38/357 or 45 colt for SASS?

[35 Whelen]

My wife and I got in to it a couple of years ago so we shared equipment. We started out with a pair of Uberti Hombre's a '92 Rossi all in .357. I cast all our bullets and load all our ammo, .38's of course.

After a few months it came time for me to get my own guns and I had already decided I was going to shoot .44 Specials because I wanted to use my CAS guns for hunting (which I have, successfully).

After a couple of years of off-and-on shooting, I would not and will not go back to the .38. I love the larger caliber primarily because it's usefulness goes beyond just competing. If I had to to do over, I might ever just go with the 45 Colt as I now own two SA revolvers and two 1866 levers in that caliber. I've loaded .38's and 45's extensively and if you cast your own bullets, there's not all that much difference in the cost of loading .38's and .45's. You're talking maybe 36¢ worth of powder to load a box of .38's and 70¢ to load a box of 45's.

I've shot with Uber-Competitors and to them it's all about winning the game and beating everybody else. Me, I'm like some of the other posters in that I compete against myself and thoroughly enjoy it.

So...if you think you'd like the authenticity of the 45, that's what you should shoot, but if you're on a tight budget or think might ant to really compete, go with the .38.
35W

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Just remember, if you're going for authentic the 45 Colt was chambered in the Colt SAA but there was no levergun in 45 Colt back then. The levergun was chambered in 44-40 and because of that many on the plains had a SAA chambered in 44-40 too and not in 45 Colt. There were many more SAA revolver chambered in 44-40 in the hands of the people than there ever were in 45 Colt. Back then the 45 Colt was mostly a cartridge used by the military and not the general public probably because of the levergun chambering.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

The levergun was chambered in 44-40 and because of that many on the plains had a SAA chambered in 44-40 too and not in 45 Colt. There were many more SAA revolver chambered in 44-40 in the hands of the people than there ever were in 45 Colt. Back then the 45 Colt was mostly a cartridge used by the military and not the general public probably because of the levergun chambering.

Howdy Again

Now no offense, but I have heard most of that many times, and I don't buy it.

Let's look at some numbers.

Far and away, the most popular chambering of the First Generation Colt Single Action Army was 45 Colt. 150,683 standard models, 100 Target Models, 8,005 Bisleys and 97 Bisley Targets. So I get 158,885 First generations of all types chambered for 45 Colt between 1873 and 1940, the end of 1st Gen production. Please feel free to check my math, I have been known to make mistakes.*

Government contracts account for about 40,000 of those guns. That is direct from the Colt website. I have also seen the figure of a little bit more than 37,000 were produced for government contracts. The SAA was standard issue in the Army from 1873 until 1891 when it was replaced by a double action revolver. During that time period, total output of all calibers of the SAA was 136,000 units. No, I cannot tell you exactly how many 45 caliber SAAs were produced from 1873 until 1891, but I can tell you that by the Great Depression in 1930 production had diminished to a trickle. And because of our involvement in WWI in 1918 and 1919 SAA production was also very low.

Let's take a wild stab and say that of the 158,885 45 caliber First Gens, 75% were made during the military contract years of 1873 until 1891. That gives us a little more than 119,000 total production, subtract 40,000 for military contracts, and that leaves us with about 79,000 1st Gen 45 caliber SAAs available to the civilian market in those years.

Now lets look at 44-40. Yes, it was the second most popular chambering of the SAA, first offered by Colt in 1878, but 44-40 production lagged way behind 45 Colt. Total 44-40 1st Gen production was 64,489 standard models, 21 Target Models, 6,803 Bisleys and 78 Bisley Targets, for a grand total of 71,391 Colt Frontier Six Shooters (the special name the factory gave the 44-40 versions) produced between 1878 and 1940.** If I multiply that by my 75% figure as my guess of how many were produced during the 45 caliber military contract era, it gets whittled down to about 53,500 44-40s produced during the same time period that about 79,000 45s were available for civilian sale.

That looks to me like almost 1 1/2 times the number of 45s vs 44-40.


********************


Yes, you are completely correct that the 45 Colt cartridge was never chambered for rifles in the 1800s, in fact 45 Colt rifles are a very recent development. Part of this undoubtedly because the rims of the early 45 Colt cartridges were much smaller than current versions, and there would be very little for a rifle extractor to grab. 44-40 on the other hand was designed specifically as a rifle cartridge and had a larger diameter rim, enough that a rifle extractor could get a good grip.


********************


While I'm on the subject, lets look at Winchester 1873 and 1892 44-40 caliber production numbers. Total production of just 44-40 caliber Model 1873s from 1873 until the end of production in 1923 was 566,487 units.*** Total production of just 44-40 caliber Model 1892s from 1892 until the end of production in 1941 was 598,680 units.**** So a total of over 1,165,000 Winchester rifles chambered for 44-40 during almost the same time period that a total of a little bit more than 71,000 Single Action Army revolvers were chambered for the same round.

So where do we get the idea that most cowboys carried a rifle and a Colt both chambered for 44-40 if there were about 16 times more rifles produced than revolvers? I think mostly from gun magazine writers. Yes, it is absolutely true that it can be a disaster if you load a 45 Colt into a rifle chambered for 44-40. Trust me, I know this from experience. But your average cowboy was a poorly paid, malnourished young man, and $15 or $20 for a brand new Colt Frontier Six Shooter was going to be beyond the reach of most of them. Whereas with the Army surplussing out all the old 1860 Colts, old Cap & Ball revolvers, and cartridge conversions were going to be much more affordable to those cowhands. If they even had the money to buy a rifle and a revolver. Sorry, I don't have a reference to what a brand new Winchester cost in 1873, but I am looking for it.


Footnotes on the statistics
*The Colt Single Action Revolvers, A Shop Manual, Volumes 1& 2 by Jerry Kuhnhausen.
**Ibid
***The Winchester Handbook by John Madis.
****Ibid

 

[Arkansas Paul]

I don't know how credible this source is but I'll link to it. It claims that the total government purchase of .45 caliber SAAs at 37,000 units out of 136,000 produced during that time frame (they started buying double action .45s in 1891).

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...eview-colt-peacemaker-single-action-revolver/

Part of this undoubtedly because the rims of the early 45 Colt cartridges were much smaller than current versions, and there would be very little for a rifle extractor to grab. 44-40 on the other hand was designed specifically as a rifle cartridge and had a larger diameter rim, enough that a rifle extractor could get a good grip.

That may have been an issue, but the main reason they never tried was that Colt had the patent for the .45 Colt round and wouldn't release it. By the time the patent expired, the .44 WCF had caught on and taken that part of the market.

I too wondered why Winchester never chambered the model '73 in .45 Colt and that was explained to me. It makes perfect sense as that time period was magnificent for firearms innovation and everything was patented and protected to the extreme.


Edit: I just saw where DJ addressed the numbers as well.

 

[goon]

I read somewhere - *somewhere* - that Oliver Winchester was unwilling to consider chambering his rifles in .45 Colt even if it had been possible.

Even now though, the .45 Colt is the only cartridge I've ever had slip out of a shell holder during reloading. The rim is there, but it's not much of a rim. If I had to use either in a rifle with the intention of staying alive, I think I'd trust the .44-40's substantial rim much more.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

I don't know how credible this source is but I'll link to it. It claims that the total government purchase of .45 caliber SAAs at 37,000 units out of 136,000 produced during that time frame (they started buying double action .45s in 1891).

Bear in mind that the 37,000 units figure refers only to the 45 Colt caliber guns sold to the Army. The 136,000 figure refers to the revolvers chambered for all calibers produced up until 1891.

That may have been an issue, but the main reason they never tried was that Colt had the patent for the .45 Colt round and wouldn't release it. By the time the patent expired, the .44 WCF had caught on and taken that part of the market.

I have heard that too, but I do not know if it is true or not. Can you verify that information?

Regarding the rims on the early 45 Colt rounds, take a look at this photo. These are early Benet Primed 45 Colt rounds. They look like rimfires but they are not. Look at how tiny those rims are compared to the modern round all the way on the right.




Here is another photo of some old 45 Colt cartridges in my collection. Current SAAMI standard for 45 Colt rim diameter is .512 if I recall correctly. Current SAAMI standard for 44-40 is .520, again if I recall correctly. Some of these rims are much less than .512. Notice there are no 'extractor grooves' either. Modern 45 all the way on the left, and an unusual extra wide rimmed 45 all the way on the right, for double action revolvers.



The Single Action Army does not have an extractor, it has an ejector rod. The empties are poked out from the inside. There was no necessity for a rim, other than a teeny, tiny rim to keep the round from sliding forward into the chamber when the firing pin struck. There was no extractor claw trying to get a hold of the rim. 44-40 on the other hand was developed as a rifle round, and has always had a more substantial rim so that an extractor claw could grab it.

One more photo, check out the rims. Left to right, modern 38 Special, a pair of 38-40s probably from the 1930s or so, a couple of 44-40s, and an antique 45 Colt.



P.S. I have seen the 45 Colt referred to as Colt's Revolver, Cal, .45, as on the old box, and Colt's Revolver Cartridge, Caliber .45 M1873, so there is probably something to what you say about Colt owning a patent. Will have to look into that further.

 

[BSA1]

As long as we are on the topic of the number of cartridges Colt chambered it's Single Action Revolvers in the 32-20 was the most popular cartridge for the Bisley Model.

It was and still is a outstanding accurate cartridge.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Driftwood Johnson, I won't question your numbers because I'm sure they are accurate or you wouldn't have posted them. My assumptions were formed by listening to so called experts on TV and magazines who are supposed to know about these things. Your numbers seem to dispute their knowledge.

Thanks for the information and especially for the photos of those fine old cartridges...

 

[Arkansas Paul]

I have heard that too, but I do not know if it is true or not. Can you verify that information?

I cannot. It's something that I heard but have not seen any evidence to substantiate it.

Thanks for the photos. That's crazy how small those rims used to be. I don't imagine they would have extracted reliably if they had tried it in a lever. Don't know what Colt was thinking when they designed them like that.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Thanks for the photos. That's crazy how small those rims used to be. I don't imagine they would have extracted reliably if they had tried it in a lever. Don't know what Colt was thinking when they designed them like that.

Read what I said earlier:

"The Single Action Army does not have an extractor, it has an ejector rod. The empties are poked out from the inside. There was no necessity for a rim, other than a teeny, tiny rim to keep the round from sliding forward into the chamber when the firing pin struck. There was no extractor claw trying to get a hold of the rim. 44-40 on the other hand was developed as a rifle round, and has always had a more substantial rim so that an extractor claw could grab it."

Those copper cased Benet primed rounds have a rolled, hollow rim, much like a rimfire cartridge. If a rifle extractor had tried to grab it, it would probably have torn right through, just like happened with the early Benet primed 45-70 Trapdoor rounds.

The reason modern cartridges have an 'extractor groove' in front of the rim is because cartridge manufacturing techniques changed. The 'extractor groove' on a rimmed revolver cartridge is actually an artifact left over from making a relief cut in the brass so it is easier to get a clean cut at the rim. Notice none of my antique cartridges have an 'extractor groove'. That relief cut does help with modern rounds chambered in rifle; it makes some clearance for an extractor claw. One reason that rifles can be successfully chambered for 45 Colt today.

If he had wanted to, Oliver Winchester could have easily modified the 45 Colt round, giving it a bigger rim, much like that big rim round in one of my photos. Then the round would have been easy to chamber in a rifle. Why he chose not to I do not know.

 

[ljnowell]

I own both. 45 colt is so very cool of a cartidge. Fun to reload, fun to shoot, heck they are fun to handle.

The 38/357 is infinitely cheaper to shoot, even as a hand loader.

 

[JeeperCreeper]

.38/.357

Then later, get a .45 Colt for special occassions

 

[bannockburn]

I went with .45 Colt just because that's the caliber I always wanted for a single action revolver and lever action rifle.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

To the original poster:

I notice you said you have a Cap & Ball revolver but are considering getting a cartridge revolver.

Two things you may not be aware of:

1. Although it is completely legal to shoot C&B in CAS, I do not recommend it for the beginner. Lots of times beginners think that they can get into the sport cheaper because C&B pistols are inexpensive. But unless you are a seasoned C&B shooter, who is very familiar with your pistols I do not recommend it. Cap failures, caps jamming the mechanism, and other problems associated with C&B make them less desirable for a beginner trying to understand the ropes of a shooting competition. If you are very familiar with C&B, OK then. But I do not recommend them for beginners.

2. You are aware, are you not, that you will need two (2) pistols to compete in CAS matches, correct? Yes, there are special circumstances, and some local matches that will allow you to just use one pistol, but the great majority of matches are designed to employ two pistols.

 

[Jim Watson]

Amen to No 1, saw it many times. It was a long while before I saw somebody get through a match with cap and ball.

You will find established affluent CAS talking about "sets" of guns. When they get a yen for something different, they go all out and buy two matching sixguns and a complimentary rifle, sometimes another shotgun, too.

 

[smkummer]

What I shoot

I shoot a 44 mag. Marlin rifle down loaded with a 200 FP bullet at about 900 FPS in the rifle. In a rifle the 45/44 vs 38 argument is somewhat negated when comparing recoil because of the weight of the rifle, but that is if you reload. Of course I have seen 38 loads with a 125 gran bullet that sounded like a 22 rifle. Right now I am shooting a 45 Colt cowboy with a 200 FP bullet at about 700 FPS and my other gun is a Colt SAA in .357 shooting a 148 match waductter at about 700 FPS. One can tell the difference in recoil. I could order Lee's 160 grain bullet for 45 Colt which looks like a flying disk but have yet to do so. Also, it appears that the 125 FP bullet is common with 38 shooters. In the group I shoot with, some shooters have switched to 38 from either 44 or 45, they don't go the other way. They state cost. I am also a bullet caster, so cost isn't really an issue. I am doing this for fun and I do other competitive sports, so shooting 45 is fun, (I also bring my 1908 Bisley in 38-40 also). While the bottleneck Winchester cartridges are fun, they would not be what I recommend for new shooters as lubing the cases for reloading slows you down. Every now and then, I show up with a 12" Colt buntline in 45 Colt. That's a crowd pleaser but its not a race gun. On one stage I shot factory 250 45 Colt loads and it about knocked the plates off of the swinging mounts. While I somewhat found it humorous, they did not want to be repairing the stage every time I shot. Again, it supposed to be fun. For a new shooter, 38 is the way to go and like someone else stated, add a 44 or 45 later.

 

[BCRider]

I guess I'm the exception. I knew I wanted to get into CAS and I found a deal on a pair of Uberti 1858 Remington clones I couldn't say no to. So my first three CAS monthly matches were shot with C&B while I was shopping around for my cartridge revolvers.

And yes, I did have all the issues noted by DJ along with a few others since it was raining hard for two of the meets and the moisture really does a number with the fouling to mess things up. But I made it through the days and as I recall I only had to take misses for two or three shots due to the nipples being plugged with moist powder fouling. I quickly learned to pick the nipples before capping on the wet days to get around that gummy little issue...

Apparently I'm stubborn since I still enjoy shooting my C&B guns in three or four matches a year at the club monthly meets and for the big meets where I'm not involved in running a possy or RO'ing. Because yes, shooting BP guns does take longer.

And for anyone that does shoot C&B in CAS I'm sure you've all had many folks that came up and mentioned something along the lines "I tried that stuff out for a while. Then I saw the light and sold them". Well, I guess I'm stubborn AND blind since I've yet to see the light.... must be all that smoke in the way....

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

I tried that stuff for a while too. Starting in 1968.

When I started in CAS ten years ago I went right for cartridge guns, didn't want to mess with C&B, had been there, done that. Very shortly I started shooting Black Powder in all my cartridges.

Three or four years ago I bought a pair of Pietta 1860 Armies because I had always loved the way they looked. Used them for a couple of matches. Decided I liked cartridges much better, much less fuss, so that's what I shoot now.

But I was a very seasoned C&B shooter when I did bring them to the matches.

 

[BCRider]

I guess that what I was trying to get across is that starting out with C&B CAN lead to issues. But it doesn't have to be as traumatic as some of you are making it out to be.

Side note to the story above. Due to weather and work and other weekend commitments it worked out that the one and only time I shot the Remingtons before my first match was literally the day before the match. I got out there and shot around 3 cylinders worth to test both my methods and the one gun. I only used one because I didn't want to clean TWO of them after all. The gun went BOOM every time that day.

The next day was in partial rain. It started out OK but got worse as the day went on. Had my first moisture/fouling blocked nipple that afternoon During that time I also learned to use a push stick to firmly seat the caps. I had a couple of non fires which went off on the second strike.

So yeah, there's a learning curve. All I can say is thank goodness for YewToob. I watched about 40 videos on black powder revolver loading and shooting to get some sort of working base before that first trial run.

 

[rodinal220]

You have to make the decision as to whether you want to be a "gamer" or a traditionalist and have some fun.
Yes,38/357 will be cheaper,lighter recoil,easier to get components.

 

[BCRider]

Well, I'd say that "Gamers" can come in .45Colt size too. I'd say that the choice of being a "gamer" or not is made when the powder is doled out while reloading.

I went with .357 guns not out of any feeling of it being an advantage. I chose that caliber because I was already set up for reloading them for my S&W DA revolvers.

I like to feel like I'm actually shooting something other than an Airsoft. So I tend to load up so the rounds are moving at around 850 fps from the pistols and probably up around 950 or maybe a little faster for the rifle.

 

[rbernie]

Most everyone that I know that shot/shoots CASS started with Uberti/Pietta/Ruger SA in 45 and 92/94 leverguns in 45 (because it seemed more 'authentic', regardless of the lack of truth in that) and moved to 38's and 32's after a season or two at most. They moved to smaller chamberings for three basic reasons, best that I can tell:

- to be more competitive; less recoil == better stage times
- to feel less beat up at the end of a weekend; less recoil == less physical stress
- to build skills and get experience for less cost

In the end, they all went smaller rather than starting smaller and going bigger.