.45 long colt rifle and pistol

[Lone_Gunman]

How is 44-40 rare and disadvantaged?

I have never had trouble finding it at gun shows, or online, or in decent gun stores.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

thats true if all you wanted it for was plinking or a set to carry into the backcountry, but the original poster has said he wants historicly accurate guns. That rules out the .45 colt as a rifle calibre.

It also rules out Rugers, and any other clones using a transfer bar rather than a hammer-mounted firing pin.

 

[mustanger98]

Neither the Winchester nor the Marlin lever guns were made for the .45 Colt for one simple reason - the rim is too small for reliable functioning. Unfortunately, things have not changed. If one wants a single cartridge setup, .44-40 is the better choice.

While this may be true in some recent instances, it isn't consistent with my experience. My experience dealing with the Marlin 1894 Cowboy rifle and Winchester '94AE Trapper carbine, both in .45Colt, is they are both quite reliable with no failures to feed, fire, or eject. While Mike Venturino favors .44-40 as an authentic round in Peacemaker and '73, there are also cited instances of the .44-40 being aggravating to handload do to the thinner walls of the tapered cases.

FWIW, I like the rifle/carbine w/sixgun combo in one caliber and like mine in .45Colt. I also would personally rather have such a combo in .44magnum or .357magnum over the .44-40 because I know what I'm doing handloading for them. I'll also say if somebody likes .44-40 they should go for it and enjoy it as it is one of the old survivors.

 

[mustanger98]

The mechanics of whether or not 45 colt is an appropriate choice for a lever gun are unimportant compared to the fact that there never was a 45 Colt lever gun in the Old West. The 45 Colt lever gun is an abomination sold to people who want a gun that is kind of Old West-like, but don't know enough to make a historically correct choice. If historical correctness is unimportant, then I guess it is OK, though.

I have a couple of Colt SAAs also, and they are fine revolvers. However, the Uberti replicas are almost as nicely finished, and I think generally have better triggers than new Colts. You might want to look at them also, it will save you about $600 if you go with Uberti. Of course, you won't get a prancing pony on the side of your revolver, and that will make a huge difference in resale value.

When I bought my Winchester carbine in .45Colt, I got a '94AE. There was no '94AE w/ saddle ring in the Old West of the 1850-1900 period. In fact, there was no '94 Trapper saddle ring carbine in .45Colt untill about 25 years ago. The equally "historically inaccurate" .44magnum version had been around longer. The whole '94AE is not an Old West gun and not to be confused with one and not to be derided as historically inaccurate because it really has nothing to do with the Old West. What I'm saying is it's comparatively NEW TECHNOLOGY. I knew every bit of that when I bought it. I don't consider it an abomination because the real abomination would have been to buy cheap unreliable junk, which is why I chose the Winchester.

Oh, and it's not a "prancing pony" on the side of the Colt's guns. It's properly known as the "rampant colt" logo.

 

[mustanger98]

The additional strength of the Ruger is unnecessary if you are going to be shooting nothing but cowboy loads.

Rugers are ok, but again I would say if Old West authenticity is what you are after, the SAA or its clones are closer.

Right, but the Rugers will take a load that will blow up a Peacemaker or clone. In fact, Hornady's 5th Edition Load manual has three sections for .45Colt data and one of those is titled ".45Colt (Ruger and T/C Only)". I have some HP/XTP's handloaded (to hunt deer in thick cover) from that section and they're stout.

 

[mustanger98]

But if that is his intent then you are 100% I'm betting the Ruger Vaquero is built similar to the Blackhawk in cyl lock up. Now for the bad news if you are really going to shoot authentic cowboy then you must (and many do) use black powder can you say corrosive.

I thought of that too. Yeah, the Vaquero is a Blackhawk in a more authentic Old West look and has the modern Ruger cylinder lock-up. (FWIW, I've had a new Vaquero in my hands and it felt good too.) That blackpowder class- I saw that on an episode of "Cowboys" and somebody said "everybody else goes home and puts their guns away and cleans up later, but we have to clean right away" or words to that effect. Personally, I don't care to shoot BP in my Rugers, but that's me. On the other hand, there's another division of SASS/CAS who's members like to go with the old B-western type impression and it can be more fun in ways for anybody who's always liked John Wayne and Roy Rogers and them. But Hey, if you want to go REAL authentic, go "Plainsman" and shoot cap&ball revolvers and BP cartridges in the '73 .44-40.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

Right, but the Rugers will take a load that will blow up a Peacemaker or clone.

We are talking about cowboy action shooting, not Big Foot hunting. So whether or not your cowboy gun takes super hot rounds doesnt matter.

I don't consider it an abomination because the real abomination would have been to buy cheap unreliable junk, which is why I chose the Winchester.

The 1873 replicas made by Uberti today are certainly not cheap nor unreliable. I am not trying to find fault with your Winchester 94 in 45 Colt. It is a fine gun. The only problem I have with it is that the original post in this thread was about authentic Old West guns, and the Winchester 94 in 45 Colt is certainly not in that category, as you know.

 

[TexAg]

We are talking about cowboy action shooting, not Big Foot hunting. So whether or not your cowboy gun takes super hot rounds doesnt matter.

Actually the original poster didn't say anything about cowboy action shooting, maybe we did, but I think its prudent he know that you can shoot as hot a load as you can in a Ruger "Old" Vaquero or Blackhawk and never worry about damaging it.
You can take historical correctness as far as you like; buy an original Colt made 100 years ago, make it in .44-40, buy a really old, original lever gun, etc. Or you can take it a little less far and get a new Colt, or clone, or semi-clone (transfer bars) and get the rifle in, gasp, the appalingly historically inaccurate, but much more available and easier to load .45 Colt.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

Yep, TexAg, you are right about that.

But the starter of the thread said: " i like to be historically correct when looking to make my purchases based on history" in his second post in this thread.

I based the remainder of my discussion on that point.

 

[Matt G]

A friend of mine had a .45 Colt M94 Trapper and a Blackhawk in the same caliber. Both were beautiful, and functional, but neither really correct historically. He just liked the combo. Fine, so far as that goes. In brushy country, he was at a disadvantage to no one for deer hunting.

Well, money got tight, and he sold them off. Now he's looking at getting himself and his wife into cowboy action shooting, and he told me that he's looking at a Rossi M92 in .357 and a .357 Vaquero. I squawked that this was "an abomination" [ ] and that if he wants something like that he should get them in .38-40, and...
He interupted me. "Matt," he said patiently, "how many rounds of .38 Special can I get for each round of .38-40?" I allowed that it would be about 2 or three to one. "I'm still kind of poor, and I want to get to shoot! More importantly, I want my wife to do a lot of shooting. I can buy a box of UMC 130g .38 Special for about $6.00 on clearence, and keep the magazine full of magnums for home protection." He had me, and I shut my big mouth.

I personally favor going with the historically-correct round and model and load and make. But if you want to shoot, I don't see a problem with taking the slightly off-caliber.

.44-40 is still a completely viable caliber. It's supposed to be a bit of a pain to reload, due to its thin casewalls and slight bottleneck, but I think I'd get a set of dies if I had a rifle or pistol for it. It's still around, certainly. But it's not very often to be found on clearance at WalMart, and the variety of loads is pretty slim. It's generally found loaded in the anemic Cowboy Action loads, which come nowhere near its potential for power, even if you keep within the SAAMI-listed 13,000 psi.

The .44-40 was an amazing step forward from the .44 rimfire cartridge that was available in the Henry, and stuck around for a long time. It was eventually improved upon as a pistol cartridge by the .44 Special and the .45s.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

I am not disagreeing with you MattG.

If cost, ammo availability, reloading potential, or sheer power are you concerns, then a SAA and Winchester 1873 in 44-40 is a poor choice.

If you are trying to have a gun/cartridge combo that is as historically accurate as possible, then a Winchester 1894 in 45 Colt is a poor choice.

 

[Texfire]

A friend of mine had a .45 Colt M94 Trapper and a Blackhawk in the same caliber. Both were beautiful, and functional, but neither really correct historically. He just liked the combo. Fine, so far as that goes. In brushy country, he was at a disadvantage to no one for deer hunting.

Well, money got tight, and he sold them off. Now he's looking at getting himself and his wife into cowboy action shooting, and he told me that he's looking at a Rossi M92 in .357 and a .357 Vaquero. I squawked that this was "an abomination" [ ] and that if he wants something like that he should get them in .38-40, and... He interupted me. "Matt," he said patiently, "how many rounds of .38 Special can I get for each round of .38-40?" I allowed that it would be about 2 or three to one. "I'm still kind of poor, and I want to get to shoot! More importantly, I want my wife to do a lot of shooting. I can buy a box of UMC 130g .38 Special for about $6.00 on clearence, and keep the magazine full of magnums for home protection." He had me, and I shut my big mouth.

I'm with your friend on this one. I would love to be able to afford and feed an authentic set of period weapons, but I have to be realistic. So I have my Puma Legacy '92 in .357, my Norinco '97, a Beretta Stampede and a Taurus Gaucho both in .357. Not a single gun in my cowboy battery cost me over $450. I pay $8 for 50 rounds of reloaded lead slug .38 cowboy load. And with me shooting and average of 160 rounds a match, shooting .38 allows me to continue enjoying this wonderful pastime. Would I love to have a Cimmaron '73 in 44-40 with a matching pair of SAA? Or better yet, a Springfield Trapdoor with a matching Schofield? You bet your boots I would, but I'm going to get a Taurus Thunderbolt in .357, when they come out, because it's going to be at a price I can afford.

All that said, I think the really important thing is the spirit of the game. Authentic is an ideal that should be persued, but I'm not going to sit on the sidelines because I can't pony the bucks for authentic gear. I may have ended up with a battery of guns that could be dismissed as a "gamer" setup, but those accusations are pretty much dismissed when they see my ranking at the middle of the pack.

Tex

 

[Camp David]

If you are trying to have a gun/cartridge combo that is as historically accurate as possible, then a Winchester 1894 in 45 Colt is a poor choice.

Lone_Gunman... what is "historically accurate" in this case? Has anyone done research on whether western lever actions were chambered in 45LC and which brand? What time period?

A while back I came across a old photo of 49ers in Canada/Alaska during the Gold Rush and popular rifle/pistol combos were in 45LC so they would have identical ammo and not have to carry two types....

 

[bg]

Lucas McCain knew what to expect from his Winnie 44-40.

The Rifleman's weapon was "in actuality" an 1892 .44-40 Winchester carbine specially modified with a large loop and metal tab to turn his rifle into a rapid firing machine. It was fitted with a large loop lever that enabled it to be spun and cocked in a dramatic fashion. The trigger guard incorporated a screw that tripped the trigger every time the lever was closed. In the words of Chuck Connors "We decided to take the rifle; take off the regular lever and put this round lever on so I could get my hand through it." McCain's proficiency with his rifle earned him a reputation and nickname of "The Rifleman" when he lived in the Nations. He reportedly could squeeze off a round of ammunition every three-tenth of a second and fire eight times in two-and-a-half seconds. Lucas spent more time fighting criminals than ranching on the show, often helping Micah Torrance (Paul Fix), the aging town Marshal.

Hard to argue with the Rifleman...

Sorry couldn't resist..

Sure isn't anything wrong with this Cimarron Model P.
It'd just be nice to have both the rifle and pistola in
the same caliber. Still a nice looking weapon.
http://www.gunshopfinder.com/cimarron/modelP.asp

 

[mustanger98]

Now come to think of it, Sheriff Jim Wilson wrote one of his collumns in Shooting Times on a rancher/range-detective/lawman type who's name I can't recall right off. This guy used an 1873 Winchester in .44-40. According to Sheriff Wilson, the guy would step off his horse with his rifle in hand, the horse being between him and whoever the adversary was. When the horse cleared, this guy was working his lever with all four finger through it, and tripping the trigger with his thumb. He later switched to an 1894 .30-30 and used the same tactics. Sheriff Wilson allowed as the guy probably looked a lot like Lucas McCain in this respect, with the exception of McCain's '92 having the set-up to rapid fire just be slamming the lever shut. I wish I could recall the man's name right off.

BTW, I've tried the deal about working the lever and tripping the trigger with the thumb. It does work. I beleive a '94 Trapper, or other model Winchesters, can be gotten into action fast from being slung muzzle down and fired in this manner.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

Has anyone done research on whether western lever actions were chambered in 45LC and which brand? What time period?

Winchester lever guns from the days of the Old West were not chambered in 45 Colt. If someone can find any information that contradicts this, I would be interested in seeing it, though skeptical. Everything I have ever seen or read indicates Winchester did not use that chambering in the old days (late 1800's-early 1900's).

A while back I came across a old photo of 49ers in Canada/Alaska during the Gold Rush and popular rifle/pistol combos were in 45LC so they would have identical ammo and not have to carry two types

I don't think any 49er's would have had any guns chambered in 45 Colt. I do not believe that 45 colt was introduced until the 1870's.

 

[Malamute]

"Lone_Gunman... what is "historically accurate" in this case? Has anyone done research on whether western lever actions were chambered in 45LC and which brand? What time period?

A while back I came across a old photo of 49ers in Canada/Alaska during the Gold Rush and popular rifle/pistol combos were in 45LC so they would have identical ammo and not have to carry two types...."


Well, yes, someone has researched this, and it isn't too difficult to find out. Nobody chambered a rifle in 45 Colt cal until the last 15 or 20 years. Before this, Winchester never had any model so chambered, nor did Marlin or anyone else.

The picture you saw mentioned the caliber of the guns they had? I would venture to say that the caption may have said something to the effect of what you said, but it was incorrect. Also, as far as going into Canada, the Mounties generally checked everyone coming in at the border, and did not allow handguns into their country during the gold rush period. BTW, the Alaskan and Canadian gold rush period was in the 1898 to early 1900's period. The "49er's" were in California in 1849. The 1894 Winchesters in 30 WCF (30-30) were pretty popular in the north.

 

[Noah Zark]

. . . My experience dealing with the Marlin 1894 Cowboy rifle and Winchester '94AE Trapper carbine, both in .45Colt, is they are both quite reliable with no failures to feed, fire, or eject . . .

FWIW, I like the rifle/carbine w/sixgun combo in one caliber and like mine in .45Colt. I also would personally rather have such a combo in .44magnum or .357magnum over the .44-40 because I know what I'm doing handloading for them. I'll also say if somebody likes .44-40 they should go for it and enjoy it as it is one of the old survivors.

+1.

I have two 1894 Marlins in 45 Colt, one a 16" low-production carbine, the other an octagonal 1894CB. Both have been FLAWLESS in cycling and reliability. They make great companions to my 45 Colt SA revolvers, a Bisley Vaquero, a standard Vaquero, and a new Beretta. I'm eyeballing a Taurus Thunderbolt to join the party . . .

Noah

 

[engineer151515]

Good reference info

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_handgun_cartridges

 

[georgeduz]

If historical correctness is unimportant

historical correctness is unimportant,why change your loads.and i like the rugers better than the colts SA.and sure the colt is good but not worth the money.the ruger is great and only runs about 500 dollars.

 

[mustanger98]

And what is historical correctness anyway? Everything we've discussed in this thread is historically correct to the respective time periods they were produced and sold. 1873 Winchester .44-40 is "historically correct" to 1873-end-of-production to the present day. 1894 Winchester in all it's chamberings- including .357mag, .44mag, and .45Colt- are historically correct from 1894 the present day with consideration for when the individual chamberings were introduced. It all depends on what period you're really seriously making the impression for, if that's the case. With the ammo considerations (cost- round for round), as Texfire mentioned, not all cowboy action shooting is meant to be period correct so much as it is recreational. And, as I said, some SASS/CAS shooters are doing the B-western thing because it's fun.

FWIW, with mention of Chuck Connors and the souped-up 1892 .44-40, I thought of doing a rifle like that just for the B-western deal , but I doubt it would be allowed in competition for being a "period incorrect" modification. Trouble with certain modifications being against the rules is the top SASS shooters are using a bunch of modifications that didn't exist before the last couple of years, such as reverse palls in sixguns and short-throw lever kits in '73's which speed up reloads in sixguns and speed cycling in the '73. This is one reason I'm not too aweful interested in competing in the big SASS shoots as opposed to the little local shoots where we know everybody and this kind of stuff gets discussed and cussed and all and everybody's there to have fun.