H110 in .45 Colt

[Geraldo]

A friend needs some .45 Colt ammo capable of handgun hunting, not cowboy shooting. With the current run on supplies I took a look at load data for powders and bullets I currently have. Hodgdon's data for H110 and jacketed bullets in .45 Ruger revolvers seems generous compared to what I used to use in .44 Mag. I also found a Taffin article on cast boolits with a reference to rather stiff charges of H110.

Has anyone used H110 in .45 Colt? I've burned lots of H110, but never in .45 Colt.

[shop_ stuff]

H110 is more for a tight charge . Dont know if it would be good in a loose load. . May have miss fire or delay fire

[TheDoctor]

Have had good results using it, but min/max is a real fine line sometimes. Have had velocity drop with cold temps and non-magnum primers. Make sure the gun is capable of the stouter loads. Not for the "new" vaquero.

[MtGun44]

Hodgdon's site has good data there. Just note that H110 is for 80% loads and UP,
NOT down. I use it for 'full power' Ruger loads only.

What boolit or bullet do you have in mind? What velocity are you looking for?
What gun?

For example, a load of around 1000 fps with Unique or Power Pistol with a Keith
250 gr or approximately will pass through any deer from end to end, and will
be safe in any of the .45 Colt guns. What more is needed? (well - good shot
placement IS needed)

Bill

[jwp475]

A friend needs some .45 Colt ammo capable of handgun hunting, not cowboy shooting. With the current run on supplies I took a look at load data for powders and bullets I currently have. Hodgdon's data for H110 and jacketed bullets in .45 Ruger revolvers seems generous compared to what I used to use in .44 Mag. I also found a Taffin article on cast boolits with a reference to rather stiff charges of H110.

Has anyone used H110 in .45 Colt? I've burned lots of H110, but never in .45 Colt.


For top end loads in the 45 Colt I have used H-110/296 since 1985 and IMHO is the best for the job in the old Colt

[Lefty SRH]

I use H-110 (and a 330gr boolit) a lot in my Ruger .45 Colt Bisley Hunter. BUT only in a full size Ruger frame, NO FLAT TOPS!

[bigboredad]

In my Ruger bisley h110/296 is the only powder to use to get both accuracy and velocity from my 345gr loads

[Lloyd Smale]

the reason those charges seem generous is the case is much larger.

[BCB]

the reason those charges seem generous is the case is much larger.

Yep...

A bit of quick math (approximate measurements of course!!!) indicates the 45 Colt is about 13% larger in capacity than the 44 Magnum...

Not to say you can use 44 Magnum data increased by 13% for 45 Colt loads of similar boolit weights though...

Good-luck...BCB

[jmort]

+1 to MtGun44 - a 250 to 300 grain bullet with a large meplat, at 1000 to 1200 fps, will smoke anything out there and shoot through any animal, short of an elephant, on a broadside. I would use 2400 as I just do not see the need to use H110, but for some more is better and there ain't nothing wrong with that.

[RobS]

H110 for Large frame Ruger 45 colts or TC's for SAA and Clones it's not an optimal powder to use due to the lower, safe pressures of those firearms . H110 is good for pushing high velocity and/or large for caliber bullets/boolits. I use it for 300-345 grainers in a Ruger Bisley 45 Colt and a Ruger SRH 454 Casull but would never use this large of a boolit or H110 in the wifey's Ruger 45 Colt Flat Top. I've also used 2400 for mid house Ruger Large Frames in 45 Colt class. Right now I have been working a lot with Enforcer/Accurate Arms 4100 and it's a darn good powder for mid to upper Ruger Only loads.

[44man]

I use 296 in my older Vaquero. Samo, samo as H110.
But references to flat top and SBH's with ears to protect sights confuses me. If frame sizes are the same they take the same loads. Only reduced frame and cylinder sizes demand lighter loads. It has nothing to do with sight ears.
Take a look at minimum load and max load pressures between 2400 and 296, some 2400 loads have more pressure. The rest are so close it is not worth the effort.

[jwp475]

I use 296 in my older Vaquero. Samo, samo as H110.
But references to flat top and SBH's with ears to protect sights confuses me. If frame sizes are the same they take the same loads. Only reduced frame and cylinder sizes demand lighter loads. It has nothing to do with sight ears.
Take a look at minimum load and max load pressures between 2400 and 296, some 2400 loads have more pressure. The rest are so close it is not worth the effort.


+1.........

[RobS]

Yep, my reference to the Ruger 45 Colt Flat Top is of the newer one that has the small frame and cylinder.

[44man]

Yep, my reference to the Ruger 45 Colt Flat Top is of the newer one that has the small frame and cylinder.
OK, a cowboy action gun.

[white eagle]

Geraldo
I have used H110 exclusively when I had a 45c Bisley
if you want some good loads for it take a look @ John Linebaugh's loads for the same cal using H110
I must have burned near 16# of it,it happens to be one of my favorites for top end hunting loads
like 44man says w296 is the same and load data can be interchanged
best.... have fun

[44man]

I don't keep up because I can't afford more guns. I did not know the Ruger BH .45 was downsized. I know about the Vaquero going smaller, mine was built on a .44 mag frame. Early .45's were too. I understand they had the sight ears.
History is not my fixation so forgive me. It was only "flat top" that confuses.
I hunt and shoot long range so I do not want a small .45. I think Ruger went too far to satisfy some sports and should have made both sizes. They create a problem with "Ruger Only" loads in manuals too.

[44MAG#1]

"History is not my fixation so forgive me."
You try to make studying the history of firearms sound bad to an extent. I do not study the history of firearms much at all but since I am interested in firearms I like to broaden my knowledge of them in whatever field of firearms i am into. No different than someone in photography studying up on cameras and lenses etc. or something else.
And for your edification they do make both sizes. The full size Blackhawk and the mid frame Flat Top Blackhawk sold by exclusive dealers such as Lipsey's
Hope this helps in adding to your knowledge bank so as to not cause further confusion in the coming months and years.

[rexherring]

My older BH loves H110/296 with heavy boolits and mag primers. I use it for my 300 and 340 gr and shoot very good. My hands are starting to not like it though. Dang arthritis. I always use either Federal or Starline brass due to a little heavier web construction.

[huntincowboy]

I've used it under a 250 gr XTP for hunting, but I worked them up and shot quite a few during the summer (100º+ out) and when I shot them during the winter to get ready for dear season (<32º out) there was a noticeable difference in recoil, volume, and I'm guessing velocity. POA really didn't change at the ranges I was shooting (<35 yards). I would suggest maybe you work up indoors, but other than that H110 is absolutely great for powerhouse 45 Blackhawk. I've never used it with cast because I don't have any data but if you had data, I'm sure it'd do great.

[44man]

"History is not my fixation so forgive me."
You try to make studying the history of firearms sound bad to an extent. I do not study the history of firearms much at all but since I am interested in firearms I like to broaden my knowledge of them in whatever field of firearms i am into. No different than someone in photography studying up on cameras and lenses etc. or something else.
And for your edification they do make both sizes. The full size Blackhawk and the mid frame Flat Top Blackhawk sold by exclusive dealers such as Lipsey's
Hope this helps in adding to your knowledge bank so as to not cause further confusion in the coming months and years.
No, not bad and I praise those that know. Good to hear they make both sizes.
My work is just to make a revolver shoot, nothing more, nothing less. I don't have time to study, besides, at my age memory is a thing of the past! :coffee: I can forget my zip code for Heavens sake.
Some writers can go through history about every gun right down to a day but can't make anything shoot. I only ask what counts to a gun owner?
The question was about H110 and notice I did mention frame and cylinder sizes so you can't give me bad marks on that.

[felix]

You specifically need to quit worrying about bad marks given to you by anyone. They mean nothing. ... felix

[Moonie]

I use 22gr H110/W296 under a lee 300gr boolit in my NMBH, it is the large frame, not the flat top or new vaquero mid frame. This is a load in the 30,000psi category.

[44MAG#1]

"The question was about H110 and notice I did mention frame and cylinder sizes so you can't give me bad marks on that. "
No one was giving bad marks on anything. Just trying to clear up a misconception on the guns.
If I remember correctly the indecision on the term Flat Top came up on a previous post elsewhere..
Anyway I don't see how trying to clear something up could be construed as giving bad marks.
Education is a great thing. I wish I had more of it. No different than you educating all of us on loads, powder, primers, bullets and all things shooting.
Never too old to learn or smart enough to know all things.

[bigboredad]

:-D
I use 22gr H110/W296 under a lee 300gr boolit in my NMBH, it is the large frame, not the flat top or new vaquero mid frame. This is a load in the 30,000psi category.

Unless your bullet seats quite deep you should have plenty of room to work up from 22gr if you so desire. But if you are happy with the load speed and accuracy then I should just shut up

[Geraldo]

Thanks for all the replies and your .45 experience. The Ruger is a BH so it should handle BH data just fine. For those who say H110 is not optimal, you may be right, but it is what I have on hand. Once the panic dies down and other powders are more available I may switch him out to a different powder.

[44man]

"The question was about H110 and notice I did mention frame and cylinder sizes so you can't give me bad marks on that. "
No one was giving bad marks on anything. Just trying to clear up a misconception on the guns.
If I remember correctly the indecision on the term Flat Top came up on a previous post elsewhere..
Anyway I don't see how trying to clear something up could be construed as giving bad marks.
Education is a great thing. I wish I had more of it. No different than you educating all of us on loads, powder, primers, bullets and all things shooting.
Never too old to learn or smart enough to know all things.
Thank you for understanding.
The term just had the feeling that the ears added to strength, my bad about frame sizes in some of the guns. It brings back memories of the original FT that was as strong as anything ever made by Ruger.
Some history from me. I watched a RUGER BH .45 Colt being shot and it was awful at close range. Turned me off and it was not until I bought the Vaquero and had done a lot of revolver work with the .44 that I found the tight throats on the .45. I hand lapped the throats to fit my boolits and actually got some 1" groups at 75 yards. Then I was cleaning my gun at a shoot, left the cylinder in my box on another table to find my box was gone. Maybe a mistake from someone but none the less, I did not get it back. I called Ruger and they made me a new cylinder ---FREE! I sent a check and got it back, called and was told there is no charge. I also had to lap the new cylinder.
Then about a year later I was sent my box back, the fella did not know how to find me so now I have two cylinders. A tribute to both Ruger and our shooter friends. Just a simple mistake since we had the same boxes.
But you can see why I kept away from the .45 BH's for so long after watching a good shooter spray the target.
Would "small frame" or "large frame" be better then "flat top?"

[RobS]

It's not that the powder isn't a good one in fact it's been a gold standard for upper end loads regards to lower pressures at high velocities while achieving great accuracy. It just isn't the best medicine for shooting lighter end target loads.

[bigboredad]

On paper it looks like the window is small. That small window in reality makes a fire breathing trainstopper into a all day pleasant shooter. it has always amazed me how 1 grain of 296/h110 either way can make such big difference in felt recoil and/ or accuracy.

[44MAG#1]

That is the reason 2400 is a powder worth looking into. It is more forgiving, will give nearly close velocities and accuracy will be just fine.
I don't care about hearing how one can shoot the eyes out of a gnat at 100 yards, with it on the fly either, with H110/W296.
I dare say most on here isn't that good to be able to tell the difference.
I will give up a BIT of accuracy and velocity for VERSATILIY . Notice I said a BIT of accuracy. Not a lot of accuracy.
2400, I know wasn't in the original post, but it is a good powder with better vesatility in how it can be used. Meaning wider charge weights with less issues than trying to swing wide charge weights with H110/W296.
I like H110/W296 a lot but.... it's versatility or lack thereof can be proven by oneself.
Later on try some 2400. You may just like it.