45 Colt and Rifles

[KCSO]

First off I am not picking on anyone or any particular gun, but I have read some pretty far fetched notions about the 45 Colt and its loading and I thought I would throw in my 2 cents worth. First the 45 Colt is not and never will be better, harder hitting or more powerful than the 44 Magnum unsless you completely disregard SAAMI specs. The Colt round was designed for about 16000 psi and even current factory high velocity rounds are 24000, while the hotter 44 Mag rounds are loaded to 34000. Yes I have pushed a 300 grain bullet at 1500fps from a 45 colt lever gun, no I did not stick to approved pressure levels.

Second... There is a reason that Winchester never made a 45 Colt rifle. Every 45 Colt rifle I have checked including the Marlins have a chamber that runs from 4 to 8 thousands LARGER than my Ruger and Uberti revolvers. It is relativly easy to get a 44 bullet or a 38 bullet into a 460 hole, not so with a 45 bullet. Therefore to facilitate production the rifles have a larger chamber than is ideal for the cartridge. I will use my ASM Hartford model as an example. A cartridge fired in my rifle is at the front 2 thousands larger than the same load fired in a revolver, at the mid point 3 thou larger and 1/4" from the rim the shell is egg shaped and 8 thou larger than the revolver round. Does this explain why you need to have dead soft brass to prevent blow by? Does this sound like a chamber you want to hot rod your loads in? Just like the old Colt 38 super bbls with the unsupported case head you are looking for trouble with hot loads in these rifles. IMHO if you want a 44 mag buy one, but don't try to remake the old war horse into something it was never intended to be. I love the 45 Colt and I shoot it a lot, but I won't put any load in my rifle that I wouldn't put in my handgun. If you can't kill a deer with a 250 grain bullet at 1300 fps from the rifle, you either need a bigger gun or better sights. I know I will hear from someone who says he shot umpteen loads of 45 Colt with a 300 grain bullet at 1500 fps. I heard the same tune from folks who hot rodded their 38 supers and they are good for business, I have fixed many of their guns when their luck ran out.
If you doubt this call Marlin and ask how much THEY reccommend you load up their 45 Colt rifles, THEY won't even sanction reloads!
'Nuff Said

[StarMetal]

My four cents hee hee. You are right about the original loadings for the 45LC. There also were not guns stout enough to handle hot loads in this round until Ruger come out with the Blackhawk. Today there's alot of guns that are stout enough, the TC Contender, Colt Anaconda, Taurus Raging Bull, Dan Wesson, Freedom Arms, and more, not counting the lever action rifles. It's more to say the 44 magnum will never equal the 45 caliber pistol rounds, speaking mainly of the 454 Casual and 45LC's loaded to level to be fired in those revolvers such chambered for them.

Now to address the reason why it wasn't chambered in leveractions many moons ago. From what I have read, the original 45 LC didn't have very much of a rim, it was very very shallow and just enough to keep it from sliding all the ways into a revolvers cylinder. To make this worse there was no extractor groove cut, as there were no intentions of putting the round in a rifle which would need an extractor groove. That's the reason I heard and believe, as to why the 45LC was never chambered for the leveraction rifles, not because of chamber shape or size.

Joe

[45 2.1]

From other sites: The 45 Colt was a proprietery cartridge by Colt. They didn't allow other firms to chamber it for some time and when the others could, they didn't need to due to their own developments.
They solved the no extractor groove problem in rifles BEFORE the 45 Colt came along, look at the 44 Henry Flat in the Henry rifle.

[StarMetal]

I don't have a 44 Henry cartridge to compare to an old 45LC, but I bet the original 45LC has less of a rim. You're right it doesn't necessarily have to have an extractor groove, but it sure does have to have enough rim.

JOe

[longhorn]

I think KCSO's real point is chamber dimensions-the same reason the custom pistolsmiths like to rechamber smaller caliber cylinders for their "stouter" 6-shot .45 LC's. Of course, sizing die matched to chamber can pretty much solve that problem in a rifle. I believe I'll go measure some brass from my Marlins.

[StarMetal]

Ross Seyfred said the weak link in loading 45LC to magnum velocities was the sloppy chambers in the revolvers chambered for them. He used the revolvers chambered for the 454 Casual as an example in how tight the whole revolvers for them are set up. He said he was tired of hearing the brass was the weak link in 45LC's and did tests to prove that it wasn't. So of course 45LC guns have sloppy chambers because the SAAMI specs for this round is very low and it's not critical to keep things tight. Now when running higher pressure rounds such as the 44 mag and 454 Casual, things are paid more attention to. The gun companies are kind of automatically protected if you go and reload a 45LC to magnum pressures and blow the gun up.

I have both the Winchester and Marlin leveractions in 45LC. The Marlin's chamber is pretty tight, the Winchesters is pretty generous. I have a Ruger Blackhawk, old three screw model, and a Model 25 Smith, also older model to compare chambers in those too. The Marlin, Ruger, and Smith are about the same. I have fired some pretty stiff loads out of the Winchester with no brass problem even with it's generous size chamber. That chamber in noway affects how that Winchester shoots by the ways. It's a pretty accurate rifle.

Joe

[felix]

Joe, you are 100 percent correct about the 45LC design, because that is the only reasoning of why it should not be hotrodded. The chambers are far too sloppy. I, for one, would really like to have a close fitting Winnie, because, like you say, that 26 twist in that gun sure does allow it to shoot normal/nomimal/cowboy boolits. ... felix

[StarMetal]

Mr Felix

I'm glad you mentioned the twist on the Winchester in that caliber. The reason is that no name forum that I was on was about nothing else but which is a better rifle, marlin or winchester. Well they all concluded that the Winchester was more accurate. I didn't want to say it in my other post as to start agruements, but maybe that twist is the reason.

Also you scared me saying I was 100 % correct. I only like to be 99.9 % correct.

Joe

[Rrusse11]

Gents,
Innerested indeed in the general discussion, just having completed a modification on my Marlin 1894 that is in the "NOT RECOMMENDED" category. Chambering went very smoothly, my first time btw, and a dozen rounds of that longer C brass with 10gr of Green Dot under the Lee 250-RF with a COAL of 1.750 and a GM205M primer performed flawlessly. The brass after fireing does taper from .480 > .484,,, but then it did that with the initial 45Colt chamber.
I have been using the tactic on the reloads of using my LEE FL die as a neck sizer only (.469"), and the Lee Factory Crimp Die with the carbide sizeing ring brings the case down to .480".
I do not intend to get anywhere near Casull pressures of upwards of 60,000psi,,,,, but feel that 40,000 is perfectly feasible. The rifle has already handled a 300gr at 1600fps in the original chambering with no obvious signs of distress, and with slightly over listed Lil Gun loads hit 2000fps with the 250gr RF,,,, leading was apparent,,,, and it was only a test run to see what it'd clock. A Saeco #945 (C452-255-SWC) arrived today, and I've already got the Lee C452-300-WFN on hand.
I'm hoping with the increased case capacity and COAL, coupled with the 24" barrel, to hit 2500'# s of ME. Should make it a solid 150yd hunting load, adequate for anything here in the NE, {:o).
I've got a pound of AA1680 to try out,,,,, and I've been thinking about Vihtavuori N130 as a possibility as well, RL#7 was NOT working in the 45Colt,,,,,,,, it may now. Lots of Lil Gun and Alliant 410 already in stock. Thoughts on powder selection Felix would be much appreciated!
Cheers,
R*2

[felix]

R2, the VV full rifle powders won't work in pistol length cases because they are too bulky. N105(BLUEDOT) and N110(2400) are the exceptions. N120 would work for 4227, should a full case of 4227 be too hot; instead, use a full case of N120. 1680/H118 should be just what the doctor ordered to make sure you don't loosen up the gun. Low pressure and probably enough speed/accuracy, even with a some ignition problems. You might make 35K CUP with the heavier boolits. Suspect some vertical stringing (use a scope with a very good rest). If the amount of stringing is satisfactory at 150 yards, go with that powder and forget the rest for hunting. The LilGun,WC820,H110,WW296 are fairly close in speed and would work well enough with the 250 grainer boolits. Might be worth fine tuning by substituting back and forth these latter powders, expecially if you get the verticals, but only then. ... felix

[26Charlie]

That's a cogent point about not having any rounds laying about, which you would not want to put into your revolvers. Sure as the world some of the hot ones will get into the wrong ammo bag for a range visit. I have Ruger Blackhawks and a S&W M25, so I load medium loads in the 10 gr. UNIQUE and 13 gr. HERCO area with 250 gr. bullets. These work well in my Win M94 Trapper, 1200 - 1300 f/s. I have experimented with heavier loads in the Winchester with slower powders and with heavier bullets, but have not gotten anywhere near the accuracy - don't know why. So I quit with the attempt to make the thing a mini 45-70.

If I am reading Rrussell correctly, you have rechambered a Marlin M1894 to the .454 Casull? Of course the model is chambered to .44 Mag and .41 Mag, with no problems, but doesn't the Casull work at about 60K instead of 45K psi? Yes of course, you said so in your post. I have to be more attentive. I guess you'll know if it gets loose or beat-up from pressure, and report on it. Sounds interesting.

[Four Fingers of Death]

I always heard it was a propritary cartridge, thats why it wasnt made in anything else. It was pretty new then and as someone on the board said by the time patents were no longer applicable, it was old news.

As to the sloppy chambers, I rmember seeing on sixgunner.com, a gunsmith that took Ruger 44Mags, rebarrelled them and rechambered the cylinders tight and used Remington brass for very spectacular results (as you would expecvt for $1000 per conversion).

Mick.

[KCSO]

As to the propritary business, did you notice that COLT chambered their Lightning rifle in 44-40 38-40 32-20 and not 45 colt.

If when you fire your gun you can see or feel and expansion or bulges in your brass that is not a gun to shoot real hot loads in. In my experience this is all the ASM's most of the Rossi's. I have only had oppoutunity to shoot 3 Marlins in 45 Colt and all of them were at least close to tolerance. My max loads in my ASM and Rossi revolver safe loads only. In the Marlin I have used the hotter Ruger Only loads, but only listed loads.

My Speer #8 (1970) and My Lyman cast bullet handbook (1996) both list 9 grains of Unique as a MAX load, if this load leaks gas anneal your brass but don't bump your load.

[StarMetal]

Well KSCO, it's like if you have a bolt rifle with slight headspace you can correct this buy not sizing your brass all the way down after you fired it in such gun. This can work for the 45 LC rifles with slightly fat chambers. Once the brass has been fired, just neck size it like Russel does and it's as though you are firing a rifle with a tight chamber. I do agree with you to not shoot hot loads in such fat chambered rifles with the brass sized to factory specs.

Joe

[Rrusse11]

Gents,
10gr of Green Dot under the Lee 250 RF giving 1333fps to get some once fired brass. Still got to cast some boolits,,,, in the interim I've got some test loads with some Hdy jacketed ready to go with H4227 using Fed 200 magnum small pistol primers,,,, should give better/earlier signs of pressure than the small rifle I'm thinking. COAL of 1.750".
24gr H4227 : 300gr Hdy XTPMag
27gr H4227 : 250gr " XTPHP
30gr H4227 : 200gr " XTPHP
I'll keep y'all posted,,,,, {:o).

[Griff]

Gotta admit, I agree with KCSO's 1st post in this thread. I use my '73 & '92 rifles for CAS and don't need/want a magnum. The '86 in .45-70 fulfills that purpose with aplomb. 'Nuff of that.
I've heard the proprietary cartridge story also. Another reason I've heard, but no one's addressed here is that what the other cartridges all share in common; is that they're bottle-necked (or nearly so): .32-20, .38-40, .44-40. As originally loaded with BP, they all have thinner neck wall thickness than the .45LC. In the BP loadings a thinner wall and bottleneck case aids in keeping that pesky BP fouling from the lifter area.
Also remember that the .44-40 didn't appear in Colt SAAs until sometime in the 1880s.
I'm sure that corporate cooperation was no better in the 1800s than it is today.
There's probably no ONE reason the .45LC wasn't chambered by Winchester until the early 1980s. I strongly suspect that it's a combination of many factors.

[Four Fingers of Death]

I suppose you are right. A 45 rifle was never built and suddenly it seems like a good idea, strange. Perhaps the fact it is easier to manafacture to close specs nowadays makes it feasible.

The 44 magnums are hard to beat thought, performance is right up there, 300Gn boolits available and its a robust and cheap case to boot.

I currently shoot 357, 44, 44/40, 30/30, 375 and 45/70 levers and nearly once bought a 45 Colt Cowboy, but the guy had taken a short piece off the bbl. Don't know why, probably dropped it and damaged it. Anyways, it was a bit expensive considering the barrel and I passed on it. Nice looking piece otherwise.

I heard that they have 454s available in Pumas now. Is that right?

[Griff]

Yep, Puma (aka Rossi) makes the '92 in .45 LC. That's what my '92 is. They make a carbine, Rifle & "Short Rifle".
The biggest reason the makers now market a .45LC rifle in these nifty lever guns is that there's a market for 'em. Many Cowboy Action Shooters (myself included) wanted a lever gun in the same caliber as our handgun. The levergun was cheaper to replace than my Colts, and besides the .45LC is an easier round to reload than the .44-40.

[Ed Barrett]

I've got a .357 mag and a .454 from Puma both blued models. I checked the chamber on the 454 after the post about the loose chambers. It is as tight as a new (6 Month old) Ruger and older Colt .45. It amazes me about the amount of pressure the 92 clone action takes and doesn't complain a bit. I've run some very hot 45 loads with AA9, H110, and Lil Gun, after I miked the web and primer pocket and found no change. I did use large rifle primers. Accuracy wise I still have not found a cast load that is as accurate as j-bullet, but I'm still working on it. I got the second Puma in .454 after a friend bought one and we did some load work up for it, he bought it because he was impressed by the quality of my .357 Puma. The only thing wrong with the .454 Puma is the ability to load the tube from the front, people think you have a .22 on steroids. <GGG> they still have the side loading gate too.

[Griff]

:oops: Thanks for correcting me Ed. Didn't think of the .454 Casull in 4fingermick's post. Just assumed he meant the .45LC.

[Four Fingers of Death]

I have a 357 and a 44 Rossi/Puma. I only just got them. They both have the a la 22tube mag loading bay, but the mag tube inner does not seem to want to come out. I oticed in the flyer I got with the new carbine that the 38 Special model only loads from the front. Is this the case. Going to the range on Wednesday, cant wait to try these out.

[Griff]

4fingermick,
Try this site: http://www.marauder.homestead.com/Rifles.html. He's also got descriptions and instructions for various other cowboy type guns. His method of smoothing the action on the Rossi '92 is almost just like what I've been doing for over 20 years; and he explains it better than I could!
Good luck.

[Rrusse11]

Gents,
Lil Gun appears to be the powder of choice, tried H4227 and some AA1680, but neither delivered the velocity, although AA1680 did exhibit good accuracy and consistent ballistics. Just nothing like the power potential of the Lil Gun.
Top load today of 28.0 gr Lil Gun under the 300gr Hornday XTP Mag gave, for a 5 shot group, an avg of 1944fps with 3 shots into one hole at 50yds , one up 3/4", the other down 3/4" with an ES of 26 and SD of 10.3, COAL of 1.740". Extrapolating from Hodgdon data should be circa 40,000cup.
My partially sized brass was just beginning to show signs of extraction difficulties,,, I could feel the brass exiting the chamber*, not so with the 26gr or 27gr loads leading up to my ME objective of 2500#'s. The Fed sp magnum primer fairly flattened, also progressively showing pressure signs that this is about the limit for my rifle. Recoil decisive, but I didn't find it objectionable, and muzzle flip thru the Bushnell 1.5x4.5 Banner was no more than a foot or so. A quick second shot would have been ez. And I found I was holding the butt fairly loosely, ie. no death grip "hang on to this baby" kinda hold. The group size also progressively shrinking from ~4" > 2 1/2" > 1 1/2", with the remarkable large round hole that I and 2 others at the range examined closely before it was concluded that it had to be 3 shots.
I'll fine tune the the load a bit,,,,, mebbe small rifle primers, tenths of a grain powder one way or t'other, and might increase COAL a tad, but I'm clearly at the 'zone' of finding the velocity sweet spot. Not suitable as a steady diet perhaps for the Marlin 1894, but a great hunting load suitable for most of what walks on the planet out to 150yds. I'll also crank up the moulds, and get some real boolits happenin', should be able to acheive same ME target with less pressure, and it'll be innerestin' with some Hdy 240gr XTPMag condoms. My feeling is a lighter bullet may go a lil further in terms of energy with the Lil Gun. I'll also try some of the Alliant 410 now that I've got a benchmark.
Cheers,
R*2

* With the brass hitting full expansion, some minor roughness in the chamber is evident, not unexpected seein' as how it's my first ever hand ream job. I'll do some carefull polishing, and the relief cut in the barrel for the extractor could use a tweak for a bit more positive snap onto that marginal case rim. All in all, I'm impressed!, and pleased. {:o)---~~~~~~~ (celebratory cigar).

[Scrounger]

R2, where are all the doomsayers, wanting to know how many fingers you have left, etc? When I made reference to an article in Rifle Magazine 3 years ago that publicly stated in print that such velocities were possible, and at safe pressures, the Chicken Littles popped up everywhere. Yet I'd be willing to bet they've blown up more rifles than I have. Zero. My shoulder quits before the gun does. I had .45-70s, I have two .444s. I don't need to hot rod the .45 Colt to get that much power. But if the gun can do it, I will give it credit for it. So should they.

[waksupi]

When you guys load pistol cartridges for the cowboy rifles, do you use pistol or rifle primers?

[KYCaster]

When you guys load pistol cartridges for the cowboy rifles, do you use pistol or rifle primers?

The only experience I have with pistol cal. rifles is a Rossi '92 x 44-40. The problem I have had is with that huge extractor that covers a substantial area of the bolt face. With pistol primers I have found that the primer cup will flow into the gap between the bolt face and the extractor and upon ejection will shear a small sliver of metal off the primer and eventually bind the extractor and cause problems.
I have tried rifle primers and the harder metal eliminates the primer flow but all the brass I have is made to use pistol primers and the rifle primers are a crush fit and I get wider variations in ES and SD compared to pistol primers.
Felix suggested that I replace the extractor with a Winchester part to eliminate the gap that is causing the problem but I hesitate to spend the money on something that may not work.
Bottom line is its just a fun gun anyway so if I keep the velocities to plinking load levels it works just fine with anything I put in it.
Hope this helps.

Jerry

[floodgate]

KYCaster, Waksupi: Get a Sinclair LR primer pocket uniformer and deepen the pockets to take the Large Rifle primers. floodgate

[Rrusse11]

Waksupi,
The Casull brass (Starline in my case), is already set up for small rifle primers, I used the Fed 200 magnum small pistols so that I'd have an earlier indication of pressure than the harder cup small rifle. I'll back off the load a tad and try again now with Fed GM205M's. I've found that with the Starline brass for the 45Colt, I can use LR primers without over crushing, same in the 44Mag, YMMV. As Floodgate points out, it's an ez ream with the pocket uniformer, from memory the spec is only 5thou or so deeper than the pistol pocket depth.

Scrounger,
There is no "need", I've got a 444 and a 45/70, but it's an innerestin' exercise, and the felt recoil is appreciably less for the same horsepower than either of the two more substantive cartridges. Certainly the accuracy potential is its own reward here, and it's been highly educational tweaking and tuning the Marlin 1894 short action to achieve rifle equivalency ballistics from a pistol cartridge. Here in the NorthEast, at 'woods' ranges, eminently suitable for even the big black bear (PA record 800#s +) that are starting to surface. With a 125yd zero, the round should be 1.66" high at 75yds, and a 10" drop at 200, still delivering 1100#s at that range.

Cheers folks!
R*2

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I don't believe there is much reason to use the .45LC in a rifle, other than interchangeability with a pistol, and you lose this advantage if you load it to pressures unsafe for the pistol you actually have. In a modern double-action or Ruger revolver, that can be quite a bit more than SAAMI pressures - but not if it is a Colt SAA or even one of its clones, and not, I think, anywhere near Casull pressures unless the gun is labelled Casull. Besides cylinder strength, I think there would be issues with revolver barrel gap width, and barrel steel where the gas escapes at much higher than bullet velocities. Muzzle blast past the bullet is slightly erosive, and that is at much lower pressure and for a much shorter period of time per shot. Besides, a 1.6in. long steel revolver cylinder expands at a rate of about .001in. per 100°F. Not many people would want to fire a lot of shots in a hurry with the .454 Casull. But almost eliminating the gap is a mistake in a revolver you might want to fire rapidly with a downloaded version.

I don't believe anybody can enforce sole rights in a proprietary cartridge, even nowadays, and Colt didn't invent the .45 Colt. They just added (for civilian use) a slightly longer-nosed bullet than the government cartridge could accommodate in the issue S&W Schofield - which lost all point when smokeless powder came along, and they didn't need the powder space. Even in subsequent cartridges of their own, they tried to use the heel bullet which was common in Europe, and remains fossilised in the .22 rimfire. I don't believe anybody could be stopped from selling cartridges, firearms or reamers for the .454 Casull - and if they could be, the ease of switching to the .455 Wallace, and of people like you lot getting the word about compatibility of the cheaper ammunition, mean it probably wouldn't be worth trying.

A loose chamber is a useful safeguard against jamming through dirt, unburnt powder grains, out of spec. cases, lumpiness of the crimp, etc. Revolver designers in the smokeless age do indeed have to make their chambers tighter, but I believe it is to add extra steel on the inside (since the frame prevents their doing so on the outside), and to improve the grip of case on chamber, which reduces thrust on the bolt-face. I don't think there is any reason why you shouldn't load the .45 LC to pressures in the 35,000 ft./sec. for use in a modern Winchester, if it was solely for that firearm. Ovality of the chamber is an annoying fault, but I think we'd find we routinely use such pressure in old military rifles with such clearances. Winchester simply stuck to the .44-40 because it is a better rifle cartridge, with a higher ballistic coefficient and therefore flatter long-range trajectory. The thin neck and rudimentary shoulder were undesirable for the reloader. But now that we have the .44 Magnum, which does away with these disadvantages, it seems like no contest.

[Scrounger]

Why, indeed. As Ballistics points out, the heavier rifles are already there, ready to do the heavy work. But as we all know, and sometimes forget, the 'need' isn't to have it, but to see if it can be done, to learn, to try something new and different. To go farther than someone else, to go in a different direction, to use a different means. In other words, if you're not a shooter and reloader, it won't make any sense at all to you. To us, it does.

[wills]

I don't think there is any reason why you shouldn't load the .45 LC to pressures in the 35,000 ft./sec. for use in a modern Winchester, if it was solely for that firearm.

That seems a little fast. Do you mean "psi" ?

[floodgate]

IICRC, the oroginal reason for the slight taper and shoulder on the .44-40, .38-40 and .32-20 was to ease the feed "funnelling" into the chamber - and, especially, extraction, with the rather primitive cartridge constructions of the day. Early (1960's) attempts to feed the straight .38/.357's, .44's and .45 Colt stumbled over feed problems, especially with the angled lifters of the '92's and Marlins, which probably explains the oversize chambers in some of the modern versions. floodgate

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Observe, everybody, that only Wills passed the test of noticing my deliberate mistake.

I didn't mention heavier rifles, and while it is a consideration, I don't believe people around here much mind having to buy another gun. My point was that unless you have safe interchangeability with a revolver you actually have, the .44s are around to do the .45 LC rifle's work better.

[Rrusse11]

Observe, everybody, that only Wills passed the test of noticing my deliberate mistake.

I didn't mention heavier rifles, and while it is a consideration, I don't believe people around here much mind having to buy another gun. My point was that unless you have safe interchangeability with a revolver you actually have, the .44s are around to do the .45 LC rifle's work better.

B in S,
The use of the longer Casull for rifle loads in my instance does segregate out the 'hot' from SA revolver loads,,,,,,, iffen I owned one. I've got a Dan Wesson which I'm sure is easily as rugged as any Ruger.
I disagree with the notion that the 44 in either a rifle or revolver "work better". Pushing 2000fps now with a 300gr cast with minimal pressure signs means that I'm in the realms of mild/medium 45/70 loads from a short action rifle, and cartridge efficiency has to be well up there. I've pushed the 44Mag in a rifle to 2000#'s of ME safely enough, but the additional case capacity and bore diameter of the 45 puts it into , IMO, quite a different class. Whereas the 44Mag is a 100yd deer rifle, the 452Mag(NOT Casull pressures) becomes a 150yd round.
I'm tempted to get my hands on a 445SuperMag reamer or a neck and throater for the 44, and do a similar length (1.38") cartridge on the Marlin 1894 in 44Mag that I grabbed off of Gunbroker recently. Course I should try the 44-40 barrel first,,,,, ahhhhhhhh, so many projects, {;o). There's another cartridge with some increased case capacity.
Cheers,
R*2

[shooter575]

waksupi
Moderator


When you guys load pistol cartridges for the cowboy rifles, do you use pistol or rifle primers?
=========================

waksupi,Lot of guys shooting 44-40 and 45LC in Henrys in the N-SSA.There have been a few prematures in the mag with large rifle primers.This has happened with flat point bullets.[makes a mess on the open Henry mag] Pocket is too short for reliable LR to seat flush.
We made a rools change to pistol primers only.

[Griff]

I can only speak for myself, but I only us Large Pistol primers. No problems, nada. I have used magnum pistol primers for some of my Black Powder loads, but only when I'm traveling out of state for a match and the ammo will be subjected to temperature/humidity changes. I admit to a bit of overkill. Still not a problem.

[Hobie]

I have a Hartford and I'm just trying to equal the .45-90 BP load albeit with either jacketed or cast. Leaning towards the WFNGC as it feeds very smoothly. Lots of fun even with 300 gr. at 1500+ fps.

[Rrusse11]

Gents,
For those who might be innerested. A trip to the range today with some Hornady 240gr XTPMag jacketed with a range of Lil Gun loads over Fed small rifle GM205M primers.
32.0 up to 35.0 grains with a COAL of 1.750, top accuracy load is clearly 34.0 circa 2300fps. On current Hodgdon data this should be around 35.000cup. My squeaky clean barrel,,,,, Kroiled, took a dozen rounds to settle in. Initial velocities dropped from the first 5 rounds of 32.0 as I went up in .5gr increments.
The other point of note was that with my neck size only approach, I must be more consistent. I've got my FL die hangin' on by a single thread, and halfway thru the loading stages I realised that a half stroke was all that was needed to get the bullet base neck tension area sized. This too made a difference in velocities, 44Mag man's point about consistent neck tension, and I'm guessing here, case capacity, play a significant role in velocity consistency at top load levels.
Primers beginning to flatten , and some signs of cratering as I went up the powder charge. My now polished chamber shows no signs of extraction problems, and I'm taking Ackley's pressure testing of the need for clean chamber and brass to heart. At 34.5 and 35 gr the lever is wanting to pop open a bit if the brass ain't spotless, and I'm clearly getting to the edge of what the gun can handle.
34 gr however cut one hole with 3 shots at 50yds, and while she's kickin' some with 2800#'s of ME, still feels manageable. Not recommended as a steady diet clearly,,,, but shooting so well that I'll work some more on it with tenths either side of 34, and juggle seating depth and length of neck size. Should be the top hunting load IMO.
Now I'll work on some more cast, but I got a long way to go before I get my boolits as consistent as Mr. Hornady's, {:o).
Cheers all,
R*2
Ps. Hey Joe! The Marlin website lists there new 45Colt twist as 1:20, yet as near as I can measure with a rod,,,, I'm thinking mine's 1:30 , or mebbe 1:32. Any idea what urs is? Thnx.

[StarMetal]

Russell

I'll try to measure it tomr. All I know is the thing sures shoots real good.

Joe

[w30wcf]

KCSO,
Thank you for starting this thread. It's lead to lot's of interesting discussion.

You mentioned that "The 45 Colt is not and never will be better, harder hitting or more powerful than the 44 Magnum unsless you completely disregard SAAMI specs."

Well......actual data taken in Hodgdons ballistic lab in 20" rifle barrels tells a different story.
.44 Magnum / 300 gr. Bullet / 19.0 grs. / H110 /1,473 fps / 38,800cup
.45 Colt ….. / 320 gr. Bullet / 23.5 grs. / H110 / 1,562 fps / 32,000cup

Please note that the .45 Colt pushes a heavier bullet faster at almost 20% less pressure than the .44 Mag. Hodgdon would not publish loads that would be unsafe to use in modern rifles.

Not bad for a 130+ year old cartridge!

w30wcf

[KCSO]

SAAMI spcec for 45 Colt are 14,500 for standard loads and 24,00 for Ruger loads. This is from the SAAMI web site. That is a tad far away from 32,000. Now I won't say that a Marlin with a tight chamber won't hold this as it will hold the higher pressure 44 magnum, but it is NOT standard pressure. In addition, having had to repair or scrap a 73 and two Colt Uberti revolvers that got some of this ammo in them, I just don't load them up that much. Every day I see the results of the uncaring or the uninformed stuffing hot loads in guns that were never intended for them, so I have a somewhat conservative bent. I have had a local fellow want his 73 replica rechambered to 45 Casul because his buddy had a Puma in the same caliber. I have had Remington rolly blocks in 7mm blown apart and trapdoors scatterd across the landscape. It seems like I can't send out a 45 Colt gun anymore but that the prospective owner wants to know how much he can fudge the reloads. I stand by my original assessment, if you want 44 mag ballistics get a 44.

[StarMetal]

ksco

Wouldn't a more correct statement be "if you want a 454 Casul get a 454 casul not hot load a 45 LC" ?

Joe

[w30wcf]

KCSO,
Thank you for your reply. For the past 2 manuals, Hodgdon has shown loads in the 30,000 cup range for the .45 Colt. In their latest(?) No. 27 manual, they indicate these loads are for Ruger, Freedom Arms & TC only. I see your point if the SAMMI shows the top load at 24,000 cup.

I bought my .45 Marlin Cowboy in 1997 to be a companion for my 3 .45 Colt Rugers. The chamber in my .45 Marlin, allows cases to expand to .487 or about .010. Interestingly, 2 of my Rugers have chambers within .001 of each other and the Marlin. I learned a long time ago to neck size only my .45 Colt brass and leave the rest of the case in its fireformed state. So dimensioned, it will function just fine in all three guns.

The Hodgdon load, 320 LBT / 23.5 H110 exits my Marlin's barrel at 1,657 f.p.s. and has been absolutely trouble free in the neck sized only, chamber fitting cases.

For most folks, your advice if you want a magnum buy a magnum is something to be heeded. Especially when there are those that put higher pressured rounds in a '73 Winchester ...... not good!

I bought my first .45 Ruger back in '74 because "everybody and their brother" owned a .44 Magnum, and since I always root for the underdog.......

I have fired away many many rounds over the years and have never had a bit of problem with 30,000 cup loads in my .45's using the chamber fitted cases. I don't own any weak .45 Colt guns, but if I did, I would be extra cautious.

I certainly understand your concern and advice regarding higher pressure .45 Colt loads and what can happen if they find their way into the wrong firearm as you have witnessed first hand.

Sincerely,
w30wcf

[w30wcf]

As to why the .45 Colt was never chambered in an early lever action rifle, no one knows for sure. As has been mentioned, possibly because it might have been a proprietary cartridge, or perhaps Winchester would only offer their '73 and '92 rifles chambered in cartridges they designed.

Early s.h.b.p. (solid head button pocket) .45 Colt cases don't have much purchase area on the narrow rim, but I once fired 50 black powder U.M.C. headstamped cartridges through my Marlin with nary a problem with feeding and extraction.

The W.C.F. family of cartridges for the '73 have thinner necks and thus seal the chamber well, since they are more elastic. The .45 Colt case on the other hand, has thicker, less elastic necks which allows blowby. Possibly another reason that it was not chambered in the early lever actions.

I have found that if one anneals the necks of his .45 Colt brass to make it more elastic, and uses fireformed, neck sized cases, blow by is a thing of the past.

Sincerely,
w30wcf

[StarMetal]

w30wcf

I don't think firing 50 black powder UMC's through you Marlin is a good representation of a test as to why they never chambered the good ole 45 LC back in the early lever days. You're talking about a very modern made leveraction, that is the latest steel, latest in spring technology, which mean that the extractor the new Marlin has to be superior then the oldies plus to you probably have a glass smooth chamber so the case doesn't have much to stick and cling too, in addition we all surmise that todays 45 LC levers have generous proportioned chambers. Who knows what guns makers back in the days of those old lever's would have cut their chambers too, they didn't have the vast knowledge that's around today. So I think with those skimpy rims and rough chambers..they thought maybe not a good idea. Now if you could find an beater and have it bored out to 45 LC and chambered fairly tight, not like the ones today, and ding up the chamber some to make it like it's was used and abused, but don't change a darn thing else, then fire your 50 rounds and see what happens. Just my two cents.

Joe

[454PB]

I have a Puma 92 in .454 Casull. I also own three .454 revolvers. All four of these guns have minimal chambers. My impressions of the Puma are the same as Ed's....it's a tough little rifle and shoots very well.

A friend of mine bought a Marlin Cowboy in .45 Colt a few years ago. He was splitting the brass after just a few mild loadings and found the the chamber was considerably oversized.

[w30wcf]

Starmetal,
I would agree that 50 b.p. .45 Colt cartridges in a modern 1894 Marlin is not a definitive test, but it was interesting to try the old loads out.

If Winchester or Marlin had a hankering to chamber the .45 Colt in their leverguns way back when, they would have tooled to produce the cartridge with a wider rim. They obviously felt that the .44 W.C.F. / .44-40 did the job just fine.

w30wcf

[StarMetal]

w30wcf

I do believe the 45 LC wouldn't have been any better then the 44-40 if any at all. Only advantage would have been compadibility with a 45 LC revolver.

Joe