Velocity w/45LC?

[750k2]

What is the spread in velocity with the 16,20 and 24" bbls with the 45LC?
Is it worth it to carry the extra weight of a 24?
250+gr's in a 92 action at 30k psi.
Thanks

[cajun shooter]

I have the 19 carbine, 20 short rifle, and the 24 in 92's. I find that the 24 weighs more and lessens the recoil better. Each length has it's place and use and therefore the reason for choice. I don't know how many of those loads you plan on shooting but the recoil will be up there.

[StarMetal]

I have two 45 Colt rifles. One is an early Marlin Cowboy with the 24 inch octagon barrel and the other is the Win 94 Trapper with 16 inch barrel. The Cowboy is one of the few Marlin rifles that I like and I don't notice the 24 inch barrel being heavier one bit because the rifle is so trim and well balanced. It's a dream to shoot and as noted the recoil is less noticeable, but the noise is also reduced much. I don't notice a real lot of difference in velocity between those two rifles for example shooting my standard shooting load of the RCBS 255 SWC over 9.0 grains of Unique.

You are really going to notice the recoil of a 30K load out of the shorter lighter barrel 92's. My Trapper becomes uncomfortable shooting the load mentioned after firing a long string of them. The Marlin does not.

Joe

[AlaskaMike]

I can't comment directly on a 92 in .45 Colt, however I can tell you that a roughly 30 kpsi load in my .44 mag 92 with a 20" barrel pushes a commercial 240 grain SWC at about 1600 fps. That should be pretty close to a 30 kpsi .45 Colt load fired out of a 20" carbine.

This is pure speculation on my part, but I wouldn't think there would be much difference in velocity with the three different barrel lengths. You might see 100 fps difference between the 16" trapper and the 24" rifle.

Mike

[rob45]

I only have the Marlin Cowboy, so cannot really say if there is a noticeable velocity difference or not. And I have never chronographed it either. But since we're talking about a straight-walled pistol cartridge, I would guess that any differences in barrel length would yield gains so small as to seem insignificant. Again, that's just guessing.

I have handled the shorter-barreled guns of others while at the range, and while they seem to be quicker into action, they do not seem as well balanced (to me) as the guns with longer barrels.

To me, the largest advantage to the longer barrel is the possibility of a longer sight radius when using open sights. This distance may vary depending upon model, as some longer barrels have the same distance between front and rear sight as the shorter version. But with a longer barrel, you can always modify to get more distance between the two, especially if utilizing a receiver/tang rear sight. That may not be important to you, but it sure helps me shoot better. Naturally, this is of no concern if you're using some sort of optics.

So I guess it all depends upon the primary purpose of the gun.:razz:

[NickSS]

I have a winchester 94 trapper carbine and Rossi 92 Puma with a 20 inch barrel. The only load I have Chronographed in both rifles is my Standard Cowboy load. It is a 350 gr slug pushed by 6 gr of Red Dot. Out of my 5.5 Inch colt clone I got 810 fps average. Same ammo in my 16 inch Winchester gave me 1020 fps average and in the 20 inch Puma I got 1055 fps average. So I did not see much difference in 4 inches. There may be a grater difference if you use a slow burning powder in the rifle to get higher pressure and velocity. The only hot 45 colt load that I chronoed was a 250 gr RNF cast over 31 gr of AA1680. This load gave me 1650 fps in my 20 inch Puma and was decidedly uncomfortable to target shoot from a bench with.

[Potsy]

I had a .45 Trapper that was a wonderful gun with it's 16" (or thereabouts) barrel. Perfect for tree-stands, close range hunting, riding around in the truck, on the 4-wheeler, or if you prefer, on a horse.
If I have to tote anything with a 24" barrel because of speed, it'll for darn sure shoot flatter than a .45 colt.
As long as you don't see a need to spend your day flinging a couple hundred 300grainers @ 1600 fps, you'll not regret the shorter barrel. Even if you did, I'd still worry about what was on the buttplate more than I would barrel length and weight.

[rickster]

From Quickload

Cartridge : .45 Colt (CIP)
Bullet : .452, 250, Hornady HP/XTP LC 45200
Useable Case Capaci: 27.540 grain H2O = 1.788 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 1.600 inch = 40.64 mm
Barrel Length : 24.0 inch = 609.6 mm
Powder : Hodgdon H110
Charge : 26.7 grains = 1.73 grams

Estimates of the progress of combustion:
NR.: x(in.) Z(%) v(fps) p(psi) t (ms)

0 0.00000 0.69 0.0 2176 0.0000
1 0.00002 0.72 0.8 2290 0.0013
2 0.00007 0.77 1.9 2433 0.0046
3 0.00019 0.83 3.2 2618 0.0087
4 0.00044 0.91 5.1 2866 0.0136
5 0.00087 1.01 7.3 3176 0.0194
6 0.00154 1.13 10.2 3559 0.0258
7 0.00255 1.29 13.7 4027 0.0328
8 0.00398 1.48 18.0 4593 0.0404
9 0.00595 1.71 23.1 5267 0.0484
10 0.00857 1.99 29.3 6057 0.0567
11 0.01197 2.32 36.7 6975 0.0653
12 0.01630 2.71 45.4 8025 0.0741
13 0.02170 3.18 55.5 9212 0.0830
14 0.02834 3.73 67.2 10530 0.0920
15 0.03641 4.36 80.7 11968 0.1011
16 0.04608 5.10 96.0 13513 0.1102
17 0.05756 5.94 113.3 15139 0.1193
18 0.07106 6.89 132.6 16820 0.1285
19 0.08681 7.97 154.0 18523 0.1377
20 0.10504 9.18 177.4 20210 0.1468
21 0.12600 10.53 202.9 21845 0.1560
22 0.14995 12.01 230.4 23392 0.1652
23 0.17716 13.64 259.8 24822 0.1745
24 0.20792 15.42 291.0 26108 0.1838
25 0.24252 17.34 324.0 27231 0.1932
26 0.28127 19.41 358.5 28177 0.2026
27 0.32448 21.63 394.4 28939 0.2122
28 0.37249 23.99 431.6 29520 0.2219
29 0.42564 26.48 469.9 29922 0.2317
30 0.44780 27.50 485.1 30032 0.2356
31 0.45832 27.95 491.9 30054 0.2374
32 0.46897 28.40 498.6 30066 0.2392
33 0.47435 28.62 502.0 30069 0.2401
34 0.47705 28.74 503.7 30070 0.2405
35 0.47841 28.79 504.6 30070 0.2407
36 0.47908 28.82 505.0 30070 0.2408
37 0.47942 28.83 505.2 30070 0.2409
38 0.47976 28.85 505.4 30070 0.2410
39 0.57128 32.39 559.6 29822 0.2553
40 0.67324 35.85 613.8 29151 0.2698
41 0.78750 39.21 667.9 28150 0.2846
42 0.91614 42.49 722.1 26898 0.3000
43 1.06160 45.67 776.3 25460 0.3162
44 1.22678 48.76 830.5 23894 0.3334
45 1.41509 51.76 884.7 22246 0.3516
46 1.63062 54.68 938.8 20557 0.3713
47 1.87830 57.50 993.0 18860 0.3927
48 2.16408 60.23 1047.2 17183 0.4161
49 2.49522 62.87 1101.4 15547 0.4417
50 2.88063 65.42 1155.5 13972 0.4702
51 3.33128 67.87 1209.7 12470 0.5020
52 3.86077 70.24 1263.9 11053 0.5376
53 4.48613 72.52 1318.1 9728 0.5780
54 5.22875 74.70 1372.3 8500 0.6240
55 6.11579 76.80 1426.4 7371 0.6768
56 7.18197 78.81 1480.6 6341 0.7380
57 8.47206 80.72 1534.8 5411 0.8093
58 10.04439 82.54 1589.0 4578 0.8932
59 11.97566 84.28 1643.2 3837 0.9927
60 14.36788 85.92 1697.3 3185 1.1121
61 17.35835 87.47 1751.5 2616 1.2566
62 21.13427 88.93 1805.7 2124 1.4335
63 22.22932 89.28 1819.2 2012 1.4839
64 22.80265 89.46 1826.0 1958 1.5101
65 22.94878 89.50 1827.7 1945 1.5168
66 23.02227 89.52 1828.5 1938 1.5201
67 23.05913 89.53 1829.0 1935 1.5218
68 23.07758 89.54 1829.2 1933 1.5226
69 23.08220 89.54 1829.2 1933 1.5228
Muzzle

[Catshooter]

My 20 inch Taylor's 92 ran about 25 fps slower than my 16 inch Trapper with the same load. It was also a pound heavier with it's half round barrel.

The cresent butt was why I sold it. The 260 grain Keith at 1550 hurt, while the same load out of the Trapper was fine.


Cat

[The Virginian]

My 20 inch Taylor's 92 ran about 25 fps slower than my 16 inch Trapper with the same load. It was also a pound heavier with it's half round barrel.

The cresent butt was why I sold it. The 260 grain Keith at 1550 hurt, while the same load out of the Trapper was fine.


Cat

That is just crazy and makes no sense to me either.

[StarMetal]

My 20 inch Taylor's 92 ran about 25 fps slower than my 16 inch Trapper with the same load. It was also a pound heavier with it's half round barrel.

The cresent butt was why I sold it. The 260 grain Keith at 1550 hurt, while the same load out of the Trapper was fine.


Cat

That difference in velocity between the two had to be a difference between the two bores.

My Trapper has the norm 94 buttplate and after a while it becomes uncomfortable during a long string of shooting. I can't find anything wrong with my Trapper...it's light, it's accurate, and very portable. I don't hunt with it much, have taken a deer with it and a bunch of groundhogs. My best friend teases me about shooting the groundhogs with 255 gr RCBS SWC's.

Joe

[O.S.O.K.]

That difference in velocity between the two had to be a difference between the two bores.

My Trapper has the norm 94 buttplate and after a while it becomes uncomfortable during a long string of shooting. I can't find anything wrong with my Trapper...it's light, it's accurate, and very portable. I don't hunt with it much, have taken a deer with it and a bunch of groundhogs. My best friend teases me about shooting the groundhogs with 255 gr RCBS SWC's.

Joe


Yep - I've noticed this before too. I have two 30-30 AI's - one is a 24" ballard cut barreled Win 94 and the other is a 20" microgroove Marlin. The Marlin will produce higher pressure/velocity with the same load. Both were rechambered with the same reamer...

I've seen this reported in general with other micro-grooves vs ballard type bores as well. So, barrel length is only one parameter to look at.

[Catshooter]

Yep, ya never know until you measure.


at