield a 257 Wetherby won't do ya much more than a 25 Remington . Maybe that is where the attraction is , if the 357 will put the goods on a deer at woods and swamp ranges why use something that is way outside the fun capacity of the gun . If fun is what it take to get them out on the shooting range and enjoying it I call that a good thing . If a fella needs to buy a WSSM because he was to lazy to practice with the last rifle .... that just means there will be more nice used rifles in the second hand market right ? 8-)

Another couple of months and we might get some decent weather It was sixty here today . A few weeks of that and my south fencerow might just thaw out and dry up enough that I can finish working there . It should be above freezing for you in what three months or so ? [smilie=1:

Jack

[missionary5155]

Greetings
I have been shooting 44-40 in origonal 92 SRC´s for many years. 8grains Unique under the 220 Saeco #443 is all any deer would need up close. But up that load to 10 grains and the old 92 becomes a different creature. Cast that boolit from 25-75 (WW-PB) and it will rip a nasty hole through anything it touches out to 75 yards. That load starts out at about 1300 fps. If you need mor velocity switch to 17 grains of 2400 and start adding at .3 increments till 50-50 mix starts leading up. 1450 fps is not real hard to reach and that saeco boolit is mean on what it touches.

[robertbank]

Some of you would benefit from reading the quoted article on the .45Long Colt. The primary reason why it never was made into a rifle until recently was Colt owned the patient on it and would not allow others to build guns for it. When the patient ran out others were able to produce guns in that caliber but by then the need for a .45 Long Colt rifle had ended. Along comes Cowboy action shooting and Voila we have .45 Long Colt rifles.

Take Care

Bob

[August]

Some of you would benefit from reading the quoted article on the .45Long Colt. The primary reason why it never was made into a rifle until recently was Colt owned the patient on it and would not allow others to build guns for it. When the patient ran out others were able to produce guns in that caliber but by then the need for a .45 Long Colt rifle had ended. Along comes Cowboy action shooting and Voila we have .45 Long Colt rifles.

Take Care

Bob

Horsefeathers. It is not suitable for rifles because of its tiny rim and horrendous blowback.

[Jeff H]

.......Maybe that is where the attraction is , if the 357 will put the goods on a deer at woods and swamp ranges why use something that is way outside the fun capacity of the gun......................Jack

"Fun," yes, but practical as well.

My own rifles are way underpowered by that standards of some I know, but are also way overpowered for what I need a lever for. If it's a pest within the borders of my two-acre rectangle, the range won't be much over a hundred yards if I am in one corner and the target is in the other. Typically, the range is 5 feet to 50 yards. The fact that the projectiles lose velocity quickly is a boon. I have a neighbor across the road (about a hundred yards), one on either side a quarter of a mile away and one a mile behind me.

If Ohio follows Indiana's lead in allowing handgun cartridges in rifles (we can use handgun cartridges in hanguns right now), I see a .44 mag. lever in my future as well.

[GH1]

I bought a .357 lever to use for deer hunting. I already have a .357 revolver and all the reloading supplies for it, so in the interest of simplicity I opted for the .357 lever. There's nothing easier to reload than a straight wall cartridge, and the referance materials and component selection for the .357 is huge. Also, my reloading space is quite limited so I appreciate the commonality of components.
Where a person hunts is a big factor in gun selection. I hunt hilly, densely wooded terrain where 50 yards is a long, nearly impossible shot and a scope is not needed. Too much vegetation.
So in that circumstance the .357 is fine, but I have no false conceptions about it's ability. If I were hunting open ground where longer ranges are the norm, I'd definately use a rifle, not a carbine.
GH1

[btroj]

Horsefeathers. It is not suitable for rifles because of its tiny rim and horrendous blowback.

The blowback os due to large chambers in the rifles available. Give me a tight chamber and I will get no more blowback than any other rifle. I also have never had a case fail to extract in many thousand rounds thru my Marlin.

My experience tells me you may be full of horsefeathers too! My Marlin in 45 Colt is my go to gun for many situations.


As for a pistol cartridge being poor in a rifle, says who? I have killed deer and hogs with them just fine. If I want to shoot at 200 yards I use an appropriate gun. My lever actions fill my needs just fine.

Making a blanket statement that pistol cartridge lever guns are bad or stupid makes no sense. They have a place in shooting. They have a place in hunting. Stay within their limits and all is well and fine.

Brad

[northmn]

What I think I am seeing is that users of these rifles really do not give a rat's behind about longer range effectiveness because they are shooting at closer ranges. My hunting includes some longer shots at over 100 yards but not much, which makes the 30-30 a very nice rifle for me. I have a couple of stands where I could easily take them with a 357 as a 60 yard shot would be the limit. The little 92 clone is a fun gun. I have been staying with tube feed slab sided levers. I do have a 99 Savage in 300 that will definitely reach out to any of the ranges I want. Anything for the 300 that is too far is too far. I used a 270 for many years and have now settled on the slab sided levers for their satisfaction. Darn HV rifles blow up a lot of meat and the deer still run about as far. I would bet if I shot a deer through the ribs with a good 357 load it would run maybe 30-50 yards and drop. They do with a 30-30 and a 270.
Will be intreresting to see Marlin's success with their newer offerings. Winchester flopped with the more powerful levers. The cowboy action market may have kicked off the interst in the pistol calibers, but they do work up close. Still, the 375 and 356 Winchesters were too good to let pass. Interesting what a 94 Big Bore brings now?
I did shoot a 45 colt Rossi lever one time and it spit in my face. I was told later they need to be loaded hot enough to seal the chamber so as not to do that.

DP

[btroj]

So pistols in general are stupid because their users don't care about longer range effectiveness?
You are making a blanket generalization. Based upon what you are saying anything short of a 50 BMG sniper rifle is stupid. Why stick to 200 yard effectiveness when o can have 1000 yards plus.

If you have an axe to grind against a specific type of weapon then grind it elsewhere. Many on this site enjoy shooting these handy little rifles. Many have a great deal of success hunting with them too. This is because we fit the needs of our hunting to the choice of weapon. I do not handicap myself when choosing my 45 Colt lever action, it fits my NEEDS.

I shoot what I want for my pleasure, not yours. If my choices insult your sense of style or offend your taste then too bad. I will stick with my ineffective little rifles and go about my pathetic existence.

Brad

[northmn]

So pistols in general are stupid because their users don't care about longer range effectiveness?
You are making a blanket generalization. Based upon what you are saying anything short of a 50 BMG sniper rifle is stupid. Why stick to 200 yard effectiveness when o can have 1000 yards plus.

If you have an axe to grind against a specific type of weapon then grind it elsewhere. Many on this site enjoy shooting these handy little rifles. Many have a great deal of success hunting with them too. This is because we fit the needs of our hunting to the choice of weapon. I do not handicap myself when choosing my 45 Colt lever action, it fits my NEEDS.

I shoot what I want for my pleasure, not yours. If my choices insult your sense of style or offend your taste then too bad. I will stick with my ineffective little rifles and go about my pathetic existence.

Brad

You have misread my intent and have your knickers in a knot over nothing. I merely wanted to discuss why they were so popular. Rifle cartridges were made
for rifle ranges and are obviously more effective at longer range. To argue that is ridiculous. It seems a lot of people on this site use pistol calibers which aroused my curiosity. I suggest you read closely before you blow a fuse.

DP

[robertbank]

Horsefeathers. It is not suitable for rifles because of its tiny rim and horrendous blowback.

Well it is an historical fact regarding the cartridge itself and who owned the rights to it. As far as the tiny rim is concerned all I can say is it seems to work quite well in the rifles made today and if you read the article referred to the cartridge performs quite well at very high pressures. I shooot the cartridge in my SAA copy and have yet to expereince any blowback that you refer to.

Take Care

Bob

[btroj]

We shoot them for fun. We shoot them because they fit our needs. We shoot them because we choose to.
You dis not word you question very well. It sure cameacross as a comdenarion pf some of the most fun rifles out there.
My Marlin CB in 45 Colt is my preferred gun for tracking deer. It is light, swings like a shotgun, is fast to shoot with a receiver sight, and carries enough wallop to finish off any deer that I may come across. As I hunt in timbered areas my chances of a 100 yard shot in these circumstances is rare. It fills this need very well. I can also get off follow up shots very fast. When I shot a pig a few years back I had a guy tell me someone was using an autoloader. Nope, just a well smoothed lever gun.

I have a 30-30 lever action. I like it. I just don't need it for 20 to 30 yard shots on deer. My postal cartridge lever guns works just fine. Light and handy.

I do get blowback in my 45 Colt Marlin with light loads. It does not hit me in the face, just dirties the action some. Not a big deal at all.

I look at it this way, a 357 lever action can be one of the harder to find guns out there. This is because there is much demand for them. What better rifle can there be to teach a new shooter? Older kids and adults sometimes want more than a rimfire but are not ready for a bigger gun than these little lever actions.

Can I load my 30-30 down to the level of my 32-20? Yep. But the 32-20 does it with less powder, less chance of double charges, no need for filler, all in a light sub 5 pound rifle. The 32-20 does it with a sense of class the 30-30 will never have.

In the end, it is about choices. I really like my 45Colt, 357, and 32-20 lever guns. I use my 45-70 Marlin for bear because I want the extra billet weight it gives me. When I grab a pistol cartridge lever action it is because it fits the needs at hand. Why use a 10 pound sledge to drive a tack?

[northmn]

They say that verbal and written words are about 40% of our communication and that personal interaction is the rest. One of the problems of trying to have a pleasant discussion on these sites is that what one thinks he says and what may come across is different as we depend on just what is written.
Genrally I agree with what you say. I just bought a 32-20 because it is better than loading down a 30-30 and the 94cl style rifle is a little handier. I have gotten away from the longer range shooting and enjoy huntign with my levers. I do have a couple of stand where the 30-30 is about right as the shots may be a bit longer for a pistol caliber but they would probably work. I also have a 357 mag in a Rossi lever which is very addictive. Up close it would work very well and there are up close opportunities for deer but I generally hunt with either the 30-30 or will probably try my 38-55. I have to put up wood during deer season and still may carry the 357 on the tractor.
That is what I am seeing is that most of the folks are using the slab sided levers for close range work and they are very handy little rifles. Personally I question the Rossi in 454 Casull as the rifle is just too light for the cartridge. While it is a pistol cartridge, what constitutes a pistol cartridge is getting rather interesting. I also have seen the "rifle" calibers made for lever guns fail because I think that the lever guns may not be used for their purpose anymore. The old 71 Winchester in 348 was at one time very popular, but its most common use now seems to be a conversion to Alaskan calibers for use against big bear. Other than the 30-30 and 35 Remington I do not see any great popularity in true "rifle" calibers in the slab sided levers. Those that want more power or range are not using tubular fed lever guns.
Your 45-70 and the 444 also seem to stay popular but they are not long range calibers.

DP

[John 242]

It is interesting as really pistol cartridges do not make good rifle cartridges. They lack the range and are underpowered for their bore size. A rifle should be usable at longer ranges.

In the part of Texas where I hunt, it's done mostly from stands. If the range is kept within 100 yards, do you really need a rifle cartridge? Yeah, over 150 yards a rifle cartridge probably should be used, but not everybody shoots that far. That's like saying; "Bows aren't nearly as effective as a rifle. Rifles should be used at longer ranges." Well, yeah, of course.


The 44-40 was originally a rifle cartridge that I think was adapted to pistols. Colt muct have picked up on the selling points of using both in a rifle and pistol. Yet a lot of Colts were made in calibers that never were made in rifles. The most obvious is the 45 which has only recnetly been made for rifles.
The .44-40 was introduced in the 1873 Winchester along with the .38-40 and the .32-20. Winchester did not chamber their rifles in the .45 Colt, but niether did Colt in either the Lightning or the Burgess.
The .45 Colt was originally loaded with 40 grains of black powder and a 255 grain bullet and made approximately 810 fps.
The .44-40 was originally loaded with a 200 grain bullet and 40 grains of black powder and produced over 900 fps.
Although the lighter bullet had a higher velocity, can you really say that the .44-40 is significantly more powerful than the .45 Colt? No, not really. The .44-40 is really more of a handgun cartridge, at least performance wise.


Single shot rifles were used by many that felt that a rifle had to have a bit more authority. Winchester did finally adapt to the rifle cartridges with their 1876 and 1886. The interchangeability seemed even then to have limited use.
Considering how popular the 1873 and 1892 Winchesters were, that's kind of a big assumption. The 1873 was produced until 1919 and the 1892 was produced until 1938, long after more powerful rifle cartridges, including the .30-30 and .30-06 were introduced.


People are buying rifles in pistol calibers and having fun with them. I am one of them, but still am amused at how they prosper. My 30-30 can be loaded down to 32-20 performance and be loaded up to out range most revolver cartridges. I was told the old 358 Winchester (another dead duck) ws popular in the Savage in Alaska as it could be loaded with lead pistol bullets for small stuff but still have the power for moose. Who knows?
DP
For the price of a 20 round box of .30-30 Winchester a person could buy a box of 50 .357 magnums. Simple ecconomics favors the revolver caliber rifle. You can't find .348 Winchesters at Wal-Mart and you're not going to find .358s there either. You'll be lucky to find .444 Marlin! .45-70 is friggen outrageous, price wise, for the non-reloader.
There is no reason that a person should have to use a more powerful rifle if the range is kept reasonably short. Many rifle caliber lever actions are iron sighted, anyway, including the Winchester 94s. Not too many people making 200+ yard shots on deer with iron sights. How much MORE DEAD is a deer at 75 yards when shot with a .30-30 versus a .44 or .357 magnum?

[Jeff H]

I keep seeing mention of how the .357 in a rifle is great for new shooters.
No argument there, but I wouldn't relegate it to that role solely, as it was after 40+ years of shooting and a couple decades of ignoring the "pipsqueak" sub-44s that I came to the conclusion that it was really a great idea in a rifle and considerably more useful and powerful than I gave it credit for.

I am certainly not ashamed to be seen carrying one, and I have been known to order a Happy Meal on those ocassions when I wasn't hungry enough for a super-sized meal.

[Piedmont]

Pistol calibers are cheap to shoot and easy to download. They also are easier to turn out in bulk on progressive machines. So if you plan to shoot a lot, rather than just use it hunting, they make a lot of sense.

As to the .45 Colt, I'm pretty sure the rim is slightly larger now than in the 1800s and I know that they are now cutting a relief groove in front of the rim. Both of these changes allow it to work in a leveraction, whereas it would not have in the 1800s.

[StrawHat]

...As to the .45 Colt, I'm pretty sure the rim is slightly larger now than in the 1800s and I know that they are now cutting a relief groove in front of the rim. Both of these changes allow it to work in a leveraction, whereas it would not have in the 1800s.

Correct, todays case is a bit different from the original. The same can be said for a lot of cases made back then. My Trapdoor has never had an extraction problem but more than a few Troopers had a problem with the origianl 45-70 copper cases failing to extract from the breech.

As a long range handgunner, I do not see where the handgun chambered rifles give a lot improvement to the endgame. If I were involved in solo ranger work, maybe but even then I think a good lever gun in a rifle chambering would be a better solution.

Some day I will have a lever rifle in 45 long Colt, until then, my 405 WCF goes nicely with any of the revolvers I choose to carry.

[btroj]

I can guarantee you that your 405 WCF weighs more than my Marlin 45Colt. I can not think of a better rifle to carry for long periods of time than a handy, lightweight lever action. For the hunting I do, which is largely under 50 yards, the 45 Colt is plenty of gun. I my 45-70 Marlin a much more powerful weapon? Yep, but it is much easier too. Does not swing as smooth either.
In the end it is about choice. This is basically a Ford/Chevy argument. Neither side is right or wrong. I jus happen to really enjoy these light weight, fun, easy shooting rifles. Now to find a 25-20!
those of you who don't see why we shoot them- find a friend who has one and go try it. You might just like it enough to want one too!

Brad

[northmn]

Its not that big of an assumption. I will stand behind the statement on singleshot rifles as Winchester went through a lot of gymnastics until Browning helped them design a lever that could take the 45-70. The military stayed with the single shot trap door until the Spanish American War. Sharps did go under in the 1880's but the Remington rolling block was even made in smokeless cartridges in its later years. Winchester also had their High and Low wall designs. Lever guns never did pass military tests. Also recreational rifle shooting was becoming popular after the civil war and single shots including the muzzle loading slug guns were popular for that as they tended to be fairly long range. Single shots could be made to use cartridges which satisfied the magnum mentality of the times. The 45 cal singlehots could use 500 grain bullets which were not as usable in a lever.
The capacity fo the earlier short cartridge rifles may have been an allure also. The 73 carried something like 14 rounds. My short magazine 32-30 still holds 7 rounds and I think my two Marlin cowboys hold 10 rounds. I rarely load a full magazine and only put about 2 or 3 in the tube, but for plinking and casual shooting it would be kind of fun to load a full magazine.
30-30's are dirt cheap in my area, such that one can hardly afford to reload them. 357's are also fairly cheap. have not priced 44's or 45's. The 35 Remington gets spendy and a 45-70 really is best reloaded to take advantage of its performance. The carbide dies make the 357 a real pleasant reloading experience.
I am surprised at the popularity of the 45 in a rifle as I would think more would opt for the 44 mag. Those that use them seem to really like them though.

DP

[pmer]

northmn, what is your consideration for the 44 Rem. mag over a 45 Colt in a rifle? :coffeecom

I have 44 and 45 revolvers and just a 45 Colt in a lever. Some day I would like to find a 357 lever action.

[northmn]

Loading manuals have cut back on 45 Colt loads, mainly because of problems with putting some of the bombs in guns like my Colt replica. I admit I have a few loads left over when I had a Ruger that I am reluctant to shoot in my pistol, even though they are really not all that hot, about 900+ fps in the Ruger. The 44 Mag can be loaded to a higher power level and still be safe in pistols and other 44 mags than the 45. For plinking one can also differentiate with 44 specials. Mostly if one uses suggested loads in either the 44 will be more powerful and as a few writers and the Speer manual stated, if you want a magnum then get a magnum. If one wants to load his 45 up to some of the levels I have read thats his business, but I do not think most 45 users do that. The 44 Mag at close range is a rather formidible cartridge in a lever rifle that compares to cartridges like the 35 Remington. At longer range the velocities will drop off, but a 44 Mag would be good for over 100 yards. It has been used in its day in a revolver for rather large game. A 45 Colt does do a fair job on deer even out of a revlover with normal loads, so I assume it would do the same out of a rifle.

DP

[btroj]

A 45 Colt lever action can easily hit 1600 with a 250 plus grain bullet. I killed 2 hogs with one a hot using a 265 wfn. Went thru first pig and hit a little one I did not see. To me that is pretty good penetration.
One reason for 45 Colt lever guns in the fact that some have had trouble with the slower twist rate Marlin uses in the 44 mag guns. Many also like the heavier bullet weights a 45 allows quite easily over a 44. I use a 290 gr plain base over 10.5 gr of surplus 105, similar to aa5, and I get about 1200 fps in my lever action. Tis will shoot thru any deer I see, is accurate, not bad for recoil, and is pretty cheap to shoot.
The manuals are reluctant to list heavy 45 Colt loads for liability reasons but good data is not hard to find. I have cut back on my top end load use as I decided I just don't need it. A heavy bullet at reasonable velocity will penetrate like nothing else so push things?
As for cost- I can load 100 rounds of 38 special for use in my lever action for about 6 to 7 dollars per 100. I don't know of anywhere that I can buy it that cheap. My 32-20 is ever cheaper. And why buy ammo? I reload for fun, it is what I am,it is who I am. I only shoot factory when no other option exists. Heck, I rarely shoot jacketed. Many of us on this site cast our own not because we are cheap but because we can. We want to. We have a need to do for ourselves. It is a state of mind.

[northmn]

As I do not have either a 45 or a 44 cal rifle I admit to personal theory. Some seem to get the 45 rifles barking.

DP

[btroj]

The 45 Colt is a better plinker than a 45-70. Lighter bullets, less powder make it cheaper to shoot. Much lighter rifle too. Good for deer and pigs to 100 or so. If you want to hunt bigger stuff go with a 45-70. I like mine for bear as it doesn't break a swear exceeding what you can do with the 45 Colt redlined. Each has a place, there is some overlap. I shoot the 45 Colt more just because I like it.
The 44 Marlins have a reputation for poor accuracy at longer ranges due to twist rate but some here have reported excellent results. search for info here and you will learn ALOT.
These little guns are the best plinkers ever. Pretty cheap to shoot, easy to cast and load for, and darn accurate too.
Get one and you will not regret it.

[MtGun44]

Nobody has "owned the rights" to a cartridge. Maybe a NAME, but so what? Many times
Marlin renamed a Winchester cartridge and went to the market. .44 WCF in a Win,
.44-40 in a Marlin. How about .38 S&W and .38 Colt New Police? SAME cartridges,
to all effects. I tend to think that the issue with .45 Colt was the tiny, almost useless rim on them
when they were only intended to be used in single actions with internal rod ejectors.

There is no real way in the US to "own the rights" in any real sense. Suppose you got
a design patent on some particular cartridge by name and dimensions. How about a
".333x53 rimless" Well, I may introduce a similar .334 Magnum, that is just slightly
different in some irrelevant dimension and will work in the same chamber, and we can
go to town.

Bill

[Jeff H]

.......I tend to think that the issue with .45 Colt was the tiny, almost useless rim on them when they were only intended to be used in single actions with internal rod ejectors..........

I had an old, old live round in my "samples" box in the shop with just such a rim. It also had no groove at all. On top of that, the projectile was so pointed, I would have been afraid to load it in a tubular magazine.

Thought I still had it and was going to take a pic and post it, but the tiny rim mentioned a couple times in this thread was real and was quite puny.

[W.R.Buchanan]

I watch alot of hunting shows on the Outdoor Channel.

It is interesting how an Arrow with a Taylor Knock Down Factor of Zero will usually kill a deer within 50 yards. It is also interesting how a Deer hit with a 300 gr slug from a Muzzleloader or a 500 gr slug from a shotgun will still go 50 yards before it dies.

I think you can deduce that if you put a hole thru the lungs with anything the deer will die within 50 yards. This equates to 10-15 seconds for the deer to realize he is dead.

The style of gun you use is more about range and what you shoot well. If you are shooting less than 100 yards (and most deer are shot well below that distance) then a .44 carbine should be more than adequate.

I get a kick out of the guys from Texas saying you have to shoot a deer with at least a .300 Win Mag or it won't be a humane kill. Most pull the trigger 4 times a year. ( three to sight in and one for the deer) I recently found 3ea .300 Weatherby cases at my range lying right next to a bench. I figured that was all the fun he could take that day.

I really get a kick out of it when the deer runs 50-100 yards after it is shot with a .300 mag, just like it would have if shot by a .30-30, or a .357 or .44. guys there are no 'degrees' of dead. The deer don't know the difference.

Randy

[northmn]

I have mentioned this before, but a friend of my sons bought a single shot in a 50 BMG. his brother was a gunsmith and made up a softpoint bullet. They claimed it almost blew out the opposite rib cage. The deer ran about 70 yards before she dropped (it was a large doe) It is on U Tube under 50 cal deer or something like that. I have seen deer shot with so many different calibers that none realy impress me all that much anymore. Shot a lot of them with a 270 130 grain bullet. Blew some pretty big holes in them. I now hunt with the 30-30 because it is good enough. If you shoot a deer with anything in what is called a deer rifle it will go about the same distance. That observation has come through deer I have seen shot in early party hunts in Minnesota, my own experience and that of my kids and brother in law. I wholly agree with Mr. Buchanan.

DP

[Phillip]

The 45 Long Colt has definitely changed over the years........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.45_Colt

http://www.oldammo.com/march08.htm

and how its popularity have helped make these changes to what we have now.

As for me, I went with the 45LC since I shoot allot of 45 ACP, most of the ACP boolits will shoot fine in a SSA or leaver for 45LC. It helps in keeping my costs down and I did not have to cast any thing new to get started.

As for it being a good hunting combo (Small hand gun round-Pistol & Rifle), ask your self, how many buffalo/Elk/Deer/Small Bear were dropped with 44WCF in the mid 1800's?

[NHlever]

Spring is coming slowly so I too much time to think. I have been noticing so many threads concerning the use of pistol cartridges in lever rifles. It is interesting as really pistol cartridges do not make good rifle cartridges. They lack the range and are underpowered for their bore size. A rifle should be usable at longer ranges.
I just bought a 357 recently so I find them as enjoyable as anyone. Probably the best 35 cal rifle cartridge to be developed for levers was the WW 356 which was a total flop, but was a good replacement for the old 348. The whole line of WW Big Bore cartridges were a flop and yet rifles using pistol cartridges thrive.
The 44-40 was originally a rifle cartridge that I think was adapted to pistols. Colt muct have picked up on the selling points of using both in a rifle and pistol. Yet a lot of Colts were made in calibers that never were made in rifles. The most obvious is the 45 which has only recnetly been made for rifles. Single shot rifles were used by many that felt that a rifle had to have a bit more authority. Winchester did finally adapt to the rifle cartridges with their 1876 and 1886. The interchangeability seemed even then to have limited use.
People are buying rifles in pistol calibers and having fun with them. I am one of them, but still am amused at how they prosper. My 30-30 can be loaded down to 32-20 performance and be loaded up to out range most revolver cartridges. I was told the old 358 Winchester (another dead duck) ws popular in the Savage in Alaska as it could be loaded with lead pistol bullets for small stuff but still have the power for moose. Who knows?

DP

The story of the pistol caliber rifles is an interesting one to follow, and I'm taking your comments as curiousity rather than condemnation. My guess is that a few folks bought these guns (well in my earlier days of shooting they were converting 92 Winchesters to more available pistol calibers) for their kids to start centerfire shooting with, or for themselves for fun use at the range, and on walkabouts, etc. A few took deer, or other game that size with them just because that is what they had in their hands at the time. Most were really surprised to see just how effective these guns were when used in their range. Even Brian Pearce, the gunwriter, admitted he was surprised when he saw his first .357 Mag deer kill. Word spread that these light, handy guns worked at normal woods ranges, and worked very well. Now someone could buy a fun gun, shoot it enough to become really good with it, and also have something suitable for deer at closer ranges. It was a very happy melding of attributes that made these guns popular. Other posters are right when they say that some folks wouldn't be caught dead carrying a pistol caliber carbine, but one seldom sees used ones in the quantity that reflects how many new ones are sold. They wouldn't have remained so popular, or actually gained in popularity ( cowboy shooting aside) as they have if they didn't work, and work well at the tasks they are used for. The best evidence I can see of that is looking at the .30 Carbine round. In my youth when those guns, and ammo were available at very attractive prices, many weret taken into the woods............... once. They didn't work, and the folks that kept them did so just to have fun at the range, or to own a piece of history. I had an M-2 Carbine when I was in Vietnam, and had lots of fun with it in off hours, but never carried it on purpose when things might get serious. Though you say these guns are underpowered for their bore size, when you get right down to it, they will do anything that can be done on deer sized game at 50 yards with bullets of that diameter. Once you poke a .45 Caliber hole through a deer, there just isn't much left that can be done with a bullet that size, and they probably do anything one can do with a .223, or .243 at those ranges. Part of the key to their success is that folks that have these guns tend to shoot them a lot, and that equates to confidence, and good bullet placement.......... always the most important thing.

[Jeff H]

northmn, what is your consideration for the 44 Rem. mag over a 45 Colt in a rifle? :coffeecom

I have 44 and 45 revolvers and just a 45 Colt in a lever. Some day I would like to find a 357 lever action.

I think I know why that question comes up. I too wondered about that, and I think that we (here at leverguns) have no real idea of how many .44s are sold versus .45s. A large part of the population of handgun owners are not levergun owners. Many don't post about their stuff either.

I believe that it is possible the .44 could be as or more popular than the .45 among the general shooting public, we just hear more about the .45s here than the .44s because the .45 is more popular here, for nostalgic or historical reasons as well as the fact that with modern brass it can be everything from a pop-gun to a real stomper.

I like the .45 Colt too, but I have dies, brass, molds, etc. for the .44s because I shoot the 'Special more than anything and have pared my "collection" down to what I "need." If I were t obuy another, it would probably be a .44. I have stuff to load the .45, but gave my brass t oa friend when I sold my OM Ruger .45 in deference to the commonality of components with the .44s.

If I still had the time and the money to mess with it more, I would probably get a .45, but then I (we) know what the .45 is capable of and I don't think "the masses" do. They may well be outvoting us with their dollars, so we can thank the cowboy action shooters for being our lobbyists, whether we shoot cowboy or not.

Even when loaded at less than magnum levels, my Smith' M25 and OM BH in .45 Colt were plenty for hunting, but the .44 mag is so much more available across the counter for those who are not quite as fanatical about this stuff as we are.

[W.R.Buchanan]

A .44 Special with a 250 gr lead boolit shot from a pistol at 1000fps will go clean thru virtually any NA Game animal up to a Moose. a .44 Mag from a rifle at 1800 fps it will go thru in ANY direction. .44 Mags with Brass solids will go thru most cars and some light trucks

.44 cal pistols have taken every game animal on this planet. This is not speculation, go to Garrettammo.com and look at their gallery of trophys taken with their .44 ammo.

.44 cal rifles shoot the same pistol loads 400-700FPS faster than pistols do.

300-335Gr .44 boolits at 16-1800 fps are well into midrange .45-70 ballistics.

You can't argue with this kind of effectiveness.

These guns are under estimated mainly because of their Ft Lb Ratings.

If you compare Taylor Knock Down #'s to say a .30-06 you'll see that the .44 is more powerful?

It depends on how you look at it.

The real limitation is range and the .44 will lose that discussion every time past 150yds. But I can tell you that a 55lb Silhoutte Ram at 200 yards will get knocked flat instantly when hit by a 250gr .44 cal boolit. [smilie=w: I mean blammo!

These guns are way underrated by current methods and someone needs to come up with a method of gauging their performance more accurately when compared to smaller calibers at faster speeds.

Arrows have zero knock down factor, and really fast ones are at 350 FPS, yet deer and other antelope sized game rarely travel more than 50 yards after being run thru. So it would seem that you can kill something by blowing up it's insides, or by poking a hole thru it's insides, just about as quickly. Sounds like different ways of doing the same thing. I don't think you can compare the morality of killing something in 15 seconds to doing it instantly. The result is the same, and I don't think one is more "humane" than the other. Besides isn't "humane" a liberal term?

If you poke a 1/2-3/4" hole thru the lungs of anything it is going to to die soon. A .44 Mag rifle or pistol will do that to just about anything, maybe not whales.

Randy

[W.R.Buchanan]

The .45LC vs .44 is moot, they can both be loaded to do the same things from new guns which are essentially identical.

The popularity of the .45LC in Rifles and new pistols is driven strictly by the Cowboy action crowd there are in excess of 90,00 of them and alot like the .45LC for that reason. big sales numbers come from that crowd.

That popularity drifts over into the "less informed" groups as well.

But unless you reload:Fire: it is going to be much harder to find .45LC ammo and then it is going to be not nearly as powerful and certainly more expensive than normal .44 mag stuff. Walmart carries .44Magnum they don't have .44 Spec or .45LC. If .45LC was more available it would be even more popular than it is now.

Factory ammo makers have to consider all of the guns made for .45LC that can't take magnum pressures so they are going to load the round down in deferance to those guns. But reloaders also drive .45LC popularity, as can custom gun makers like Linebaugh , and Bowen who make big boomers like .454 Casulls which can plink with .45LCs.

Another thing to consider is that new .45LC cases like from Starline, are no longer "Ballon Headed"(Is that a correct usage?) so with the stronger web they can be safely loaded much hotter, thus increasing utility.:castmine:

Add Ruger Super Black Hawks, Marlin 1894's in .45LC and others, and you have strong guns that are going to appeal to the more knowledgable shooters, which will be followed by others, thus resulting in more popularity and beyond.

Kind of makes sense? :confused:

Randy

[Jeff H]

The .45LC vs .44 is moot,.......Randy

I had absolutely no intention of opening the debate (can-o'-worms) regarding whether the .44 mag. or .45 Colt is "better." I can personally be happy with either, so long as I have components.

I am not privy to the marketing numbers from the manufacturers, so, again, my comment is speculative only and specifically about the distribution of .45 Colt shooters, nothing else.

[lbaize3]

In both rifles and pistols.... Everyone knows the 44 Mag will do the trick for most game. I load my 45 Colts with 250 grain LRNFP bullets and 7.8 grains of Universal. This is the max load for Colt and their replicas and gives a velocity in the high 900 fps out of the pistol. I have not run the load over the chrony but I think it should be in the high 1000 fps out of a rifle. I use this load so that the brass will expand and seal the chambers in my Taurus Thunderbolt rilfes and so the linkage in my Uberti 1873 lever guns will not be stretched. This load will take care of anything I will run into here in Texas. The load is mild shooting and easy on the shoulder and wrist.

I also find the Uberti replicas lighter than the S&W model 29 and the 1894 Marlin. I enjoy carrying the 45 Colt when I am wandering the woods. And since both calibers are equally accurate I don't feel any disability in the short woods hunting ranges I normally encounter.

However I pass up shots that I am not sure of and bullet placement is the key, not the caliber.

[northmn]

My original intent was that of curiosity not to run down their use. Mostly looking at the posts I realize that many users are using them at pretty close range. They are nice and handy to carry and quick to get into action. I have taken deer with my 30-30 and a Williams 5-D peep sight and can appreciate that use. The deer I have walked up on could have been taken with a 357 as well as a rifle caliber. Where longer shots are the rule I suspect many go to a bolt action in a flatter shooting caliber.
When I was younger I got to talk to a lot of old depression area veterans and some of their descendents that used 30-30 or 32 special carbines to take about anything bigger than rabbits that they ran into. One individual joked that he was 18 before he knew what beef tasted like. They all carried these carbines almost everywhere they went as they were light and handy and did the job. A lot of the carbines had a peep sight with the aperture throen away for quick shooting. The Cowboy action crowd seems to have generated a lot of manufacture of pistol chambered carbines used for a similar purpose.

DP

[btroj]

I consider my Marlin 336 in 30-30 a 100 yard fun with cast for deer. It will work beyond that but I prefer to not push things.
I suppose the treason some of us hunt with them is for the same renown some use a ha shun or bow, we choose to hunt deer, not shoot them. It is the challenge of knowing we have to get close.

[Jeff H]

My original intent was that of curiosity not to run down their use........DP

I thought that was pretty much cleared up. As you said, it can be a challenge to put inflection and tone, let alone body language into straight text. That's what the smiley icons are for, but I usually don't find just what I need.

I think it's a great thread and I am glad you started it. A feather may have been ruffled here and there but they smooth out quickly here.:drinks:

I just came in from trying my "wide-mouth 32-20" (.357) with a "yard-work" load and am tickled silly. 5.5 grains of W231 under a LEE (not the bevel-base) in mag cases and six of nine went into two inches at forty yards with the factory sights. Nice and quiet, accurate and will make a significant hole in pests without needing the velocity (and noise) to expand a hollow point.

I have had revolvers that would do 2" at that range and it may not seem that great with a rifle, but with some load development and better sights, this carbine is the berries for what I need. The possibility of a coyote or an ill-tempered feral dog would not deter my choosing this when heading out the back door. I have hesitated on my way out with the .22 before and that hesitation could cost you a beloved pet.

[Catshooter]

I load my 45 Colts with 250 grain LRNFP bullets and 7.8 grains of Universal. This is the max load for Colt and their replicas and gives a velocity in the high 900 fps out of the pistol. I have not run the load over the chrony but I think it should be in the high 1000 fps out of a rifle.

lbaize3,

That load will not deliver the speed you're thinking. I use 9.0 grains of the same powder and it goes 950 or so from four inches, 1100 + from 16. At least over my Chrony.


Cat

[6pt-sika]

You know it pretty much all boils down to what a person wants to do it with a pistol caliber lever or a bolt action 50 BMG !

And at the risk of sounding derrogatory I don't really care what other folks use and I'm quite sure the vast majority don't care what I use .

And with that being said I would have no qualms trying a deer with a cast bullet loaded 32-20 . But again it would be in a specific situation where I was certain I had enough ass in the load to handle the task ! Same can be said for the 25-20 , 219 Zipper (jacketed Nosler 60 grain Partition only), 25-36 Marlin and any number of other borderline cartridges !

I've already taken deer with the 41 MAG and 44 MAG rifles. Wanted to try some with the 357 MAG in a rifle but never did . Anyway IMHO I think a good many of the pistol cartridge rounds will do far more then they're given credit for . However one needs to know their limitations when they use them .

Let us not foget the great "Jordan Buck" was killed a good while back with nothing more then a Winchester 1892 in 25-20 and also remmember James Jordan shot that deer about 7-10 times before he finally got him !

[Combat Diver]

I enjoy my Marlin 1894S in .41 Mag has I also hunt with my .41 mag Smith revolvers. Deer have out smarted me when hunting however and have only harvested some grey squirrels with it. Wouldn't mind picking up a Rossi 92 in .454 Casull for a light 45-70 capable carbine.

CD

[DanWalker]

Love my win94 Trapper in 45LC. Killed several deer and piles of hogs with it. Even whalloped prairie dogs, potted grouse and bagged bunnies with it. I have loads that range from roundballs at 700 fps, that make this a great gun for kids to shoot, to firebreathing stompers, pushing 320 grain hammer boolits at 1500 fps, that can(and have) punch right through hogs and deer like butter.
We used lever action 44 mags when I was helping eradicate hogs off of the channel islands of California. They were also HIGHLY effective.

[northmn]

A 30-30, 35 Remingon or 32 special can and have been loaded with cast bullets that are a match for jacketed factory loads. I use a 190 grain cast at 1975 fps or so. It put a deer down at 140 yards such that I had to kick it over to gut it. Shot through the lungs and there was blood all over the place. Short stubby bullets can be effective but do not knock long slim ones. A 400+ grain 45-70 bullet has the same sectional density more or less as a 180 grain 30 cal. The buffalo hunters used heavy bullets for their long range shooting because they would maintain velocity and were effective at the 200 yards they often shot at to avoid spooking the herd. The 40-90 was popular but it used a bullet at over 300 grains in a 40. Most of the lever guns use I am hearing is for close range shooting.
Long range shooting with something like a BP rifle or muzzle loader can be done, but you have to know the rifle very well and must know the range. Many of the long range single shot BP cartridge shooters use a laser range finder. Do not get excited about the marketing for the modern ammo for a muzzle loader. The pointed bullets are still pretty light weight for the caliber. A 50 cal rifle should have a 450 grain bullet and some use a 700 grain. I had a 50-70 and a 50-90 once and proper bullets also got my attention when I shot them. But that is another story.

DP

[Rafe Covington]

My Trapper in 45 Colt and my 1876 in 40-60 WCF will do the job if I do my part, lever guns in revolver rounds and 1876 rifle cartridges worked for my grand dad and my dad so its sure good enough me. People got to use what ever works and makes them happy, JMHO.

Rafe:drinks:

[waksupi]

Those pistol chambered lever guns can be shot at longer ranges. We shoot them out to 400 yards regularly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23UhypY-pUg

[Jeff H]

Those pistol chambered lever guns can be shot at longer ranges. We shoot them out to 400 yards regularly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23UhypY-pUg

Hey, it could happen.;)

Something I have to be VERY mindful of where I live.
It'a flat as a pool table here as far as you can see.:shock:

[6pt-sika]

Those pistol chambered lever guns can be shot at longer ranges. We shoot them out to 400 yards regularly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23UhypY-pUg

I watched a man shoot a nice old Winchester 1873 in 44-40 at 300 meters one day and hit a good percentage of the boar silhouettes he aimed it at !

And by no means was he using ass stomping loads .

[1Shirt]

No sense in getting in a public urination contest on the subject.

I probably enjoy shooting my 357 M-94 as much as any of my lever guns. I can shoot a hundred or two rounds thru it in an afternoon, not be tired, and not be beat up. Son in law shoots a 32-20 that is about the same. With the right loads, they are adequate for most small game and varmints. Would not hesitate where legal on deer to use my 357. Not legal in Ne. however in a rifle. It is in a handgun-----go figure as they say.

Many/most pistol ctg rifles are shot mostly at paper, however from 357 and up, are adequate for deer, pigs, etc. at appropriate ranges. Another factor, at least to me, is that as far as rifle go, so called pistol ctgs are cheaper, and easier to load, than traditional rilfe ctgs. Sure would like one in a 32Mag.-----talk about a fun little rifle.

As far as hunting the pistol ctgs. in rifles, ya gota hitum to gitum. Put a pistol blt from a rifle in the vitals, and there will be meat on the table. Gut shoot with a larger rifle ctg--------well, we all know the results.
1Shirt!:coffee:

[northmn]

There was an individual at a local BP shoot that hit gongs with a 44-40 and beat out a few single shots. The problem with any of the slower bullets be they rifle or pistol rounds is knowing the range. If a target shooter knows the range and has a good set of sights he can hit what he shoots at. That is kind of fun. A 44-40 will play h--l in a wind however as compared to a 45-70. A 400 grain 45-70 drifts less than a 200 grain 44. If the wind is strong enough it does not matter. For years granddad was searcing for rifles that shot a little flatter so that range estimation was not so critical. The 30-30 and 30-40 Krag do not look that powerful compared to some of the contemporary claibers but they shot a lot flater and made hits possible. They made the old black powder cartridges obsolete. A lot of the rifles that lasted beyond smokeless powder days were made up to use up parts on hand. The old 1895 lever had its faults but people like Teddy Rooseveldt really liked them.
Some people that like to use the older cartridges at longer ranges also carry a rangefinder to compensate for the rainbow trajectories at longer ranges. The schutzen cartridges in the early days were rather slow, 40-70 to 38-55 down to 32-40 at 200 yards. They also shot some amazing groups at that range.

DP

[Jeff H]

........ If a target shooter knows the range and has a good set of sights........DP

Speaking of sights, did you decide to/not to mount that 5D on your Rossi?

I have been sight shopping and that one is starting to look like the one I am going to put on mine.

I would be interested to know if you were able to keep your original front sight height and where (fore/aft) you put the site on the reciever.

[northmn]

Speaking of sights, did you decide to/not to mount that 5D on your Rossi?

I have been sight shopping and that one is starting to look like the one I am going to put on mine.

I would be interested to know if you were able to keep your original front sight height and where (fore/aft) you put the site on the reciever.

I filed down the rear sight on the Rossi and opened up the buckhorn a bit. I also made a bigger U in the rear so that I can see the front. I kept the original front sight but am considering a green fiber optic. I have not put a peep sight on it yet. I can still shoot the open sights. The open rear sights have one big advantage in that I have a 38 special load that is fun to shoot that chronographs at a little over 1100 fps. I also have a 357 load at about 1500 that I like. I can sight in to the elevator for both loads and just move the elevator up or down depending on what I am using. A 5D requires a scredriver. I have a Marlin sight from one of my CB's that I may install as it has a fine adjusment plus a better elevator system. My Marlin 32-20 now supports a 5-D peep sight but will probably be used with one load. 9 grains of 2400 and a 120 grain bullet are looking good in it.

DP

[cajun shooter]

Robert Bank, Your posting shows that you are the one that needs to do some research. Your posting is all hot air!! The 45 Colt case that came out in 1873 was a balloon head style case that had just enough of a rim to see and feel with your fingers. It was designed to be fired from the Colt 1873 SAA that was equipped with a extractor rod and did not need a rim for a extractor to remove it from the gun. It would not work in any rifle produced at that time. The 44-40 or the 44WCF which is the true name was designed by Winchester to make it's debut in the 1873 rifle. The reason that Marlin called the ammo 44-40 is that they did not want to put Winchester on any of their guns. I think what you are trying to refer to has nothing to do with any cartridge. It was said that when Colt started making rifles they were paid a late night visit by the owners of Winchester. Winchester had a good hold on the rifle market as did Colt with the revolvers of the time. They advised Colt that if they continued to make rifles that Winchester was ready to produce revolvers. Nothing was ever released to the public but Colt stopped all rifle production with out any press information. At least that is how the story goes. Several companies through time have made the others cartridges in guns but chose to call it by a different name. The 45 Colt case made today by such makers as Starline have a case that is just as strong as any 44 magnum case. The reason they are still loaded to the pressures of old are what is known as the PUBLIC IDIOTS. You have people who would load one of these rounds in a old BP frame Colt just to see if it would work. This posting is not given to put down on you as a person as I have never met you. It was given because I don't care to be told I am wrong by some one who is using the wrong information to show me my mistakes. Take Care

[KCSO]

Well I've carried one since about 1973 or so. The 357 carbine I started with would shoot my duty loads into less than 3" at 100 yards and carried 12 in the gun. It seemed pretty handy many times when my oppponant was hunkered down well out of shotgun range. The fact that the carbine put a 158 grain bullet on target at 100 yards with the same energy as a revolver at the muzzle seemed pretty comforting too. Since I have retired my cary guns are a 44 Mag Ruger Bisley and a 44 Mag rifle. With a lot of work i have a cast bullet load that will shoot right around 2" at 100 yards and in the revolver I can hold under 2 1/2" at 25 yards. The 240 grain bullet from either has been plenty for deer out to 125 yards. I have shot the rifle getting ready for levergun sillouette this summer and I am holding under 6" at 200 yards with the tang sight. All in all it's handy to carry a set that shoots long and short with the same ammo. The rifle may not be a 400 yards coyote killer but it has done well at the ranges i normally shoot.

As to the 30-30 beng superior to a pistol cartridge, well Maybe, but so far the sillouette guys have foound that the bigger 44 and 45 bullets are knocking down the plates better at 200 yards than the 170 grain 30-30's. And since a 30-30 is at best a 150 yard deer cartridge I don't feel too bad about having to let them get 25 yards closer for my puny 44. If I want to hunt out to 300 yards I get a REAL gun I shoot my Krag!

[robertbank]

Robert Bank, Your posting shows that you are the one that needs to do some research. Your posting is all hot air!! The 45 Colt case that came out in 1873 was a balloon head style case that had just enough of a rim to see and feel with your fingers. It was designed to be fired from the Colt 1873 SAA that was equipped with a extractor rod and did not need a rim for a extractor to remove it from the gun. It would not work in any rifle produced at that time. The 44-40 or the 44WCF which is the true name was designed by Winchester to make it's debut in the 1873 rifle. The reason that Marlin called the ammo 44-40 is that they did not want to put Winchester on any of their guns. I think what you are trying to refer to has nothing to do with any cartridge. It was said that when Colt started making rifles they were paid a late night visit by the owners of Winchester. Winchester had a good hold on the rifle market as did Colt with the revolvers of the time. They advised Colt that if they continued to make rifles that Winchester was ready to produce revolvers. Nothing was ever released to the public but Colt stopped all rifle production with out any press information. At least that is how the story goes. Several companies through time have made the others cartridges in guns but chose to call it by a different name. The 45 Colt case made today by such makers as Starline have a case that is just as strong as any 44 magnum case. The reason they are still loaded to the pressures of old are what is known as the PUBLIC IDIOTS. You have people who would load one of these rounds in a old BP frame Colt just to see if it would work. This posting is not given to put down on you as a person as I have never met you. It was given because I don't care to be told I am wrong by some one who is using the wrong information to show me my mistakes. Take Care

Well we seem to hit a nerve. Some of the above relates to the topic. Most doesn't with all do respect. I am aware of the stories, likely true, regarding the Colt/Winchester compromise but it has nothing to do with the topic you refer to nor does the argument regarding balloon head cases. The .45Colt was not the only cartridge case made that way, another was the .41 Long and Short Colt. I am sure there were others.

You have your opinion I have mine. If I agreed with you I suspect we would be both wrong. Never-the-less I respect your opinion I just don't agree with it.

Here is the article with research on the subject: http://www.leverguns.com/articles/paco/45coltlevergun.htm

and the passage worth reading:

"But the research I did back in 1984/85 for my first book on leverguns shows that the 45 Colt handgun round was a proprietary round developed and patented by Colt for the Army. And Colt never gave permission to other companies to chamber any guns for it. That included S&W, Winchester, and later Marlin....so the 44-40 became the revolver/rifle classic. Colt did sell 45 caliber handguns to the public early on when U.S. Army orders slowed...but wouldn’t let other manufacturers chamber for it. That’s not being critical of Colt, it’s a fact of history....so by the time the patents and design copyrights fell into public domain two decades plus later....the 44-40 and 38-40 class of rounds dominated. And then rather large cased calibers followed to make the leveraction rifles very potent long arms. So these big rounds created no profitable reason to go to the 45 Colt handgun rounds in rifles, after the 45 Colt patents were expired. Rounds like Winchester’s 45-65...and Marlin’s 1881 leveraction in 45-70 eclipsed the need for the 45 Colt in rifles."

Take Care

Bob

[felix]

Well, does it really make any difference today? The only thing that does make sense is that the case manufacturers are all screwed up on what to make cases fit what. I would think there would be a market for big and small cases, and printed so on the rim as 45LCB or 45LCS. Can't use the letter "L" because it can mean either large or little. I am sick and tired or these so called "stock" chambers being cut for who knows what. That is my only complaint with the LC. If they ever make a standard chamber, they should make it for 458 boolits and be done with it. Let the auto have the small boolit to itself. .. felix

If anybody should have known mo'betta', it should have been Dick Casull. He had a chance to fix things when designing his 454, but didn't. Water under the bridge too. It all sucks big time. ... felix

[btroj]

You are dead on Felix. I would love to see brass and dies made to allow proper fit in the massive chambers Marlin and Ruger seem to like. I am sure my Marlin would allow a .458 diameter bullet seated in a case to chamber. The barrel might not but the chamber sure would.

[cajun shooter]

You are using one article to base all your opinions on. That article is filled with flaws such as calling the 45 Colt the long Colt because he (PACO) has a box of 45 Shorts. That's a bunch of DOO DOO!! The US Army had two guns that used 45 ammo at the same time with the problem being that they were different lengths and one could chamber them both but the other could not. The 1873 45 Colt was loaded to almost 1000 fps and a handful for most shooters. The S&W Schofield revolver named after the Cavalry Officer that came up with the idea used a 45 Schofield round which was 1.09 to the 1.28 of the 45Colt.There was more than one time when the calvary would receive the 45 Colt as opposed to the Schofield round. The chambers were too short and would not accept the longer 45 Colt. On the other hand the 45 Colt SAA would chamber and use the 45 Schofield ammo which was loaded with the load of about 28 grains of BP with the 205 grain bullet. Much lighter recoil so the Army only ordered the short Schofield ammo. No one knows who first said Send us some of those 45 Short rounds ;we don't need any of the 45 Long Colts. A lot of so called experts still make that mistake today. Show me some Colt factory paper work where it is called the 45 Long Colt. Do yourself a favor and look at an original 45 Colt case and you will see the hard facts that you seem to deny. It has nothing to do with what Paco stated in his fictitious book. The 44-40 was introduced the same year as the 45 Colt. Why is it that Winchester designed it for the 1873 rifle but is was also made in Marlins rifles and Colt chose to chamber it's revolvers for it. But the Colt 45 could not be used by anyone else because Colt owned the rights. You sir need to do some heavy research before telling everyone else they are wrong. Perhaps you need to read more books of fiction like 20,000 leagues under the Sea as that is what you relate to. Jules Verne only stated pure fact in all his books.

[robertbank]

cajun shooter most of your post has nothing to do with your point of view. You are right of course and we all concede to your opinion.

All the best.

Take care

Bob
ps most of the cartridges of the days you are speaking of were made with balloon head cases so any suggestion the .45LC was't loaded in rifles due to the balloon head caes is to use your words, just hot air. The 45-70 managed balloon head cases for quite some time. What Colt called the cartridge and what others referred to it are two different things. Why get your stomach in a twist over it. As an aside one of the attributes of the Schofield was it was much faster to reload, a fact I doubt was not missed by the Army.

rbb

[Jeff H]

I filed down the rear sight on the Rossi and opened up the buckhorn a bit. I also made a bigger U in the rear so that I can see the front. I kept the original front sight but am considering a green fiber optic. I have not put a peep sight on it yet. I can still shoot the open sights. The open rear sights have one big advantage in that I have a 38 special load that is fun to shoot that chronographs at a little over 1100 fps. I also have a 357 load at about 1500 that I like. I can sight in to the elevator for both loads and just move the elevator up or down depending on what I am using. A 5D requires a scredriver. I have a Marlin sight from one of my CB's that I may install as it has a fine adjusment plus a better elevator system. My Marlin 32-20 now supports a 5-D peep sight but will probably be used with one load. 9 grains of 2400 and a 120 grain bullet are looking good in it.

DP

I believe I will be doing s omething similar with my rear sight, partially to compensate for the height I will lose on my front, when I amputate the off-ceneter bead. Overall, I think it will come out as a better set of sights for me. The screwdriver thing is definitely not a positiv in one way, but it makes for a sleek sight. Compromises.

On the other hand, the scope my brother sent me to use for load development arrived today and turned out to not be a pistol scope. Still ruminating the whole situation and greatly appreciate the help. It won't kill me to stick with the factory sights (modified) until I make my final decision.

[plainsman456]

It seems funny when I started shooting my 41 Marlin they always told me to do any good you have to shoot the 210-220 grain bullets for deer.
In my Blackhawk I liked the 170 grain,so whentrying both in the rifle it told me it liked the lighter bullet.
I guess the rifle knew best because when shot at 125 yards the deer just dropped out of sight,dead where he stood.
The idea of having a pistol and a rifle chambered in the caliber just makes sense to me whatever the caliber is.

[DanWalker]

You are using one article to base all your opinions on. That article is filled with flaws such as calling the 45 Colt the long Colt because he (PACO) has a box of 45 Shorts. That's a bunch of DOO DOO!! The US Army had two guns that used 45 ammo at the same time with the problem being that they were different lengths and one could chamber them both but the other could not. The 1873 45 Colt was loaded to almost 1000 fps and a handful for most shooters. The S&W Schofield revolver named after the Cavalry Officer that came up with the idea used a 45 Schofield round which was 1.09 to the 1.28 of the 45Colt.There was more than one time when the calvary would receive the 45 Colt as opposed to the Schofield round. The chambers were too short and would not accept the longer 45 Colt. On the other hand the 45 Colt SAA would chamber and use the 45 Schofield ammo which was loaded with the load of about 28 grains of BP with the 205 grain bullet. Much lighter recoil so the Army only ordered the short Schofield ammo. No one knows who first said Send us some of those 45 Short rounds ;we don't need any of the 45 Long Colts. A lot of so called experts still make that mistake today. Show me some Colt factory paper work where it is called the 45 Long Colt. Do yourself a favor and look at an original 45 Colt case and you will see the hard facts that you seem to deny. It has nothing to do with what Paco stated in his fictitious book. The 44-40 was introduced the same year as the 45 Colt. Why is it that Winchester designed it for the 1873 rifle but is was also made in Marlins rifles and Colt chose to chamber it's revolvers for it. But the Colt 45 could not be used by anyone else because Colt owned the rights. You sir need to do some heavy research before telling everyone else they are wrong. Perhaps you need to read more books of fiction like 20,000 leagues under the Sea as that is what you relate to. Jules Verne only stated pure fact in all his books.

So Paco's book on leverguns is, in your opinion, fiction?
Would you mind citing a few examples? Not trying to pick a fight, but when someone makes a strong statement like that, they usually have a darn good reason. I'd just like to hear yours, if you don't mind.

[northmn]

I do not think that power became so much of an issue when the smokeless powder loads came along as the abiltiy to hit. The 30-30 can and has done better than 150 yards. Depending upon the source one hears up to 200 with a scope. As I have only used mine out to about 140 with a cast bullet I cannot say further. I had no chance to get closer as I was in a tree stand and getting out would have spooked that deer. A lot has to do with iron sights as they can limit ones range also. That is an issue that can be debated ad nauseum. Heavy bullets will knock over steel better as they have more momentum and do not tend to fragment as badly. I had a Brown Bess that was loaded low on energy, but I had to quit shooting club gongs with it as it practically destroyed them. It used about an ounce and one quarter ball at maybe 900 fps.
I have been having some problems with accuracy in my 357. I am getting a nice horizonal group but a vertical string that seems to be walking. I am wondering if it isn't a Winchester sydrome as some are sensitive to the barrel rings. Still playing. There are several things that can cause that so I need to keep trying. It will not group 2" at 100 yards. But my Marlin in 32-20 probably could. I would like to get my little Rossi grouping reasonabley as it is fun to shoot.

DP

[Piedmont]

So Paco's book on leverguns is, in your opinion, fiction?
Would you mind citing a few examples? Not trying to pick a fight, but when someone makes a strong statement like that, they usually have a darn good reason. I'd just like to hear yours, if you don't mind.

Using Paco as a source is a lot like using Wikepedia as a source. I have read him since early eighties and there is a lot of BS, in my opinion. Also I would be very leary of his load info as I consider much of it too hot. He writes chapters or articles on a caliber for instance and rather than tell you it is good he just has to go over the top

As an example I just pulled Paco's book Leverguns off the shelf and in Chapter 13 he is selling us on how these are not short ranged rounds. He mentions loading his .307 Winchester with 125-130 grain bullets to 3100 fps and tells you how it is like a .270 Winchester. Now didn't the .307 have a 20" barrel? And weren't the pressures supposed to be a little lower than a .308? This is the kind of stuff Paco does, or did (I don't read him much anymore) all the time. You need to turn your BS meter on and you can use his loads in YOUR guns but keep them out of mine.

It isn't all fiction. Maybe none is fiction but there are lots of half-truths and overloads.

[DanWalker]

Thanks for the info. I've not read his book, but have read many of his online articles.

[northmn]

The 45 Colt has a rather avid and loyal following for rifle users. However, for what ever reasons it was never adapted to rifles until recently. The 44-40, 38-40 and 32-20 were actually rifle cartridges adapted to pistols. Mike Venturino one time commented on this and also stated that the 45 in black powder days would not give much of an increase in velocity in a rifle and that they were trying to wring out every fps they could back then. Look at the Winchester "Express" cartridges which were made in some cases to clear the actions but also to give a bit higher fps. One arguement against the current trend in hot loads for the rifles in that caliber comes from the fact taht they are definitely not for use in any version of the Colt peacemaker and not even the new Ruger Vaquero. It is easy for someone to claim lack of brains for using one in that way, but if you are hit by lightening or something similar, an innocent might buy them on a estate sale or some such situation. Mix ups can happen. Those that load them should be very careful about how well they are marked. One good arguement for a 454 lever.

DP

[plainsman456]

Has anyone heard of the 41 long colt?
I have a small collection and looking through it last night I came across 3 of these cartridges.
It is smaller than the 41 mag in diameter and length.

[robertbank]

Yes. I have my Great Grand-fathers gun chambered in .41Long Colt. I also have the three Lyman moulds I use to cast boolits for it. Two of them are heel based while the third is hollow based.

I now use 38spl brass to make cartridges for the gun. It is a labour of love. My gun sat for the better part of 60 years without ever firing a round. I take it out occasionally and shoot it.

If you Google the cartridge there is a lot of historical info out there on the cartridge. It was fairly popular amongst law enforcement in its day and from what I hvae read quite popular in the southern US.

The Colts are not known for their accuracy in this cartridge due to the fact Colt never really decided on the bore of the barrel. That and the cylinders on my gun are bored straight through. I read where Colt tried to solve some of the barrel issues when the hollow based bullets for the cartridge appeared. The hollow basse was expected to seal the bore.

Incidently there also was a .41 Short Colt. I have never seen cartridges in that calibre but have read pocket revolvers were made in this calbre.

Not sure if any of this helps.

Take Care

Bob

[KCSO]

The 45 Colt in a rifle with a 24" barrel will run between 1150 and 1200 fps wehn loaded with fffg powder and right at 1100 when loaded with ffg. This is from a ballard cut Marlin barrel 24" long. The 16" carbine of a rossi will run 1100 with FFFg. All this with a 250 gr bullet.

My theory has always been that if you want 44 Magnum velocity get a 44 magnum, so I don't whooop up my 45 Colt loads. I just shoot a 44.

[plainsman456]

I will have to keep an eye open for a short 41.
Thanks for the information.

[Link23]

i have the rossi 92 in 44 MAG and i shoot the 240 grain boolit no gas check, only after having it a week i was hitting a barbed wire fence post(the 2 1/2'') ones at 200+ yards and it was bending the post, that was with iron sights so for me that would be plenty for a deer, but im in kentucky apparently we have tiny deer here
Link23

[DanWalker]

i have the rossi 92 in 44 MAG and i shoot the 240 grain boolit no gas check, only after having it a week i was hitting a barbed wire fence post(the 2 1/2'') ones at 200+ yards and it was bending the post, that was with iron sights so for me that would be plenty for a deer, but im in kentucky apparently we have tiny deer here
Link23

WOW! Great shooting!
I need a thinner front sight on my win94 Trapper before I can even attempt shooting like that.
Heck, it's so fat that it covers the front HALF of an antelope standing broadside at HALF that distance....