.44 Special or .45 Long Colt?

[Eb1]

I own a SBH in .44 Mag, and I will be buying a Lipsey .44 Special very soon. I like the .45 Colt, but from what I have read you might have some variance on cylinder/cone size that can be worked out, but it seems like I haven't read much about .44s having those issues.

You could get a Rossi .454 Lever gun, and shoot .45 Colts out of it, and if you wanted that extra boom without pushing the .45 Colt just load up a .454 Casul.

 

[Lloyd Smale]

i really like the 45 colt but really love the 44 special.

 

[jason41987]

i guess if i was going to hunt with a 45 colt lever action, if i went with something that wasnt a toggle link design, something like the 1892 clones or a marlin 1894, i could probably cut down 454 casull brass and load some pretty hot .45lc.. but, id have to do something to tell these loads apart from the rest.. dont want to accidently load such a hot load into a revolver.. might be better to just go with 454 for hunting so i dont have to worry about accidently feeding them into an old revolver... and i can chop down some 454 brass to 45lc length, which means i can stock pile only one type of brass.. of course, i can do the same with 44 magnum and 44 special

that being said, i like some of the old toggle link designs.. id love to have an 1866 henry clone, which arent available in 357 mag, im assuming due to pressure restrictions

so its looking like there isnt much difference ballistically between the 45 colt and the 44 special... revolvers are going to end up with roughly identicle width and bulk to them, as the 44 special does have a narrower case, it has a wider rim, in fact, both rims are 13mm diameter.. (just sort of thinking out loud)

im also reading that the smaller rim wasnt the only issue in the 19th century.. softer alloys and a different design also contributed to the extraction problems, and as these have been corrected with modern brass, so has the problem.. i read there were issues due to metallurgy, balloon head case design, as well as patent issues on the .45LC... id like some more input on this.. anyone have feeding issues with their 45lc lever?

something else i thought of that could be cool if i went with 44 special is that for cap and ball conversions, i could possibly just have the chambers bored through, cut the 44 special case down a bit, find some way of cutting a heel into .454 bullets, and load up some .44 colts

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

A couple of things.

If you are looking for lever guns chambered for 44 Special, you may have a hard time finding one. Although Uberti does offer the chambering in the Model 1873, they are very difficult to come by. One would have to be special ordered, and they are not usually in stock. The two most common, and easily available chamberings for the 1860 Henry, 1866, and 1873 are 45 Colt and 44-40. Because of its immense popularity with the Cowboy crowd, ALL of these rifles that I have seen on gun store shelves have been chambered in 45 Colt.

Although Uberti has been talking about releasing the 1873 in 44 Mag for some time, I would be very leery about shooting 44 Mag in any toggle link gun.

Another thing to consider is the strength of the actions. The toggle link guns, specifically the Henry, Model 1866, and Model 1873 are notoriously weak. They will take SAMMI spec ammo, but if you want to get maximum horse power you are better off looking at the Model 1892 or the Marilin Model 1894. Both of these rifles are much stronger than the toggle link guns. That is why they are offered in 44 Mag. The '92 is even available in 454 Casull if you want maximum power.

Regarding Black Powder in lever guns. The 44-40 is the cat's meow in a rifle. Yes, the thin case wall makes it a bit fussy to reload, care needs to be taken in setting up the dies just right and one has to pay close attention, but that same thin case wall makes it obdurate under the relatively low pressure of Black Powder to seal the case far better than the thicker, more robust case of the 45 Colt. I shoot 44-40 with Black Powder in no less than five rifles chambered for 44-40. Clean up is a snap, all the fouling stays in the bore where it belongs. The same cannot be said about 45 Colt and Black Powder in a lever gun . Fouling will blow by the case and get into the action where it needs to be removed. Not a problem with the Model 1873, with its easily removable side plates, more problematic with the 'Henry or '66. This can be a real pain with a '92, they are not so easy to take down. Not a problem with the Marlin, one screw and the entire action comes apart. Unfortunately, all of the Marlins coming out of Ilion recently have been crap.

If you are talking Black Powder, the 44-40 has significantly more case capacity than 44 Special, and you can stuff more powder in, getting more oomph. Not so with Smokeless, where you don't fill the case up anyway.

Regarding rifling groove diameters of 44-40. Yes, in the 19th Century the standard was .427. However, many manufacturers today opt to use the same barrels that they do with 44 Mag/Special with .429 barrel groove dimensions. So in that case, the same bullets used for 44 Mag/Special can be used for 44-40. You really have to slug the barrels to be sure. Three of my 44-40 rifles have .427 barrels, 2 of them, including my Uberti Henry I bought brand spanky new a few years ago have .429 barrels. Most of what I have read about recent Uberti 44-40 rifles seems to indicate they are using .429 barrels these days.

44-40 revolvers are a whole nother kettle of fish. Some manufacturers use .429 barrels, some use .427. But many have had difficulty matching chamber mouth diameters to barrel groove diameters.

While I am still thinking of Black Powder, you are aware I hope that it performs much better with bullets specially lubed for it? Regular Smokeless lubed bullets can cause problems when used with Black Powder.



A few other things.

Planning on making your own Black Powder? I wouldn't.

Avoid the Winchester Model 1894 chambered for 45 Colt or any other short cartridge like the plague.

According to Kuhnhausen, 44 Special was first chambered in the Single Action Army in 1913, not 1940.

Neither 38 Special nor 357 Mag loaded with BP are slouches.

Yes, the brass frames of the 1860 Henry and 1866 Winchesters limit pressure, that is why they are not chambered for 357 Mag.

That's all for now, gotta go to work.

P.S.

Loading more than one caliber really is not a big deal.

All my Cowboy rifles are chambered for 44-40, most of my Cowboy revolvers are chambered for 45 Colt. After a while, you learn to tell them apart on sight.

 

[USSR]

im also reading that the smaller rim wasnt the only issue in the 19th century.. softer alloys and a different design also contributed to the extraction problems, and as these have been corrected with modern brass, so has the problem.. i read there were issues due to metallurgy, balloon head case design, as well as patent issues on the .45LC... id like some more input on this..

It wasn't just the .45 Colt, they were all balloon head construction in the 19th century. They quit making them that way prior to WW2, so don't let that sway you one way or the other. Modern .45 Colt brass (especially Starline) is plenty strong.

Don

 

[jason41987]

i did some more research into .45 colt brass, and what i noticed is that because of the balloon head case, there was no groove cut into the brass for the extractor, so the short rim issue was exacerbated because of this.. as not only did the extractor not have to catch onto a small rim, but didnt have any recess to fit into... modern brass does have the groove cut into the case around the rim for the extractor and as such, shouldnt have any problems feeding because lets face it, fully automatic rifles of today have no rim at all, just an extractor cut and its been plenty good

so im confident that with new brass that has the extractor cut there should be absolutely no problem using 45 colt in anything, its more readily available as a chambering in 19th century reproductions, i can get one .454 casull rifle for hunting and use all the same reloading components, same as i could get a 44 mag lever action for hunting which would have given me the option of of using 44 specials

all of that being said.. theres no reason i can think of at this point to use 44 special instead of 45 colt, and i will have a larger selection of firearms i can purchase, and if im not mistaken i believe where im at i find more 45LC sold in stores than 44 special

but as stated before, im going to choose one rifle for hunting, .454 casull chambering, probably going to be a rossi R92 or puma.. something inexpensive, but this is a safety precaution, having the more powerful hunting rifle fire 454 casull means i cant accidently fire a hot load into a toggle link or SAA.. so i can keep all my .45LC loads within standard pressures

i guess ill go with 45lc, stock up on some nickle plated starline brass which is actually really cheap.. but probably pick up about 100 454 casull brass as well to load for hunting after i get an R92 or puma, which i can practice with the 45 colt loads

----

my decision: .45LC

 

[RPRNY]

No reason to "cut down 454 brass for stout 45 Colt loads". 45 Colt +P loads using post WWII brass will push the limits of almost any revolver or lever gun that will chamber them.

Suggested a Ruger Blackhawks so that you would not have to worry about ammo segregation. As you note, you don't want to have rifle 45 Colt loads that you can't shoot in a revolver. Disaster will ensue.

 

[jason41987]

if i was going to cut down 454 casull brass, it wouldnt be for increase pressure, it would be so i wouldnt have to buy multiple types of brass.. however, 454 casull brass is quite a bit more expensive than 45 colt brass so there wouldnt be any savings involved, and the added work wouldnt be worth it.. so i can get 100 pieces of nickle plated starline .45LC for $25.. not bad at all.. and i dont want to overload the 45 colt as it could get mixed up.. and yeah, danger would ensue

as for the blackhawk.. i actually dont like blackhawks for a few reasons.. i dont think they balance or point as well as the colt design, and i really see no point for adjustable sights, i dont like adjustables on anything to be honest.. so id like to get a 4" birdshead uberti for something smaller, more compact, possibly concealable, but id like to get a 5 1/2" colt-made revolver since theyre making them new now.. just to have an actual colt

the other revolvers id be interested in is an 1860 conversion or a 72 open top and an 1875 remington clone

 

[USSR]

if i was going to cut down 454 casull brass, it wouldnt be for increase pressure, it would be so i wouldnt have to buy multiple types of brass.. however, 454 casull brass is quite a bit more expensive than 45 colt brass so there wouldnt be any savings involved, and the added work wouldnt be worth it.. so i can get 100 pieces of nickle plated starline .45LC for $25.. not bad at all.. and i dont want to overload the 45 colt as it could get mixed up.. and yeah, danger would ensue

as for the blackhawk.. i actually dont like blackhawks for a few reasons.. i dont think they balance or point as well as the colt design, and i really see no point for adjustable sights, i dont like adjustables on anything to be honest.. so id like to get a 4" birdshead uberti for something smaller, more compact, possibly concealable, but id like to get a 5 1/2" colt-made revolver since theyre making them new now.. just to have an actual colt

the other revolvers id be interested in is an 1860 conversion or a 72 open top and an 1875 remington clone

Jason,

You're over-thinking this. First, forget about cutting down .454 Casull brass. Second, you don't need different brass if you use 2 different bullet styles to differentiate between loads. Third, while you may not like adjustable sights, on a .45 Colt they are a very good idea for matching POI with POA, which will vary between loads. Lastly, you do realize, with the revolvers you are talking about, you will be restricted to powder-puff loads?

Don

 

[CraigC]

i really like the 45 colt but really love the 44 special.

Me too!

The .45Colt is a good cartridge but it's really a lot of wasted case capacity at standard pressures. The .44Spl is much more efficient and in the case of the Colt SAA and similar guns, it can be loaded to higher velocities with a better safety margin. It is a wonderful cartridge in guns of this strength level and really a better choice than the .45Colt. It is also far less likely to have accuracy problems due to oversized or mismatched dimensions. Unless you buy a USFA or Freedom Arms, you are likely to encounter issues with oversized chambers and over or undersized chamber mouths. Even Colt still cuts theirs oversized and mine is at least .456". Far as I can tell, there is no shortage of .44Spl sixguns either. Several of the importers offer them, Dixie Gun Works have quite a good selection of them. Ruger and Colt also offer several .44Spl's and USFA made plenty of them before the recent stupidity. There are more good .44Spl's on the market now than at any other time in history. IMHO, the .44Spl has its own rich history and it deserves to be a far more popular cartridge than the .45Colt but some folks just have a weird 'thing' about the .45. Last I spoke to the folks at Cimarron, they had `66 and `73 .44Spl's in stock and virtually any .44Mag levergun on the market will function with .44Spl's.

Make mine a .44Spl!

USFA Pre-war:

A Uberti Bisley that got away:


A custom Ruger flat-top:


S&W 24-3:

 

[Arkansas Paul]

i could probably cut down 454 casull brass and load some pretty hot .45lc..

but id like to get a 5 1/2" colt-made revolver since theyre making them new now.. just to have an actual colt

the other revolvers id be interested in is an 1860 conversion or a 72 open top and an 1875 remington clone

1. As has already been said, cutting down .454 brass will not do a single thing that modern made .45 Colt brass won't do. It simply is no longer an issue and hasn't been for many years.

2. You better not combine hot .45 loads with any of the revolvers you mentioned above. I assure you, you won't do it many times.
That being said, there's not a lot you can't do with a standard .45 Colt load of 8.5 grains of Unique and a 255 grain SWC bullet.

 

[jason41987]

as ive already mentioned that people seem to not be reading.. i wont load 45 colt hot.. ill get a .454 casull lever action for hunting and this way i CANT accidently load a hot load into a weaker design.. then all my 45 colts can remain standard pressure

as for selection of 44 special.. i do like the round a lot, but, the selection is a lot more limited, for example, i like cap and ball conversions, such as the richard mason conversion revolver and i dont think they offer these in 44 special.. but as i said, i could have the chamber machined out and put a heeled bullet in the 44 special.. similar to what they did for the 44 colt.. or heck, i could just make and fire 44 colt from the cap and balls

then again.. cimarron does sell a richards type 2 conversion revolver in 44 colt and another in 44 special... so for the most part.. i could make do with either cartridge

but heres the issue. im looking to put together a pretty sizable collection... im starting a HUGE collection of 19th century reproductions/clones.. including an 1873 compact thunderer or birdshead, a 5 1/2 inch typical SAA, an 1875 remington, a richards type 2 conversion revolver, MAYBE an 1872 open top, possibly an 1858 converted to a compact/snub "belly gun", as well a smith model 3 top break

for rifles, id like a spencer rifle, 1860 henry steel frame, 1866 yellow boy, 1873, and 1892 rifle

since these are all pistol caliber firearms.. id like to get all of them in a single cartridge if possible (except i might get the spencer in the 56-50)

so.. yeah.. thats why the decision of which cartridge i go for is that important

i will admit this though.. 5 years ago i didnt see or notice many in 44 special.. now it seems most of the firearms produced are available in it, so it does seem like the 44 special is very quickly growing in popularity for these older style firearms

 

[CraigC]

The 1860 Richards-Mason, Richards Type II and 1871-1872 Open Top are all available in .44Spl. Which is a better chambering for those guns anyway because there have been reports of forcing cones cracking in the .45's. Most of the .44Colt marked guns have .44Spl chambers anyway.

Existing percussion .44's cannot be converted to cartridges without a new cylinder.

http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/topic,48692.0.html

I'm kinda curious why anyone would buy all those different guns but in the same chambering. Sounds kinda boring.

5 years ago i didnt see or notice many in 44 special.. now it seems most of the firearms produced are available in it, so it does seem like the 44 special is very quickly growing in popularity for these older style firearms

Very little has changed in the last five years, except for Ruger's offerings. I get the feeling you had already decided on the .45Colt.

 

[Dave T]

To the OP, you specified 19th Century firearms. Then I would think the only choice would be the 19th Century cartridge. The 45 Colt was introduced in 1873 while the 44 Special didn't appear on the scene until 1907.

Dave

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I also see no reason to pump up the charge weights for .45 Colt ammo meant for a levergun. The longer barrel alone should add ~12% to 15% more velocity to the bullet alone. There's not much in North America that can stand up to a 255gr .452" LSWC @1050 fps. Any Deer including the larger Mule Deer surely won't. Even if no velocity increase is seen from the Carbine that same bullet @900 fps will do just as good a job.

 

[jason41987]

dave T, i consider the 44 special to be a good alternative to the 44-40.. in fact, at one point i really wanted to go 44-40, but not sure im up for dealing with the thin case mouth and slight taper, the 44 special just seems so much easier, and gives me the option of newer revolvers too

going with the same caliber would be more for logistics, keeping the cost down by only having to supply myself with one cartridge when ammo prices get high.. but maybe youre right.. maybe i shouldnt try to get everything in the same cartridge.. so long as i had something i can use for defense, and something else for hunting, the rest can be toys whether i find ammo for them or not

for defense, mostly outdoor defense, sometimes concealed carry when im in the mood for a single, id like to get an 1873 with a thunderer or birds head grip.. as a general purpose rifle a rossi or puma would probably be the best.. as theyre cheaper, less valuable, something i wouldnt feel TOO guilty for throwing around outdoors

but ill admit.. id like to get some of these rifles in their original cartridges.. i really do like the 44-40, its just that this cartridge isnt very attractive to me for reloading.. if cases lasted as long as thicker straight walled cases, id probably go with that cartridge... maybe i get that birdshead or thunderer SAA in 44 special, the R92 in 44 mag/44 special.. and the rest i get in a cartridge more historically accurate for that firearm, such as .44WCF for the 1873 winchester and 1875 remington?.. and the .44 russian in the top break isnt a slouch either

 

[Jaymo]

You'll save money on powder and lead by going with a .44 Spl.
You can load it 1,ooo fps from a revolver and take most game animals with the revolver or carbine.
Some days I like the .45 better. Others, I prefer the .44.
My first pistol was a .44 Spl revolver.
It's a fantastically accurate round.

You're really missing out by not buying a Blackhawk.
The 5.5" flattop Blackhawk .44 Spl is a sweet shooter.
And, it can be loaded hotter than a .45 of the same size.

 

[jason41987]

well that is an advantage of the special.. smaller diameter case means thicker cylinder walls and the potential of handling higher pressures.. but if i were to get a blackhawk it wouldnt be until after i had everything else... i got into single action revolvers due to the feel and balance of colts... that balance isnt exactly there in the in the blackhawks and it just feels like another revolver to me.. though i had considered a 44 mag super blackhawk at one point.. but now with uberti selling the calahan in 44 mag.. which looks like an actual SAA, id probably rather get that

my next revolver i think is going to be the birdshead/thunderer gripped SAA with a 3 1/2 - 4 inch barrel

 

[Jaymo]

The Flattop BH in .44 Spl doesn't balance like the regular blackhawks.
It has a steel grip frame and is built on a frame the size of a Colt SAA.
Only difference is the adjustable sights. Looks like the adjustable sighted Colt New Frontier.
The Thunderer in .44 Spl would thrill me to no end.
Then again, so would the .45 Colt version.

 

[CraigC]

The Callahan is a large frame sixgun like the Ruger Super Blackhawk. I wouldn't say its feel is much like a Colt except that the grip resembles the 1860 Army.

The mid-frame Ruger .44Spl's handle very much like a Colt SAA, although they are a couple ounces heavier. The grip frames are almost identical and the new flat-tops are all steel. Almost completely different from any other Ruger Blackhawk or Super Blackhawk.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

as ive already mentioned that people seem to not be reading.. i wont load 45 colt hot.. ill get a .454 casull lever action for hunting and this way i CANT accidently load a hot load into a weaker design.. then all my 45 colts can remain standard pressure

Have you done much reloading? Are you aware that clearly labeling your ammo and keeping it organized is a good way to guarantee the wrong ammo does not get into the wrong gun? It's really pretty simple. Use MTM plastic boxes, use MTM labels to clearly state what is in the box. You can even use different color boxes for different loads of the same cartridge.

Regarding getting some nickel plated brass from Starline, I have not bought nickle plated brass in years. It sometimes splits more frequently than plain brass. This is usually because the plating process was flawed. Nothing against Starline, they make great brass, I have bought lots of it. But I never buy nickel plated brass.

 

[jason41987]

ive done a lot of reloading, but only for rifle cartridges up to this point.. and its not so much myself confusing the different types of ammo because id simply find different types of bullets i could easily distinguish.. or using nickel plated brass for one load, standard brass for another.. but, i can guarantee others i let shoot would be as observant.. if i used .454 casull or 44 magnum in an R92 for added power, i wouldnt have to worry about myself, or anyone else loading the wrong ammo.. better safe than sorry in this case

ive actually been trying to find a stainless 44 special thunderer grip SAA.. but cant seem to find anyone to find one in this cartridge, only 45 colt or 357.. so i might have to go with a case hardened model or nickel plated.. id actually be confident and comfortable carrying a 3.5-4" thunderer/birdshead gripped SAA for defensive purposes.. i dont know why though but i just dont have much attraction for the blackhawks.. they just look too different for me, and i really do NOT like fixed sights.. in fact, i like to focus on intinctive shooting... and once the fixed sights are properly set up to hit on target theres just no need to adjust.. my goal is to find one very nice, well rounded load, and stick to it

 

[35 Whelen]

Geez....make up your mind!!

Let me first say why I would NOT (and did not) go with a 44/40; if for no other reason, since said cartridge is a bottleneck, carbide dies are out of the question. End of discussion for me.

The thing about the .45 Colt is you can get a Colt SA clone or a Winchester '66, '73 or '92 clone in that caliber anywhere, anytime. That is why my vote is for the .44 Special. Out of the ordinary if nothing else.

I have two Colt copies a 4 3/4" and a 5 1/2", a new model Flat Top Blackhawk in 5 1/2", and an 20" 1873 lever...all in .44 Special. I don't even know where to begin. I love these guns and the cartridge. The 4 3/4" Uberti is my constant companion here at the house and I try to have 2 or 3 range sessions a week with it...more if time permits. I keep the same filthy, 80 Starline cases in a loading block, a Lyman 55 measure full off Alliant 20/28 set to drop 7.5 grs., and a cardboard box full of 260 gr. cast SWC's on my bench at all times. It takes but a few minutes to load 40 or so rounds, then hie out behind the shop to the bench for some 50 yd. gong-ringing. These type sessions have become quite a mental bowel movement for me...

In these type firearms the handloaded .44 Special has a 200 fps or so advantage over the 45 Colt. Using data from Handloader Magazine, I've run a 260 gr. SWC to right at 1100 fps in the Colt clones, stopping prior to reaching their published max loads of over 1200 fps. I've loaded the BH to a little over 1200 fps with the same 260 gr. SWC's. The 20" '73 will do roughly another 300 fps depending on the powder.

And now a word from our sponsor:










Please don't think I'm bashing the 45 Colt cartridge because I fully intend to acquire a couple of them in the future. In fact, if you decide to go with a .45, I just happen to have this little unfired, NIB beauty I'm trying to sell



ETA- Suggestion: If you think you want a birds head grip, I'd try one first. My Dad has a 5 1/2" SA 44 Special with a birds head grip and it's not a good grip for me especially when the gun recoils.
35W

 

[Jaymo]

35 Whelen's .44 Spl handloads are more powerful than standard .44 mag factory loads from the big three.
There's something very wrong with factory .44 mag ammo that only pushes a 240 grain bullet to 1150-1200 fps.

Jason, if you want one, you can get a dealer to backorder one from buffaloarms.com
I ordered my 1862 police from them and am very pleased with the way they treated me.
I'm leaning toward the 3.5" thunderer .44 Spl or the 4.75" Bisley.
If you've never held one, the Ruger Bisley Vaquero feels great in the hand.

35 Whelen, your signature line is a good one, and applies doubly so to the five-seven fanboys.

When I was a boy, I wanted 38s, .357s, .44 Mags, .45 ACPs, and .45 Colts.
Then, I bought a nice Charter Bulldog .44 Spl and shot and loaded for it.
I forgot about all other pistol rounds for a long time.
A 240 grain boolit at 1200 fps, in a gun that weighs less and handles better than a .44mag is a good thing, indeed.
My flattop is the same as 35 Whelen's, except for the grips. I replaced the factory checkered plastic grips with some holly grips from Pvt Schultz.

 

[Eb1]

I bought the Ruger SBH stainless 5.5" .44 Magnum over this:

and I keep thinking I made the wrong choice. The .44 Mag is heavy, and I had to put on Hogue grips to control 240 grain bullets moving 1400+ fps.

I am not saving to buy the Lipsey .44 SPC from Ruger. It felt wonderful, and I was on the spot as I was looking for a hunting revolver. But I generally load the .44 Magnum to 1300 fps or 1200 fps. So I am not really pushing it as fast as I could.
The .44 Magnum is also a revolver I bought the day my son was born to give him when as he becomes a man. There really isn't a disappointment here. I just don't have both right now, and it is driving me crazy.


I am seriously thinking of selling a Marlin 30-30, an AR-15, and a VZ58 that I recently acquired back to buy a setup like 35 Whelen displays in .44 Special. A setup like that seems like the best stress medicine there is next to a Harley Davidson. Those are so beautiful to look at you could just get them out and rub them down if it was raining and get the same affect as if it were 70* with a mild wind and shooting steel.

Thanks, 35 Whelen. My wife is going to be calling you regarding the laptop being on next to the bed late as I stare at that first picture for hours on end.