Colt SAA: 4.75" vs 5.5" Barrel.

[texaswoodworker]

What are your thoughts on this? Does the 3/4" really make much of a difference in accuracy unless you plan on shooting over long distances? I like the looks and the speed the 4.75" version has, but I don't want to sacrifice a lot of accuracy. (will be shooting at typical handgun distances).

[bouncer50]

I think you answer your own question. If you like the looks and speed of the 4.75 go for it. Your not going to sacrifice accuracy. I have a friend with a model 36 S&W 38 special with a two inch barrel that can shoot at 50 yards and put all 5 round in a paper plate. I myself prefer the 5 inch barrel on wheel guns. The 4.75 has the best balance on a single action. To each their own what the best for you.

[robertbank]

The 4 3/4" balances quite a bit better than my 5.5". The latter feels muzzle heavy to me. My guns shoot better than I can in hands that can really shoot. Enough said.

Take Care

Bob

[EDK]

There isn't enough difference BALLISTICALLY to worry about. The way the gun feels in your hand is the determining factor. Either length will carry a lot better than the 7 1/2 length.

I personally prefer the 5.5 inch Original Size RUGER VAQUERO, but also use the 7 1/2 inch length. AND there's a 3.5 inch custom (that I bought used) in the safe.

[DougGuy]

3/4" of barrel will translate to -about- 35 fps more velocity in a best-case scenario, the increase in accuracy is negligible in offhand shooting, you may shoot 1/2" to 1" tighter groups at 25yds from a rest with the longer barrel, to settle the debate you really need to own one of each!! :bigsmyl2:

[texaswoodworker]

Well, it looks like I'm going for the 4.75" model. :D

http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/15/04/07/ce8c0386447e2f99d23412124600145a.jpg

[bigted]

yesss sir reee ... that length is my favorite as well. I can see the sights better on the short barrel and they handle so well as to be an ammo eating machine. easy carry either hip or shoulder and generally much lighter as well.

my 4 and 5/8ths Ruger in 45 Colt is a very nice handful in the "New Vaquero" mode and it handles more power then I am willing to put the smallish plow handles thru in my mitts. love the black powder loads with 30 to 38 grains 2F under my 266 grain Accurate Molds blackpowder boolit with the larger grease groove.

I am sure you will have a very nice relationship with your new addition. keep us posted with info and photo's of the new family member when the glorious day comes.

[runfiverun]

the 4-5/8ths carry super easy, and are mostly [99%] what I have in holster guns.
if I'm going longer I go longer, 6" minimum for a hunting type gun.

[35 Whelen]

I have both, really prefer the 4 3/4". However, a more experienced handgun buddy of mine correctly pointed out that when shooting longer ranges where elevating the front sight is required, there's a slightly greater margin for error with the longer barrel.
Velocity wise, I found 35 - 50 fps difference in my .44 Specials. Accuracy wise, not enough difference matter.

35W

ETA- I wish you hadn't posted the picture of the Uberti. Every time I see something like that, it just makes me want another one...and I already have six, including one identical to that pictured above.

[rintinglen]

Well, I am the odd man out, but I prefer the balance of the 5 1/2 inch guns. However, that is purely personal preference. There ain't really a dime's worth of difference, so I guess I'll join the pack and endorse the "whatever-floats-your-boat" ticket. Your money, your hand, fondle 'em both and then let your conscience be your guide.

[rondog]

I like the longer barrels too. But I wouldn't kick the short ones out of bed for eating crackers.....

[M-Tecs]

I prefer the balance of the 5 1/2 inch guns.

[Bigslug]

The 4.75's look a little stunted to me - I tend to prefer the 5.5 for looks. If I was given a bucket of money and told to buy one right now? 7.5". I have ZERO interest in driving any car that has its own brain (IOW, a horse), but if I did, I'd err on the side of sight radius.

[35 Whelen]

Let me clarify, I don't think one is really better than the other for most shooting applications. Once the revolver is pointed at the target, I can't tell the difference in a 4 3/4" and a 5 1/2". Even toting them around, no real difference to me. But, I like the looks of the shorter barrel...just a little....maybe .75" or so. :bigsmyl2:

35W

[texaswoodworker]

Let me clarify, I don't think one is really better than the other for most shooting applications. Once the revolver is pointed at the target, I can't tell the difference in a 4 3/4" and a 5 1/2". Even toting them around, no real difference to me. But, I like the looks of the shorter barrel...just a little....maybe .75" or so. :bigsmyl2:

35W

It just has that look that screams gunfighter don't it? :D

http://d1g4sq00ps2bp3.cloudfront.net/entertainment/15251.jpg

[StrawHat]

I prefer the 5 1/2" or Artillery Model.

136364

I also have the 7 1/2" version and find no difference in practical accuracy.

Kevin

[DougGuy]

4 3/4" definitely. Although I do want a 5 1/2" with a .45 Schofield cylinder. It's better to have one of each!

http://i1202.photobucket.com/albums/bb374/DougGuy/Guns/DSC03733crop768_zpsyheifbcl.jpg (http://s1202.photobucket.com/user/DougGuy/media/Guns/DSC03733crop768_zpsyheifbcl.jpg.html)

[smokeywolf]

Just familiarity speaking here. I really like the artillery model Colt SAA (5-1/2" barrel). I like the weight, the look, and the way it shoots. If I was shooting SASS I'd go for the 4-3/4" barrel. Besides, my cartridge belt has a slot for a left holster and there's an artillery model already in the right side.

smokeywolf

[texaswoodworker]

I've shot everything from 4" to 8". Honestly, I shot them all basically the same. (I shoot handguns OK, but not as well as many others here) The only difference was the feel. I prefer to stay under 6", and can shoot the shorter guns faster. I think I'll like the 4.75" SAA. :D

[doc1876]

My average fast draw for the 5 1/2 is .420, the 4 3/4 is .390. Size does matter in this aspect.

[Rhou45]

Congratulations on your choice,

I currently have a Ruger SS SBH has a 4.75 inch barrel in 45C. The gun gives up nothing in performance to any of the other 45C's I've owned with longer barrels. Plus, it carries a lot easier in a variety of holster configurations. I'm sure you won't have any regrets....unless not buying two would count as a regret.

Ralph

[robertbank]

Doug Guy every time I see that gun of yours I have an itch to get one of the antiqued guns. They usually go for less up here than the blued versions. My wife is going to kill me, sure as heck...probably with the last gun I buy.:bigsmyl2:

Take Care

Bob

[Whiterabbit]

I have both, really prefer the 4 3/4". However, a more experienced handgun buddy of mine correctly pointed out that when shooting longer ranges where elevating the front sight is required, there's a slightly greater margin for error with the longer barrel.
Velocity wise, I found 35 - 50 fps difference in my .44 Specials. Accuracy wise, not enough difference matter.

That's an interesting perspective, I'd love for you to talk about it some more.

Unlike many people, you seem to suggest that sight radius is a non issue with longer range. That a shorter barrel to 4.75 is every bit an equal at distance, provided that the front sight height is a non issue.

Unlike many people also, you are speaking from experience. Can you comment more on my interpretation about shooting a 4.75 vs a 5.5 at distance? did I interpret your statement correctly?

[RJM52]

Don't know why but my sail shifted a few years ago and I ended up selling off all my sub 5" SAs except for a 4.25" .41 Magnum Freedom Arms 97 and kept all the 5.5-6.5" guns.

I would however add a FA 83 .41 Magnum with a 4.75" barrel with round butt if one became available...

Bob

[44MAG#1]

Talking about perspectives and interpretations I'll add this. It has been my experience that if a person can shoot well they can shoot well regardless. If they suck at it they suck.
a person that can't hit with a short barrel cannot magically hit when handed a long barrel and vice versa.
if you can shoot well you can shoot well if you can't you can't.
Everyone is looking for that magic load or barrel length to make up for their shortcomings.
That is simply human nature.

[robertbank]

Talking about perspectives and interpretations I'll add this. It has been my experience that if a person can shoot well they can shoot well regardless. If they suck at it they suck.
a person that can't hit with a short barrel cannot magically hit when handed a long barrel and vice versa.
if you can shoot well you can shoot well if you can't you can't.
Everyone is looking for that magic load or barrel length to make up for their shortcomings.
That is simply human nature.

This in spades. Personal preference is more prevalent in those who can shoot reasonably well. The easy magic formula to success is an elusive witch that entices to many for the benefit of a few.

Now what was it the guy in the store was saying about a new rear sight out that will fit my 1911......

Take Care

Bob

[lobogunleather]

I have 4.75", 5.5", and 7.5" Colt SAA's, First, Second, and Third Generation, in .32-20, .45 Colt, .357 magnum, and .44 Special. No practical difference in accuracy or handling. I feel the balance difference more in comparing the .32-20 to the .44 or .45, but that is probably only because I have handled them so much over the years.

[Silver Jack Hammer]

I was in a gunshop admiring a 5 1/2" Colt's SAA telling the guy behind the counter I have a bunch of 4 3/4" and a couple 7 1/2" but I don't own a 5 1/2". He said he could start the paperwork to correct that. I told him I liked his attitude.

[Whiterabbit]

I have 4.75", 5.5", and 7.5" Colt SAA's, First, Second, and Third Generation, in .32-20, .45 Colt, .357 magnum, and .44 Special. No practical difference in accuracy or handling. I feel the balance difference more in comparing the .32-20 to the .44 or .45, but that is probably only because I have handled them so much over the years.

no practical difference in handling, does that include woods carry? Ever wear one and sit in a OHV?

[gwpercle]

4.75 inch. I watched to many Saturday morning shootouts to consider any other.
The only guys with long barrel Colts were Wyatt Earp, if the Buntline special story is really true, and Matt Dillion...his was longer but he won the shootout every time!
Gary

[gwpercle]

no practical difference in handling, does that include woods carry? Ever wear one and sit in a OHV?

Over Head Valve car ????

[bluelund79]

I may not be as fast as others, but I prefer the balance of the 5.5" over the 4 3/4" gun. Especially out to 25-35 yards. It seems to hold a little better in my opinion. This is in 45LC and 45acp

[bouncer50]

4.75 inch. I watched to many Saturday morning shootouts to consider any other.
The only guys with long barrel Colts were Wyatt Earp, if the Buntline special story is really true, and Matt Dillion...his was longer but he won the shootout every time!
Gary As the story i read years ago Ned Buntline did give Wyatt Earp a 12 inch barrel Colt. A while after Ned left town Wyatt had the barrel cut down so he could carry it. Drawing a 12 inch barrel would have gotten you killed.

[Silver Jack Hammer]

As the story goes Wyatt did not cut his barrel down, Bat Masterson and Bill Tilghman did. Ned Buntline AKA E. Z. C. Judson was reported to have had one too and kept it his entire life. Charlie Bassett and Neal Brown kept the barrels as they came. The notes in the records indicate the guns had 10 inch barrels, how the story came to make the barrels 12 inches in length is not known. The guns did not have the elevator flip up rear sight. It appears the guns probably had the shoulder stock attachment and name stamped in the wood after they left the factory.

[bedbugbilly]

All I can speak about is .357 - I have a 5 1/2 Ruger New vaquero and a 4 3/4 Uberti Bisley. I'm no "Annie Oakley" but I can't see any difference in performance between the two - they both shoot very well. That said . . . personally, I prefer the 4 3/4". I almost bot the Bisley in 5 1/2 but I'm glad that I didn't. I'm getting ready to add 45 Colt/Schofield to my reloading and that means a new revolver - and I'll probably go with another Uberti 4 3/4" Bisley - I just like that length of barrel - but - it's a personal thing in the end and depends on what feels best in your hand.

[lobogunleather]

I don't even know what a OHV is, but I have carried a sidearm just about every day of my life since 1968. Two tours in Vietnam (airborne infantry pathfinders), 24 years as a cop, and thousands of hunting, fishing, and camping trips in all conditions. There have also been 43 years spent making holsters along the way, customers in all 50 US states and 33 other countries so far.

There are ways to carry just about any revolver for any purpose, comfortably and discreetly.

[Whiterabbit]

I don't even know what a OHV is,....

http://golfcartsandhuntingbuggies.com/data/uploads/johnnys-hunting-buggy.jpg

I'm sure you knew, and just likely use a better term than I do.

What do you recommend for sitting in a cart like that, that can also tolerate hiking a few miles as well? Doesn't need to present fast, just comfy for walking with a pack and driving or riding in a cart like that.

[smkummer]

I like them all, right now my favorite with a full power 45 Colt in the 7 1/2. If I used it for cowboy action shooting, the 4 3/4 I would prefer as I am using an original Bisley in 38-40 with that length. But the 5 1/2 was my first in 44 special and I will never get rid of it. Remember the plow handle rotates in your hand when shooting one handed. A full load 45 Colt in a 4 3/4 will rotate the muzzle to the 12 oclock position or more upon firing.

I just shot a cowboy match yesterday and in the Bisley I had some reduced loads with 700X. I was getting low and I had a standard load with unique at about 7.5 grains I believe as my last shot in the Bisley. It sounded like a magnum. The one spotter said what was that! I said that was just a standard load and he laughed. If you know anything about cowboy action, the loads a minimal.

[Whiterabbit]

why is the 7.5 your favorite? I ask because I'm about to take a hacksaw and lathe to an older vaquero to shorten it.

[warboar_21]

My first single action I bought for myself was a 7.5" 45 Colt. I shot it a lot and became very accurate with it. I loved almost everything about it except the long barrel when trying to sit down. My next purchase was a Bisley with the 5.5" barrel and love it. It does feel a bit nose heavy but no where near as bad as the 7.5" barrel. So I find a 4.75" convertible and snatched it up. Now that thing just feels right. It's accurate, points like a dream, and carries well to. I can wear it on my hip driving and it doesn't bother me a bit. I still have all three of them and wouldn't let any of them go but when it comes to taking out a big bore I always grab the 4.75" with the Colt cylinder. Now I just need to get myself a birds head 3.75" in 45 Colt and i'll be good.

[DougGuy]

http://golfcartsandhuntingbuggies.com/data/uploads/johnnys-hunting-buggy.jpg

I'm sure you knew, and just likely use a better term than I do.

What do you recommend for sitting in a cart like that, that can also tolerate hiking a few miles as well? Doesn't need to present fast, just comfy for walking with a pack and driving or riding in a cart like that.

If you're right handed, I recommend a cross draw holster worn in front of the left hip, either of the two shorter barrel lengths would work. A 7 1/2" is still a tad bit cumbersome even in a crossdraw.

[Dale53]

One thing that no one had mentioned regarding barrel length. Ohio, as an example, requires a minimum 5" barrel when hunting deer. I have no idea what restrictions any other state may have on handguns for hunting, but-t-t...

Me, personally, I find that the longer barrel holds better for me when doing deliberate shooting...

FWIW
Dale53

[white eagle]

Although not a colt I prefer my Ruger single action 4.5 over the 5.5

[Silver Jack Hammer]

When I hit the range with my Colt's shooting close range targets I grab my short barreled guns first. It's easier for me to hit short distance targets with short barreled guns and I don't know why. It should be more natural to hit close targets with long barrels but I'm just a little bit quicker with short barreled guns at multiple close range targets.

[DougGuy]

One thing that no one had mentioned regarding barrel length. Ohio, as an example, requires a minimum 5" barrel when hunting deer.
Dale53

Got to remember that most states measure revolvers from the breech face, same as if it were an autoloader or a single shot so if Ohio measures from the breech face, a 4 5/8" barreled Ruger is really 6 3/8" and plenty legal to hunt with.

[9.3X62AL]

My single-action rollerpistols live at both extreme ends of the barrel spectrum--4.75" and 7.5". No in-between.

Double-action rollers are equally split between 4", 5"/5.5", and 6"/6.5". If you can derive a preference from that information, go right ahead.

[timtheartist]

I'm loving cowboy fast draw. It's a lot of fun, the people are great and shootin wax bullets all day is cheap. I use a 5 1/2 Vaquero with a spring job (lighter springs) and it's great so far. Perhaps if / when I get really competitive I will look into the shorter barrel. My go to gun for accuracy is a 45 Blackhawk 7 1/2" It still amazes me after many years

[robertbank]

My single-action rollerpistols live at both extreme ends of the barrel spectrum--4.75" and 7.5". No in-between.

Double-action rollers are equally split between 4", 5"/5.5", and 6"/6.5". If you can derive a preference from that information, go right ahead.

You prefer handguns over badminton rackets.:bigsmyl2:

Bob

[9.3X62AL]

WE HAVE A WINNER!

It's the "Penn reels vs. handgun" question that gets sticky. Especially when the yellowtail and tuna are into suicide mode locally. 50# bluefin, 4 miles off Dana Point yesterday (not me).

[robertbank]

WE HAVE A WINNER!

It's the "Penn reels vs. handgun" question that gets sticky. Especially when the yellowtail and tuna are into suicide mode locally. 50# bluefin, 4 miles off Dana Point yesterday (not me).

Saaaawweeet!

Local Salmon are running in the Skeena Al. My biggest is 40#s. Caught it and a 30# all in the same day. Have not been out for the past couple of years. Wife doesn't care for Salmon and if I am not going to eat them I just let them swim. Great fighting fish though especially in the river.

All the best

Bob

[44man]

Length depends on caliber, short is accurate and works with most revolver calibers. It is when you get to large cases that you need longer. I see no problem with a snub .38 but when you get to a .454 and up, you need length.
I prefer longer with large calibers, 7-1/2" to 10". But I deer hunt and don't carry.
A short .454 can not do as good as a .45 Colt since you can't burn the powder needed so you use Unique in the .454 or just shoot Colts out of it. You have a gun in name only. Show me a 4" barrel in .454 and I will tell you the Colt will do it all and more.

[9.3X62AL]

I agree that shorter barrels can shoot VERY accurately, if you have enough grip to actually control and direct the shots. LOTS of range time with 2" Model 10s, 2.5" Model 19s, and 3" Model 13s. All can shoot VERY well for me--I had no trouble keeping all hits within the 9-ring on a B-27 silhouette target at 25 yards/double action, and my revolver skills aren't exemplary. Those tiny S&W J-frames can be another story, though--I sometimes have trouble hanging on to them in my big paws.

With the Magnum revolvers--357, 41, 44--resorting to a 4" barrel results in an average velocity fall-off of about 10% from that achieved in a 6" barrel. This is a 10% forfeit in exchange for a 33% decrease in barrel length, which scores as a plus for portability. That may be a reasonable trade-off for a lot of sportsmen/women, given that any sideiron is already a compromise between portability and striking energy......and one that favors the former factor rather strongly. I have no experience with the uber-magnums that 44 Man speaks of, but his rationale about longer barrel lengths using their heavier powder charges more efficiently makes empirical sense.

[DougGuy]

Show me a 4" barrel in .454 and I will tell you the Colt will do it all and more.

ONLY in the same gun capable of .454 pressures!

[44MAG#1]

"Show me a 4" barrel in .454 and I will tell you the Colt will do it all and more."

I can't let this go. I have a FA 43/4 inch 454.
Now I am talking about velocity only NOTHING else.
I Have a chronograph.
You come up with a 45/8 inch 45 Colt Ruger Blackhawk.
You load your hottest load and I will load my hottest load and I will come up and bring my chrono and we will chrono both. Yours a tad shorter barrel so I will spot you 50 FPS If the 43/4 inch 454 won't beat your 45 Colt I pay you 1500 dollars and if mine beats your 45 Colt you pay me 1500.
Are you on for this.
I have chronoed both so I know who will make 1500 bucks.
A little fun competition is good as long as money is thrown in.

[44man]

Not so much, you forget twist and spin up. Short takes more instant pressure then long with an extended peak and more push. The .454 can not burn a full load of 296 in a short barrel. You raise pressure with a fast powder but the Colt can do it with less pressure. You get more recoil and muzzle blast but is the boolit faster?

[44MAG#1]

No, I am not forgetting anything. We are talking velocity read by the chrono. $1500. How about it?
Let's go for it. Average of 5 Shot across the chrono.
I figure with my cost of gas and a couple meals along the way I still should make 1375 bucks or so.

[robertbank]

Sometimes these threads are more fun than watching a re-run of the gunfight at the OK coral.

Take Care

Bob

[44MAG#1]

"Sometimes these threads are more fun than watching a re-run of the gunfight at the OK coral."

Yes they are. At one time 44man And I would be at great odds on things. If you have noticed I rarely argue with him anymore. I understand where he is coming from and now don't let it bother me as much.
But this, I have to issue the challenge on this velocity thing.
I hate to do much driving anymore but to make close to 1400 dollars clear I will do the 600 miles or so round trip. Plus will get to see some different scenery too.

[robertbank]

Jeez I have to drive 600 miles just to get to Pr. George so I can turn and head south. No sweat but it a long boring drive once you have seen the Skeena Valley and Coast mountains a few times.

Take Care

Bob

[Bill*B]

While I love the "feel" of the old SAA, and enjoy thumbing that big hammer back - the barrel length is a moot point, to me. I can't hit the broad side of a barn with these old guns. Never tried a 7 1/2", but I can't tell the difference between a 4 3/4 and a 5 1/2.

[Whiterabbit]

for me, sights are everything. The top needs to be crisp or I can't hit as well as I like, too.

That means patridge style sights are required from the get go or I'm done. Can't do the round ones. you might be in the same boat?

[robertbank]

for me, sights are everything. The top needs to be crisp or I can't hit as well as I like, too.

That means patridge style sights are required from the get go or I'm done. Can't do the round ones. you might be in the same boat?

The Uberti El Patron and the Beretta Stampede models have exactly what you describe albeit built into the frame. The cut is wider in the rear and square while the front sight is wider. I have to admit I shoot the El Patron and Stampede much better than my Cattleman. I do prefer the 4.75" barrel as for me it balances so much better. The El Patron unfortunately is a 5.5". I guess that means a slightly used 4.75" El Patron is in order.:idea:

Bob

[Silver Jack Hammer]

The problem with the front sights is the factories round the corners when they polish finish. Single actions used to come from the factory with front sights too tall, now many are sight regulated out of the box. The solution is to take a file and square off the top, and give work on the side of the front sight we focus on to square it up. This is easy when the front sight is too tall and there is metal to work with.

I got a SBH back from the gunsmith with a re-blue job. It was beautiful but the front sight had been buffed and polished so the edges were rounded and I had to re shape it too.

[44man]

it is spin. So say a boolit needs 1300 fps but the short barrel only gives 1100 with any powder. Same twist rate. You need faster powders but can you reach 1300?
My choice of guns, bring a 4" .500 JRH against my 7-1/2" or a 4" .500 S&W against an 8-1/2" at 100 yards and I will take your money.
I can borrow a .454 to compare with a 2". I will eat good.
I said the shorter the barrel, the faster the twist is needed. Many hate the .460 S&W with a long barrel that has a gain twist so they cut it and lose the twist. Show me a 4" .460 at 200 yards.

[Whiterabbit]

I agree with Jack, that is exactly what I did.

The problem with the roundover for me is that it glints. That glint is desirable, but where it reflects into my eye changes whether the light is in front of, above, or behind me. That RADICALLY changes my point of aim.

My solution, since my vaquero is acceptable with respect to blade width and rear sight channel, was simply to file the roundover flat. a flat surface reflects the same no matter where the light is. I also appreciate the lack of bluing on that section of the sight. Basically, change it into a ramp.

I don't do ramps as well as patridge, but I do ramps a darn sight better than a practical hemisphere!

[Whiterabbit]

it is spin. So say a boolit needs 1300 fps but the short barrel only gives 1100 with any powder. Same twist rate. You need faster powders but can you reach 1300?
My choice of guns, bring a 4" .500 JRH against my 7-1/2" or a 4" .500 S&W against an 8-1/2" at 100 yards and I will take your money.
I can borrow a .454 to compare with a 2". I will eat good.
I said the shorter the barrel, the faster the twist is needed. Many hate the .460 S&W with a long barrel that has a gain twist so they cut it and lose the twist. Show me a 4" .460 at 200 yards.

ill warn you in advance, you buddy's argument is you cannot compare a 65ksi 454 to a 13CUP 45 colt at any barrel length. Your argument above now demands the same cartridge. I agree that changing only barrel length (regardless of twist) you'd win the bet, but I have to admit I would bet on your buddy if you are comparing even a snub 454 in velocity only to a 13CUP 45 colt or even a 30ksi colt +P of any practical length. In my experience with the 460, that pressure is such an advantage for velocity. especially when you lock the bullet choice to heavy copper clad 200 grain class weight 45 cals. There is a lot of space in a 454 case for H110 if all you need to do is produce an enormous fireball and zing out a light bullet at warm ridiculous. Sure lots of powder is burned out of the barrel, blinding, uncomfortable to shoot, and unlikely to be accurate depending on bullet choice and twist, not to mention issues with sight radius compared to a longer barrel, but that pressure peak that hits while the bullet is still engaged with the forcing cone is the telling story. Your velocity ceiling is going to be dictated by your Pmax and how long you can keep the gas on it, and the 454 is simply going to be able to do that better with gunpowder generated pressure curves.

I speak nothing about accuracy, comfort, weight, etc. Just velocity.

Also, ramp up allowable 45 colt pressure to 65ksi and I'm back to betting on longer barrel alone dictating greater velocity.

Pressure (if your ONLY metric is velocity) is such an advantage

[44man]

We all know a short barrel can be accurate. But no amount of pressure can increase velocity in short barrels when powder can't burn. 31 gr of 296 will NOT burn in a 2" barrel .454.
Not talking about old .45 Colts that are weak.
What velocity will you get with a .454 Alaskan? Never seen the results.

[44MAG#1]

44man,
I am not talking about excessively short barrels that are,just for short range. We are talking about reasonably short is all.
I made the challenge, if you are so sure the 45 Colt will match the 454 in velocity, a 45/8's inch Ruger 45 Colt verses 454 Casull in 43/4 inch with me spotting you 50 FPS because of your slightly shorter barrel put up your 1500 and I will bring my FA 43/4 inch 454 and my 1500 and we will see. WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT ACCURACY. VELOCITY only. I will load H110/W296 with 340 gr and 305 gr bullets and we will see who is right or wrong.
Please stick to one subject at a time. Not flip plopping around like rocking a car to get it unstuck from a mud hole.
Do you really believe in your mind that a 45 Colt will equal or beat a 454 in 45/8 inch to 43/4 inch length velocity wise?
If you do let's schedule the epic event as I need time to get my days off work worked out and the bullets cast.

[Whiterabbit]

I really don't want to get mired into this too much, but for the record, basic physics demands that your velocity is going to depend most strongly on barrel length and pressure curve, when your projectile weight is constant. gunpowder pressure curves we like to think of as quite variant, but for small arms it really appears to be similar from powder to powder. The peak is strong rapidly, and is already well descended by the time the bullet is in the bore. Even for a snub. So we aren;t talking about a microsecond @ 65ksi vs being at 30ksi for all of the barrel time, they are both @ peak pressures for just a moment.

By definition, your 30ksi cartridge HAS to be in the barrel long enough to compensate for the 65ksi load force comparison, even if only acted on in a couple inches.

In my limited experience, 65 ksi is really hard to overcome for a velocity advantage, particularly when coupled with light bullets.

That's all.

[DougGuy]

65ksi? In a short barrel? Methinks NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!! Not even for a nanosecond! Certainly not in any known .45 caliber SAA revolvers!

[Whiterabbit]

the comparison is 454 vs 45 colt. All 454 SA revolvers are capable of holding 65ksi within design spec. They have to be.

[DougGuy]

I was thinking the 454 was 50ksi

[44MAG#1]

SAAMI specs on a 454 Casull is 65,000 PSI.
Speer tested some Winchester 454 ammo andmit registered 55,000 PSI.
Now, with the Ruger 45 Colt load at 32000 CUP (not the same as PSI) that is a big difference for one to say that a short barrel 45 Colt (within reason) will out do a 454 with the same barrel length.
Aint gonna happen. Just like the people that say one is better off with a 2 inch barrel +P 38 Special since it will equal a 2.5 inch 357.
Anyone that believes that read the Speer #14 load data for both in a short barrel. Even with the 357 using H110.
Talk is cheap. Sometimes cheap isn't so good.

[timtheartist]

Can I bring my 45/70 revolver with a one inch barrel to the pissing contest?:bigsmyl2:

[M-Tecs]

Can I bring my 45/70 revolver with a one inch barrel to the pissing contest?:bigsmyl2:

Bringing a short barrel to a pissing contest puts you at a serious disadvantage!!!!!!!!!!!

[timtheartist]

Thanks M-Tecs Exactly my point

Winning a four inch velocity contest does not land you a role in the adult movie industry

Can we move on? This thread actually started out with a reasonable question and some useful answers.

[44MAG#1]

There are times when one just can't let everything go. While I think the world of 44man this is one of them. He is right a lot of the time but not every time.