OK here it is again 44mag vs 45 LC

Status
Not open for further replies.
44 magnum is so much easier to find full house factory ammo. for, and has a bunch more data available for those of us that reload. I've reloaded for both and have chronographed both, and I feel that the 44 has a little bit on the 45LC. Regarding the effectiveness of either cartridge for hunting or S.D., I would feel more confident with the 44 mag. for hunting, and either one would be more than sufficient for S.D..
 
Regarding Long Colt vs. Colt, if enough people start referring to it as Long Colt for a long enough time, it effectively is "Long Colt" by virtue of usage. Manufacturers already label it as such, and the term is in common use.

As far as .44 Magnum vs. .45 Colt: even if you do handload, .44 Mag will probably be cheaper, and I doubt the animals you shoot will know the difference. I'll have to get a .45 Colt one of these days just for S&Gs. I've had my eye out for a 4" Redhawk, but have yet to see one in stores.
 
wow, smart 45 lc or 45 acp aka 45 colt short?, i hate when people have no clue what they are talking about and make up stuff, 45 colt short, wow
 
I originally got into reloading back around 1990 because of the potential of the .45 Colt in Ruger Blackhawks. I now have a Bisley:

2628941370053667879S600x600Q85.jpg


and a Freedom Arms Model 83 in .454 Casull/.45 Colt:

2990352660053667879S600x600Q85.jpg


My two sons have Blackhawks in .45 Colt and we enjoy reloading and trying various recipes as a very fun and rewarding family acitivity.

Dan
 
I had .44 mags for years and was a big proponant, but they were never a lot of fun to fire with top loads, a lot of muzzleblast and somewhat sharp recoil. Got into .45 Colt after reading Ross Seyfried, John Linebaugh etc.. and find them to be FAR more pleasant to shoot with equivelant power loads due to the lower pressure. Much less muzzle blast and a much less sharp recoil. My ears and my hands are both happier.

I've reduced my gun collection substantially as I didn't need 41mag, .44 mag, 45 Long Colt and .454 Casull all for basically the same purpose. What remains are the .454's, Ruger SRH 7.5" with a scope and an Alaskan for belt carry. They handle my .45 Long Colt loads fine, have never seen a high end .454 load and likely never will. The factory load I shoot is the Winchester Super -X load, 250gr jhp @ 1300 fps. Pure pleasure to shoot and plenty for anything I need.
 
Last edited:
Bergman,

Those grips make that Bisley! What kind are they?

I also think you and your boys have a great hobby going there! .45 LC is always a top pick in my book.
 
Bergman,

Those grips make that Bisley! What kind are they?

I also think you and your boys have a great hobby going there! .45 LC is always a top pick in my book.

I found these here:

http://www.altamontco.com/products/pistol/ruger/bisley.php

They took a bit of fitting but they are really exceptionally well made (Rosewood) and very reasonably priced ($38.00). A closer pic:

2237454970053667879S600x600Q85.jpg


My boys and I (Thomas, 23 - Steven, 22) have a great time reloading and shooting. We all learn from each other and study published loads and discuss fine tuning them. Thomas and I also have .45 Colt lever action rifles so that adds to the fun.

It's all good.

Dan
 
I have a few S&W .44's and even owned 2 in .45 Colt. After 4 years the .45's are gone and the .44's are still in the safe. Unless you're talking about a Blackhawk I see no advantage to the .45 at all.

Put those 2 cartridges in a N frame S&W and the .44 will beat it every time. I also did not like loading a cartridge that you can't even see the powder in the case.
 
I think Buffalo Bore makes a +P .44 magnum that does around 1600 ft-lbs. It's pretty wild stuff, but I doubt your wrist or wallet would be too happy about trying to shoot it regularly. Really either of these cartridges you would probalby want to reload for just due to the ammo costs.
 
The .44 may be a little better with lighter weight jacketed expanding bullets.

I have never owned a .45 of any kind, but I have owned several .44 Mag revolvers. I have also fired quite a few .45 Colt revolvers owned by friends.

I think the two cartridges are pretty close to being equivalent when firing bullets in the weight range of 265 gr to 340 gr.

I think the .44 mag may shoot jacketed bullets in the weight range of 200 gr to 240 gr at greater velocities than the .45 Colt. The .44 mag. may enjoy a small advantage in this weight range when expanding jacketed bullets are being used. But many .45 revolvers have been known to shoot 225 gr, 250 gr, and 260 gr bullets quite well.

During the last 25 years, many handgun hunters have adopted the use of heavy for caliber, hard cast, non-expanding, wide flat nosed, bullets fired at 200 to 300 fps lower velocities than is typical for lighter weight jacketed bullets in that caliber. The hard cast bullets depend on their weight and a wide flat meplat to create a load with extreme penetration and a larger than caliber wound channel. In .44 mag, hard cast bullets of this type typically weigh in the range of 300 gr. to 340 gr. In .44 mag, these bullets are typically fired from hunting revolvers with 5" to 8" barrels at velocities ranging from 1050 fps to 1350 fps.

The deep penetration and adequate wound channels provided by heavy hard cast bullets have proven to be very effective on large heavy game with thick skins, massive high density muscles, and large heavy bones. They are also effective on deer, black bear, and elk; although they may be no more effective than the best strongly constructed lighter weight expanding jacketed bullets for this purpose. Recoil with loads using bullets at 300 gr and over can be pretty ferocious in a .44 mag revolver.

Since hard cast bullets are designed to be non-expanding and (pretty much) non-deforming, it would seem that the use of a larger caliber bullet would be one of the few available options for creating a wider wound channel. So for the hunter who favors the use of heavy hard cast bullets at moderate velocities (typically in the 1050 to 1300 fps range), the .45 Colt would seem to enjoy a modest advantage with bullet weights ranging from 300 gr to 360 gr.

Many .45 fans say that the recoil of these heavy bullet loads seems (or feels) less severe (or sharp) with the .45 Colt than with the .44 mag. They also point out that these heavy hard cast bullets don't require maximum velocities to get the job done.

But all of my hunting has been in the lower 48 western states, and I have observed that for game up to and including the size of elk, the best strongly constructed controlled expansion jacketed bullets in the weight range of 240 to 280 gr work quite well when fired at near maximum velocities from a .44 mag revolver. (I generally prefer JSP bullets for anything larger than deer.)

.44 mag loads using wide flat nosed hard cast bullets in the range of 250 gr to 290 gr. also work quite well for close range defense against (black) bears and for hunting larger animals. Hard cast bullets in this weight range still have plenty of penetration and do not require maximum velocities to be effective. Contrary to the beliefs of many hard cast bullet fans, you don't always have to choose the heaviest for caliber bullets to get excellent penetration from WFN hard cast bullets.

My preferred .44 mag load for large mule deer and elk features a 270 gr Gold Dot (now called Deep Curl) JSP at 1300 fps from a 6.5" barrel. Recoil is stout but manageable. This load has been used by many hunters to give excellent penetration (often through and through) on elk and black bear along with modest expansion (often in the range of .46 to .54 on recovered bullets.) These modestly expanding JSP bullets in .44 mag give comparable penetration and the same wider wound channels as WFN hard cast bullets fired from a .45 Colt.

I think this modest expansion from bonded controlled expansion JSP bullets is ideal when compared to the classic double caliber mushroom style expansion delivered by some JHP bullets. Bonded JSP .44 mag bullets (at impact velocities < 1300 fps) kind of flatten out to a diameter of nearly half an inch or sometimes a little more, but under some conditions they may barely expand a few hundredths of an inch (which makes them equivalent to a non expanding .45) Large diameter mushroom style expansion (seen with many JHP bullets) often seems to limit penetration on larger animals at typical revolver velocities.

For this reason, bonded controlled expansion JSP bullets are probably preferable to all but the most strongly constructed JHP bullets (like the Swift A-frame) for use on black bear and big hawgs. Strong bonded JSP bullets and WFN hard cast bullets of the same weight and at approximately the same velocity can be expected to give pretty much equivalent performance and penetration.

Good luck with your large caliber handgun hunting.
 
Last edited:
I got both - wanted DA so got a Ruger Redhawk in 45 Colt and a SW 629 in 44 Mag - the 629 fits my hand the Ruger does not but I do not think there is a gnats eye difference in the hunting loads between the two. Getting a gun that fits you and shoots accurately is much more important than this choice of caliber.
 
Smith and wesson loaded a shorter less powerful .45 round for their Schofield revolvers that would also chamber and fire in Colt revolvers. Colt loaded a shortened version to fit their competitors revolvers and marketed them as the ".45 Short Colt" Gun writer Mike Venturo has a full box of them that he uses to settle this question from time to time. When cowboys went to the store and wanted the original full power .45 load they would ask for the .45 "long" Colts to differentiate between the original and the short ones and the name stuck even though they quit making the short ones over 100 years ago.
 
You're welcome, bergmen. But I'd be careful with the loads you put in that Freedom Arms revolver, it looks kind of flimsy;).

Tmygun
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top