45 colt vs 44 spcl
- Thread starter hrubison
- Start date
- Status
LawofThirds
Member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2008
- Messages
- 474
Actually, wouldn't the .44 beat out the .45 since it's sectional density would be better?
Hondo 60
Member
45 Colt - one of the iconic historical guns that made us the USA (imho)
.44 spl - nice, but really nothing special
(can you tell I have one and not the other? lol)
.44 spl - nice, but really nothing special
(can you tell I have one and not the other? lol)
John Linebaugh notes in one of his articles that a .45 Colt loaded with a 260-grain bullet at 900 fps will shoot lengthwise through a mule deer out to 100 yds. Considering that both the .44 Special and .45 Colt can both produce these ballistics in standard SAAMI spec, my verdict would be that they are both as capable as your average shooter could ever ask for.
Kind of makes you wonder how much a .44 magnum, .45 Colt Ruger, .454 Casull, etc really offer over these venerable classics.
Kind of makes you wonder how much a .44 magnum, .45 Colt Ruger, .454 Casull, etc really offer over these venerable classics.
It's kind of a toss up, the .45 Colt tends to throw the same weight a little faster or a bit heavier bullet (ie similar SD) at the same velocity. And both will reliably shoot through a typical target (self-defense or typical big game hunting), so increased SD isn't that significant IMHO.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
You guys can't apply the .44Mag vs. 45Colt logic to the mid-frame guns. Due to thicker cylinder walls, the .44Spl can be driven to higher velocities with 100% safety margin. This is why Elmer Keith made the switch to .44Spl's in the first place.
The old .44Mag vs. .45Colt argument isn't as cut and dried as it used to be either.
The old .44Mag vs. .45Colt argument isn't as cut and dried as it used to be either.
Off topic question for CraigC. You appear to be quite knowledgable about guns and I'm not. So what's up with the two revolvers pictured hammers? One is 'pointy' and the other is flat. Does that have anything to do with anything in particular or with nothing at all? Admin. please delete.
Last edited:
True, but you also don't have to push a .45 Colt as hard to get it to do the same thing as a .44 Special for a given bullet weight. Pressure x area = force. .45 Colt has more area, so can generate the same force on a bullet as a .44 Special at lower pressure. Force divided by your bullet weight gives you your bullet acceleration. Intergrated over the pressure curve, it ultimately gives you your velocity and energy. That's why Hodgdon 30k CUP .45 Colt loads produce about the same velocities for a given weight as Hodgdon 40k CUP .44 Magnum loads. The trade off is really in sectional density vs diameter, and it's fairly moot because they both have penetration in spades.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
That's exactly what I'm saying. But you're applying the same logic (as the large frame .44Mag debate) to the .44Spl and the mid-frame and it is not relevant. It ain't the same ballgame. Because the .45's are now not 80% as strong as the .44's, they are more like 70% or less and it is that decreased strength that is the unknown. The large frame .45's have been tested to destruction and the 80% figure is solid. No such testing has been done at all, nor has any been done to differentiate between the different mid-frame guns. Colt's, USFA, Uberti, Ruger, etc. The .44's are stronger, the .44Spl more efficient and it still holds the advantage in the mid-frame guns. We 'may' run the .45's to 21,000psi but those cylinder walls are awful thin at the bolt cuts and I'm not comfortable in doing that too much. While the .44Spl can be safely pushed to 1200fps, in the proper guns.
Look again, the .44 still retains a 100fps advantage across the board. And those numbers are accurate, according to my chronograph. It's beeneight years since Beartooth sent those bullets to Hodgdon's for testing and few people have noticed.
WARNING: DO NOT USE ANYTHING SAID BELOW AS ADVICE FOR YOUR HANDLOADING PRACTICES, AND IT SHOULD NOT BE REPEATED AS RELIABLE. ALL LIABILITY AND RISK IS YOUR OWN IF YOU DO SO.
I put together a spread sheet using the basic hoop stress equation, and some numbers I found on the internet for between chamber wall thickness. I checked it for the Blackhawk-sized frame and it spit out 80%, so in theory it might be sound though this is a primitive modeling for a more complicated piece in shape. Using the numbers I found online, I got 74% for a New Vaquero size. Probably closer to 70% when you figure in the typical Ruger loose chambers.
I see your point more clearly now though, I wasn't sure what specifically the ".44mag vs .45 Colt logic" was referring to, but I think I understand now. You're right, a smaller frame size (cylinder size) does favor the .44 Special. The increase in .45 Colt area (and its advantage at the same pressure) is a constant. The pressure-derating effect from thinner walls is not constant, and increases as cylinder size decreases.
Regarding the Hodgdon data, the .44 magnum also has some extra barrel on the .45 Colt tested and is relatively long if memory serves (over 8"). Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that lower-pressure rounds tend to retain their velocity better as barrel lengths get shorter when compared to similar high-pressure rounds.
I put together a spread sheet using the basic hoop stress equation, and some numbers I found on the internet for between chamber wall thickness. I checked it for the Blackhawk-sized frame and it spit out 80%, so in theory it might be sound though this is a primitive modeling for a more complicated piece in shape. Using the numbers I found online, I got 74% for a New Vaquero size. Probably closer to 70% when you figure in the typical Ruger loose chambers.
I see your point more clearly now though, I wasn't sure what specifically the ".44mag vs .45 Colt logic" was referring to, but I think I understand now. You're right, a smaller frame size (cylinder size) does favor the .44 Special. The increase in .45 Colt area (and its advantage at the same pressure) is a constant. The pressure-derating effect from thinner walls is not constant, and increases as cylinder size decreases.
Regarding the Hodgdon data, the .44 magnum also has some extra barrel on the .45 Colt tested and is relatively long if memory serves (over 8"). Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that lower-pressure rounds tend to retain their velocity better as barrel lengths get shorter when compared to similar high-pressure rounds.
LawofThirds
Member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2008
- Messages
- 474
Short barrel performance is mostly determined by burn speed of powder. The faster the powder burns, the quicker the chemical energy is converted to heat and pressure before the bullet leaves the barrel and is no longer subject to the powder's influence.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
I tested in a 7½" Ruger Bisley.
I'm going back to the original question. 44 special 15.5K SAMMY spec, .45 Colt, 14K.
In ANY modern firearm, gun quality is not an issue at these pressures. Now, on those merits, you can find powders that will fill both cases, or nearly, and stay at lower pressure. I'm not sure the fact the .44 was designed with smokeless powder is a factor.
Either cartridge can be hotrodded, and, if so, must be matched to a gun that is capable of taking higher pressures. There are a LOT of solutions to this itch. 5 shot cylinder guns put this sort of thing into another ball park. 17-4 Stainless guns, like the Freedom Arms, and, BFR's not to mention the Scandium frames and cylinders change everything as well.
There are a LOT of things that can be done with either cartridge, and depending on what you want to do, either one can do pretty much anything you want it to, including giving you .44 mag and 454 type specs, in standard cases.
I'm not really up on it, but, what I do remember about both is you needed a LOT of money to shoot either a lot, or, you had to reload. Factory ammo was absurd when I bought my 44 special, and, it was about the same as the .45 Colt ammo of the time, 22 bucks a box for 20, back in the late 70's.
While that may have changed a bit, I don't think a general discussion of the merits of each caliber is worth much time, since a specific goal needs to be focused on, and, if so, you might evaluate which would be the most economical way to achieve that goal.
They are both excellent calibers...
If you're comparing reloads, you might as well just compare the .45 to the .44Mag. With good brass, you can make hot .44 Special loads, or just use .44 Mag cases instead. When you reload I can't see any difference between these two cartridges, in practical terms, since you can reload them each to be essentially ballistically equivelent.
Not sure if the original poster was also speaking about only .44 special chambered revolvers vs. .45, or whether he would be shooting .44 special through .44 mag revolvers, so sorry if I'm missing that.
More choices out there for .44 Mag in double action revolvers, if that is a factor also. Single Action, not so much.
My real point is, if you're limiting this discussion to factory ammo only, and are NOT going to be shooting .44 Special out of a .44 Mag Revolver, but only a .44 Special revolver, then the comparison becomes more interesting. I would direct the poster to Buffalo Bore loads for each caliber. They have some smokers in .45 Colt, and a few interesting loads in .44 Special IIRC, although I've never shot the .44 loads.
Certainly for real-world results in warmer factory ammo, like the Buffalo Bore or Corbon, there may be no practical difference between the two calibers.
But isn't all this comparison just plain fun? We all get together and split hairs for hours, over this load and that, this gun or that, etc. and it really drives the wives crazy!
Cheers to you all,
Best,
Steve
Not sure if the original poster was also speaking about only .44 special chambered revolvers vs. .45, or whether he would be shooting .44 special through .44 mag revolvers, so sorry if I'm missing that.
More choices out there for .44 Mag in double action revolvers, if that is a factor also. Single Action, not so much.
My real point is, if you're limiting this discussion to factory ammo only, and are NOT going to be shooting .44 Special out of a .44 Mag Revolver, but only a .44 Special revolver, then the comparison becomes more interesting. I would direct the poster to Buffalo Bore loads for each caliber. They have some smokers in .45 Colt, and a few interesting loads in .44 Special IIRC, although I've never shot the .44 loads.
Certainly for real-world results in warmer factory ammo, like the Buffalo Bore or Corbon, there may be no practical difference between the two calibers.
But isn't all this comparison just plain fun? We all get together and split hairs for hours, over this load and that, this gun or that, etc. and it really drives the wives crazy!
Cheers to you all,
Best,
Steve
talking about the "mid-frame" guns like the Colt SAA, its replicas, custom Ruger Old Model Blackhawks and the new flat-tops & New Vaqueros chambered in the cartridge. These guns are all smaller, lighter and handier than the large frame, .44Mag-based sixguns. These guns are the perfect vessel for the .44Spl as they are imminently more packable but still offer sufficient strength to handle heavier loads. Up to and including Elmer Keith's 250gr@1200fps load. In these same guns, the .45Colt, with its thinner chamber walls, must be kept to around 1000fps.
In the larger Blackhawks, where the .45 begins to come into its own, we're talking about .44Mag-sized sixguns so it only makes sense to compare them to .44Mag's.
My main point is that you cannot discuss the capability of the cartridges, nor compare them, without regard for the sixguns in which they are chambered.
This reply is spot on and really excellent. I think the original poster was interested in a .44 Special sized gun, which greatly focuses this discussion. The idea of comparing the .454/45 LC to the 44 Mag/44 Sp, in terms of which caliber has the greatest potential in general, seems to be irrelevant to the original post, although the subject of a fine discussion over a few beers.
I always omit the thought of chamber strength due to a larger vs. smaller caliber. Thanks for pointing this out. Important point when reloading.
Best,
Steve A
A
In the larger Blackhawks, where the .45 begins to come into its own, we're talking about .44Mag-sized sixguns so it only makes sense to compare them to .44Mag's.
My main point is that you cannot discuss the capability of the cartridges, nor compare them, without regard for the sixguns in which they are chambered.
This reply is spot on and really excellent. I think the original poster was interested in a .44 Special sized gun, which greatly focuses this discussion. The idea of comparing the .454/45 LC to the 44 Mag/44 Sp, in terms of which caliber has the greatest potential in general, seems to be irrelevant to the original post, although the subject of a fine discussion over a few beers.
I always omit the thought of chamber strength due to a larger vs. smaller caliber. Thanks for pointing this out. Important point when reloading.
Best,
Steve A
A
Thing is the small frames are also near perfect for a .45 Colt 5 shot, if you don't go buffalobore on the poor gun.
At the end of the day, its' a .429 vs. a .452-.454" bullet. My handloads, putting 240 grain HP's out at 1000 fps, gave me the warm, fuzzy and secures out of a Charter Arms Bulldog. Problem was, it shot the gun loose.
I went with a 451 Detonics instead, which, with 230 grain HP's at 1100 fps REALLY gives me the warm and fuzzies, or, the 200 grain flyin ashtrays, at 1200 fps. You can also go 45 Colt, and put a 255-260 grain bullet out at 1047 fps, ala buffalobores flat points, and have a semi-auto with .45 Colt ballistics.
I think one of the great things about the .44 special is the cult following it has.
It doesn't kick much, and, with Keith loads, will kill pretty much anything in the 48, outside some of those Texas game ranches.
FA 97 in .44 Special, or .45 Colt Certainly has an appeal for me. Light gun, 5 shot, I can hot rod anyway I want. At the end of the day, I'll stay with the bigger calibers, always.
At the end of the day, its' a .429 vs. a .452-.454" bullet. My handloads, putting 240 grain HP's out at 1000 fps, gave me the warm, fuzzy and secures out of a Charter Arms Bulldog. Problem was, it shot the gun loose.
I went with a 451 Detonics instead, which, with 230 grain HP's at 1100 fps REALLY gives me the warm and fuzzies, or, the 200 grain flyin ashtrays, at 1200 fps. You can also go 45 Colt, and put a 255-260 grain bullet out at 1047 fps, ala buffalobores flat points, and have a semi-auto with .45 Colt ballistics.
I think one of the great things about the .44 special is the cult following it has.
It doesn't kick much, and, with Keith loads, will kill pretty much anything in the 48, outside some of those Texas game ranches.
FA 97 in .44 Special, or .45 Colt Certainly has an appeal for me. Light gun, 5 shot, I can hot rod anyway I want. At the end of the day, I'll stay with the bigger calibers, always.
Stainz
Member
The only way this comparison, in my mind, should be made is in standard SAAMI spec loads max - none of these 'Ruger only' loads. Then you see exactly why there is a question - they are very much equivalent. Certainly, they are both 'reloaders' calibers - commercial ammo will break the bank in short order.
For the non-reloader, there is a 'Curtain #3' choice in frugal recoil big bores - the .45 ACP. Whether you buy a .45 Convertible Blackhawk and use the .45 ACP cylinder or a S&W 625JM and some moonclips, you will be set for big bore fun. And - you can buy 250 UMC 230gr FMJ .45 ACPs at WallyWorld for $86... on a Sunday afternoon! Reloading for it is also fun - you can even load .45 Auto Rims for the S&W - which won't need moonclips. I load .45 Colt bullets in mine, too - 255gr LSWC & 250gr Gold Dots. Still, with standard .45 ACP fare, they are fun - and certainly a big bore.
Stainz
For the non-reloader, there is a 'Curtain #3' choice in frugal recoil big bores - the .45 ACP. Whether you buy a .45 Convertible Blackhawk and use the .45 ACP cylinder or a S&W 625JM and some moonclips, you will be set for big bore fun. And - you can buy 250 UMC 230gr FMJ .45 ACPs at WallyWorld for $86... on a Sunday afternoon! Reloading for it is also fun - you can even load .45 Auto Rims for the S&W - which won't need moonclips. I load .45 Colt bullets in mine, too - 255gr LSWC & 250gr Gold Dots. Still, with standard .45 ACP fare, they are fun - and certainly a big bore.
Stainz
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
I agree, the .45ACP would be an excellent choice in a SAA-sized package. Ruger even has New Vaquero convertibles.
saltydog452
Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2004
- Messages
- 1,707
Thanks all.
Not to put too fine a point on the subject, but Wilbur was going to post some information regarding Penn Bullets.
? and please.
salty.
Not to put too fine a point on the subject, but Wilbur was going to post some information regarding Penn Bullets.
? and please.
salty.
44 Special VS 45 Colt
In my experience, the 44 Special and the 45 Colt are each capable of sub 2" groups at 25 yards. The 44 Special is somewhat easier to develope a load for. I came up with sub 2" groups, using my S&W 624 after only a few experiments. I used a cast 240 grain Keith-style semi-wadcutter and either 5.7 grains of Unique or 6.0 grains of Win 231. At this point I was satisfied so I stopped experimenting.
For my two Ruger Blackhawks in 45 Colt it was a different story. First, I had a gunsmith ream the cylinder throats to .452 inches. Then I lightened the triggers to 4 pounds. Finally I polished the action a bit to get rid of the trigger creep. I have performed about a hundred experiments so far and have noticed that between 6.0 and 6.7 grains of Trail Boss, together with quality cast bullets from 200 to 225 grains (and a medium light crimp) yield groups of 0.8 inches at 25 yards (center to center, best four out of five rounds). I have also had good results with 255 grain cast bullets and 6.2 grains of Titegroup. Hornady 250 grain jacketed hollow-points and 8.0 to 8.3 grains of Unique (yielding 1.2" groups). I have also had luck using IMR 4227 and H110 in my heavy-weight Ruger Blackhawk Only loads.
So although 44 Special and 45 Colt are capable of equivalent accuracy, the C45 Colt may require a little more work in load development.
In my experience, the 44 Special and the 45 Colt are each capable of sub 2" groups at 25 yards. The 44 Special is somewhat easier to develope a load for. I came up with sub 2" groups, using my S&W 624 after only a few experiments. I used a cast 240 grain Keith-style semi-wadcutter and either 5.7 grains of Unique or 6.0 grains of Win 231. At this point I was satisfied so I stopped experimenting.
For my two Ruger Blackhawks in 45 Colt it was a different story. First, I had a gunsmith ream the cylinder throats to .452 inches. Then I lightened the triggers to 4 pounds. Finally I polished the action a bit to get rid of the trigger creep. I have performed about a hundred experiments so far and have noticed that between 6.0 and 6.7 grains of Trail Boss, together with quality cast bullets from 200 to 225 grains (and a medium light crimp) yield groups of 0.8 inches at 25 yards (center to center, best four out of five rounds). I have also had good results with 255 grain cast bullets and 6.2 grains of Titegroup. Hornady 250 grain jacketed hollow-points and 8.0 to 8.3 grains of Unique (yielding 1.2" groups). I have also had luck using IMR 4227 and H110 in my heavy-weight Ruger Blackhawk Only loads.
So although 44 Special and 45 Colt are capable of equivalent accuracy, the C45 Colt may require a little more work in load development.
Vern Humphrey
Member
That mirrors my own experience with my Ruger Blackhawk. But my Colt New Service shot well from the get-go (the problem there was it shot tight groups 18" high and 12" to the left at 25 yards -- but that's another story.)
So it's basically the guns, not the cartridge, that determines the accuracy potential.
So it's basically the guns, not the cartridge, that determines the accuracy potential.
MrAcheson
Member
Sectional density is a two edged sword. As many people have pointed out, force is pressure times area. Which means a higher sectional density needs more chamber pressure to push the same bullet weight to the same speeds. In SAA-sized guns, that extra chamber pressure is there because the walls are thicker with the .44 special. But this only works if you handload, because the factory rounds are practically indistinguishable.
Honestly, I like the colt. I don't reload so the midframe performance argument doesn't do anything for me. It also means that local availability is the deal breaker for me. I can get .45 colt. Just about every shop I go to has a single action revolver chambered for it in stock. They have the ammo for said revolver on the shelf. .44 special? Not so much. When you do find it, you're paying the same price as .44 magnum.
I concur. It is the gun not the cartridge.
I used to have a Ruger Super Blackhawk Silhouette (10.5" barrel) with a 1 in 20 rifling twist. Although I killed two whitetails with it using Speer 240 grain JHP bullets and 21.4 grains of 2400 (RCBS Li'l Dandy rotor #25), I preferred the flatter shooting, more accurate, lighter bullets. I found that the Sierra 180 grain and 210 grain JHP bullets with 25.3 grains of W296/H110 (RCBS Li'l Dandy rotor #26) were a true joy to shoot.
I used to have a Ruger Super Blackhawk Silhouette (10.5" barrel) with a 1 in 20 rifling twist. Although I killed two whitetails with it using Speer 240 grain JHP bullets and 21.4 grains of 2400 (RCBS Li'l Dandy rotor #25), I preferred the flatter shooting, more accurate, lighter bullets. I found that the Sierra 180 grain and 210 grain JHP bullets with 25.3 grains of W296/H110 (RCBS Li'l Dandy rotor #26) were a true joy to shoot.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
Correct, the real problem with the .45Colt is not the cartridge itself but the goofy SAAMI specs. Most guns have oversized chambers and chamber mouths tend to be either too small or too large. Very few are just right. The .44's, on the other hand, tend to be much more consistent with correct dimensions and thus tend to shoot better out of the box.
- Status
