45 Colt Ruger Only Loads

[Hammerdown77]

I would think all of the major powder/bullet manufacturers who have "Ruger/TC Contender Only" sections in their loading manuals would have worked with or at least consulted Ruger engineers on the development of those loads. Seems like a huge lawsuit waiting to happen if they didn't.

Also, what about all the manufacturers of speciality ammo like Cor Bon and Buffalo Bore and Grizzly who make "Ruger Only" loads? Wouldn't they have consulted with Ruger? How can they possibly advertise they are safe for use in Rugers if there is possibility of damage to the firearm. I can't imagine their lawyers would let them make that claim if there were.

Has anyone called Ruger and asked them about using factory ammo from those companies in their Blackhawk?

 

[kludge]

Yes, I have called Ruger, I tried asking a few different ways and the only words I could get out of his mouth were "ammunition that is loaded to SAAMI specifications".

Since AFAIK there is no SAAMI spec .45 Colt +P... well there's your answer.

 

[Hammerdown77]

I don't see how they could say that with a straight face if you asked them about shooting those loads in a Redhawk 45 Colt.

"Yes, for your own safety and to maintain the structural integrity of the firearm, we recommend you only shoot 14k psi loads in a REDHAWK. <snicker>"

 

[CraigC]

I would think all of the major powder/bullet manufacturers who have "Ruger/TC Contender Only" sections in their loading manuals would have worked with or at least consulted Ruger engineers on the development of those loads.

Don't count on it. If they did, then Ruger would endorse high pressure .45Colt loads. They do not.

I don't see how they could say that with a straight face if you asked them about shooting those loads in a Redhawk 45 Colt.

They do and there's a team of lawyers there to make sure that's all they ever say.

 

[Old Fuff]

Once again, the issue is not about shooting "Ruger only" loads. It's about what can happen if you accidentally (or intentionally) exceed the data, and the clear fact that if you damage the revolver they aren't going to fix it on their dime.

Both Bill Ruger and the company strongly objected to the practice of using the safety margin built into the platform as an excuse to substantially increase the load over recognized Industry standards. They also didn’t like being singled out by the implication that it was safe to shoot loads in Ruger products that weren’t in revolvers made by others, because it represented something they didn’t want to be associated with. Of course some people paid no attention, and still don’t. But that being the case they can’t blame the maker if something goes wrong.

 

[bergmen]

Back to the original question: To the OP, I have shot hundreds and hundreds of rounds with your exact load (25.7 grains of W296/H110 over 250 JHP of various makes, XTP being my favorite) for about twenty years out of my .45 Colt Blackhawk without a whimper.

My son has this revolver now and is shooting the same load and loves it. My oldest son has a new Blackhawk and loves this load as well. I now have a .45 Colt Ruger Bisley and it is getting fed this load also.

Great fun at indoor ranges, really lights 'em up.

It's all good.

Dan

 

[ljnowell]

Once again, the issue is not about shooting "Ruger only" loads. It's about what can happen if you accidentally (or intentionally) exceed the data, and the clear fact that if you damage the revolver they aren't going to fix it on their dime.

Both Bill Ruger and the company strongly objected to the practice of using the safety margin built into the platform as an excuse to substantially increase the load over recognized Industry standards. They also didn’t like being singled out by the implication that it was safe to shoot loads in Ruger products that weren’t in revolvers made by others, because it represented something they didn’t want to be associated with. Of course some people paid no attention, and still don’t. But that being the case they can’t blame the maker if something goes wrong.

Thats funny. I guess that differs from other manufacturers in what way? Any gun you load for max with and make a mistake can have those problems.

Why do you continue to post this rubbish about stretched chambers when using published data? You said your peace, why keep crapping in a thread you have no interest in other than to complain about people reloading in a way you dont like?

 

[Old Fuff]

Why do you continue to post this rubbish about stretched chambers when using published data? You said your peace, why keep crapping in a thread you have no interest in other than to complain about people reloading in a way you dont like?

Who's complaining? All I've done is point out that there are possible negatives when it comes to loading and shooting "Ruger only" hand loads, which is something that the revolver's designer strongly objected to. Anyone who thinks that expanded chambers are rubbish is welcome to call the Ruger factory and ask them. While you’re at it check out Smith & Wesson for an opinion too.

The High Road is an open, public forum where all points of view can be presented, so long as it's in a civil manner. While I have no worries about what you and some others do, I am concerned about those who are new to the game and may not realize all of the risks.

 

[murf]

now that ruger is coming out with a small-framed blackhawk in 45lc, this "ruger only" issue is going to get complicated.

murf

 

[Clark]

The S&W 25-2 has cylinder chamber walls .065" thick to the outside and between cylinders.
Clark Custom guns [no relation] will convert that relolver to 460 Rowland.
http://www.clarkcustomguns.com/revserv.htm#rowland
http://www.clarkcustomguns.com/460loadchart.htm
Those links have been good for 12 years, so it is likely not too many have been blowing up at 39,200 cup
Then I measure some 45 Colts.
The Ruger chamber walls are between .069" and .073" to the outside.
The Uberti Cattleman chamber walls are between .059" and .063" to the outside.
The Ruger chamber walls are between .059" and .060". between chambers.
The Uberti chamber walls are between .046" and .047".
If we look at "Speer 12" 1994 [my first load book, and the worst load book ever written] we see 25,000 psi loads as the limit for Ruger 45 Colts.
If we accepted the three revolver cylinder shapes and steel as the same, and we accepted my model as splitting cylinders is the weak link in these revolvers, then we might extrapolate:
25-2: 39,200 c.u.p.
Ruger: 35,581 c.u.p
Uberti: 27,742 c.u.p
I have been shooting 28 kpsi [Quickload estimate] in my 25-2 with 1.555" OAL and getting 44 mag performance.
I have been shooting 22 kpsi [Quickload estimate] in my Uberti and getting 44 mag performance.
I shot my Ruger once at 22 kpsi [QL est], and the recoil cut my hand.
I have damaged >~ a dozen revolvers, but no 45s.
My experience is that S&W revolvers will shoot loose, in the the bolt slot in the frame and cylinder gets play.
My experience is that large caliber revolvers, 38sp and up, will split the cylinder at high pressure.
My experience is that Aluminum frame revolvers may bend the frame.
Older break top revolvers can stretch the latch.
Older small cartridge revolvers can blow out the forcing cone.
I can see that the Ruger, factory new, is already loose. It was built sloppy.
I have posters all over the internet that think I am going to blow up my 25-2 and my Uberti Cattleman, but if you read and understand the above, you can see how I am confident I can keep doing it.

 

[CraigC]

Once again, the issue is not about shooting "Ruger only" loads. It's about what can happen if you accidentally (or intentionally) exceed the data, and the clear fact that if you damage the revolver they aren't going to fix it on their dime.

And again, this is something that can happen with any firearm in any chambering. What's the point in making this statement here, unless your goal is to begin an anti-handloading campaign???

Both Bill Ruger and the company strongly objected to the practice of using the safety margin built into the platform as an excuse to substantially increase the load over recognized Industry standards.

They can object to whatever they want. The fact is, in this case, the safety margin for a Ruger large frame .45Colt is about 500%. The margin of safety in a Ruger .44Mag is 100%. All "Ruger only" data does is equalize the margin of safety. You imply that it's running on the ragged edge but this is completely untrue. As usual, those who do not believe Ruger .45's should be run over industry standard pressures have no technical argument whatsoever.

They also didn’t like being singled out by the implication that it was safe to shoot loads in Ruger products that weren’t in revolvers made by others, because it represented something they didn’t want to be associated with.

What Ruger likes is irrelevant.

Of course some people paid no attention, and still don’t.

With complete success!!!

But that being the case they can’t blame the maker if something goes wrong.

Which is the case for any handloader of any cartridge in any firearm.

 

[CraigC]

Clark, one can assume nothing about Uberti's metallurgy so simply measuring cylinder walls doesn't really tell the whole story. There exists heavier than standard pressure but less than "Ruger only" load data for domestic USFA's, mid-frame Rugers and Colt SAA's but no authority on the subject would suggest your load in a Uberti.

 

[kludge]

I don't see how they could say that with a straight face if you asked them about shooting those loads in a Redhawk 45 Colt.

Yep, Redhawk. As far as I could tell he said it with a straight face.

 

[solvability]

What is the issue with Redhawk 45 Colt - I am not shooting Uber loads but I am hunting with 300g jacketed @ 1150fps - am I going too hot? I know the Blackhawk is stronger but doubt I am at the limits - it seems hell for stout.

 

[Clark]

CraigC
Clark, one can assume nothing about Uberti's metallurgy so simply measuring cylinder walls doesn't really tell the whole story. There exists heavier than standard pressure but less than "Ruger only" load data for domestic USFA's, mid-frame Rugers and Colt SAA's but no authority on the subject would suggest your load in a Uberti.

"Assume nothing"?

Someone knows more than I do about what it takes to blow up a gun?

I have been doing this for a while, and steel thickness is about 90% of the story.

 

[CraigC]

I know the Blackhawk is stronger but doubt I am at the limits - it seems hell for stout.

Actually the Redhawk is stronger, much stronger.

Someone knows more than I do about what it takes to blow up a gun?

So it takes a catastrophic failure to indicate you're doing something wrong? Alrighty then.

...and steel thickness is about 90% of the story.

Then why not do so with a blackpowder Colt? Or an 1860 cartridge conversion?

I have been doing this for a while...

You're not the only one.

 

[Clark]

Here is a scan of a page in a handbook that the chief engineer used to design a number of guns that won contracts at Rock Island Arsenal, Detroit Arsenal, and the marines.

4140 is machinable up to RC29 and I have no problems.
As you can see from the chart, that corresponds to about 129 ksi tensile yield.
If one machines an asymmetrical part, and then heat treats it to get more strength, it can warp. So that is not done.

Smith and Wesson cylinders in the 1970s had no advantage over Uberti cylinders in the 1970s.

Many people know of the Oct 2000 copy of "Design News" where the then chief engineer at Ruger, Steven Perniciaro, described the trouble getting the 454 to pass 93,500 psi proof testing with thin cylinder walls and still be machinable. They got specialty stainless [Carpenter's Custom 465], and have 260 ksi strength.
This was not tested with computer modelling. They blew up guns, changed materials, fooled around until it stopped blowing up. To model the cylinder failing, to a first order, it is thin wall hoop stress. But it is open ended, so you need Roark's formulas, but it is not a regular shape, so nothing in the book will work.

I have worked at small companies with engineering staffs the size of Ruger's and it is not rocket science going on, it is more like branding cattle. I have worked at Rocket Research, and while it is technically rocket science, it is stagnant.

I have now bought hundreds of guns for destructive test.
I can now look at a gun and in two seconds predict what will fail and what it will take to make it fail. I am not always right, but who is?

 

[CraigC]

And so you are confident enough in your knowledge of what alloys Uberti has used and their heat treatment as well as the variations between individual guns to suggest shooting any possible example from any era with your H110 load?

 

[kludge]

Actually the Redhawk is stronger, much stronger.

^this^

 

[RalphS]

I think the real question is why does Ruger continue to produce a super heavy duty 32K psi 45LC revolver when they could just put a 454 cylinder in there and we could fill the 45LC brass with as much H110 as we want to.

The other question is why don't they just combine the RH and SRH lines into one product line with the best features of each - SRH grip frame and action, RH barrel.

In the meantime, I will continue to handload my hot 44M and 45LC loads and continue to fire them in my Redhawks with no signs of overpressure.

 

[CraigC]

I think the real question is why does Ruger continue to produce a super heavy duty 32K psi 45LC revolver when they could just put a 454 cylinder in there and we could fill the 45LC brass with as much H110 as we want to.

Well, that's a good question because it would take literally no effort whatsoever. All you need is a SRH .454 cylinder installed right into the existing .45 Redhawk.

 

[solvability]

Actually the Redhawk is stronger, much stronger.





You're not the only one.

Good - I would hate to be carrying around a lump of steel that heavy for no good reason!