opinions -- SAA hiking/camping gun...357 vs 45LC?

[DouglasW]

Okay, I've searched the archives and read so many comparison threads on THR and elsewhere that my head hurts ...so I'll just ask the sage THRs for opinons on what's best in my situation:

Background Data:

• I've got an itch to purchase my first single-action revolver
• I'll use it for hiking/camping/range/plinking gun
• I want it for self-defense against 2- and 4-legged predators
• My current DA revolvers (and a lever action) are all .38/.357
• I like the simplicity of only having one centerfire handgun caliber in the house
• I do not re-load (but might down the road)
• I do not hunt
• I live in Colorado, and will do my hiking/backpacking/camping here
• Currently, a 3 1/16" Ruger SP101 stoked with 158s or 180 Buffalo Bore serves as "take it camping" sidearm.

Based on some glowing reviews here and elsewhere, I had nearly decided on a 4 5/8" Ruger New Vaquero in .357 (or a 50th Anniv. Blackhawk in .357 -- I prefer fixed sights, but cannot decide if adj sights would be better in this application).

So what's the question, you ask? Well, I recently made the mistake of reading the praises of the 45 Colt...and 45lc sounds like a damn fine cartridge. Considering ballistics vs. what I might meet in the Colorado mountains, availability, cost, etc., should I make the leap to a new caliber/platform...or stick with the .357? [yes, I could probably get the .357 soon...and save up for a 45LC a few years down the road, too] If 45LC, what barrel length and model do you recommend? I've fondled the NV and 50th Anniv Blackhawk, and both fit my small/medium hands well...

Thanks!

 

[longboard]

I love 45lc , but in your case with no hunting in mind I would stick with .357 [I love my .357's too] in the Blackhawk with adjustible sights and a 4 5/8 " barrel.
I had a Super Blackhawk in .44 mag but sold it , did not like the 5 1/4" barrel
and I had three .45lc revolvers at the time[cowboy shoot'in].
The Blackhawk IMHO is one of the best looking revolvers ever made.
Longboard

 

[MCgunner]

I think if you don't handload and don't have a big ammo budget, you should stick with the .357 magnum. .45 Colt factory stuff isn't as available or as available in quite as much variety, and is a lot mor expensive than .38/.357 ammo.

I have a blued .357 6 1/2 inch and think that in that caliber, you'd be better served with the 6 1/2" barrel length. It gives me nearly 800 ft lbs (785 to be exact) in my 180 grain Hornady XTP load which the Buffalo Bore claims pretty much mimic for factory ammo. That extra pop would be desireable in black bear country.

I do think were it a choice between my .45 Colt 4 5/8" stainless Blackhawk and the .357, I'd pick the .45 Colt, but I handload for it. I like both and ain't about to get rid of either, but the .45 hits harder with hot stuff, can shoot light stuff, and is almost as versatile for the handloader IMHO, maybe more versatile since it's capable of what the .44 Mag can do. Even if you don't handload for it, if you have the cash, there is hot buffalo bore stuff down to ultra light cowboy loads that would make good small game stuff. In the .45, I prefer the shorter 4 5/8" barrel length. It doesn't need the boost of a longer barrel, though the longer tube will boost it. It's already making near 900 ft lbs out of that shorter barrel with hot stuff and it's a little handier gun to tote in the field than the longer gun. And, looks wise, I prefer the shorter barrel.

Either way, I don't think you can make a bad choice, probably what makes the choice tough and probably why I own both calibers in Blackhawks.

BTW, if you don't handload and get the .45, send me your brass....

 

[Jim March]

The 45LC only exceeds the 357 in stopping power when you have a 44Magnum-class frame. In which case you can cope with 45LC+P fodder which in many cases meets or even exceeds 44Mag horsepower.

In the size gun you're looking at, the 357 out-powers the 45LC. With thicker cylinder walls you can run more pressure and more net energy in 357, AND keep all the interchangability niceness, the low cost, the flexibility of 38/38+P, etc.

Now. The New Vaq is a damned fine gun but I found the sights a bit too..."traditional" for my tastes. I spent about $200 at a local gunsmith having a much better front sight put on and having the rear sight hogged out a bit to match. I've posted pics of this critter before but in case you missed it:

This gives me windage adjustability, elevation was set via having the front sight shaved down to specifically match the weight of ammo I'm interested in (135gr in my case, which means 125s will be very close and if I want to heat it up I can run Cor-Bon or Winchester 140gr). I actually went to the range and via bench shooting determined how far off the front was, and reported that back to the gunsmith, who milled the front accordingly.

I am building this into exactly the sort of thing you're looking at. I also recommend the SBH hammer or even the Bisley hammer if you want to get radical - takes a bit more work making it fit but it's still a "home-brew mod" versus "gunsmith required".

An alternative is to start with the 50th Anniversary 357 and...I *think* a Bowen "Rough Country" rear sight will fit that gun. Not certain though as the topstrap is a bit different.

 

[DouglasW]

Thank you for your thoughtful replies. Seems to be 3:0 in favor of the .357 for my needs thus far.

I tend to lean towards shorter barrels in DA (I prefer the 'feel' of snubbies and 3-inchers over 4" and up.)...but am certainly open to consider a longer barrel in the Single Action. Was the 50th anniversary blackhawk only available in 4 5/8"? In looking at Ruger's website tonight, it looks like the New Model Blackhawk is also available in a 6.5" barrel. Anyone know if this the same frame as the 50th Anniv model, or larger?

BTW, if you don't handload and get the .45, send me your brass....

MC, I don't reload (yet)...but I'm already saving my .357 brass in case I ever do

Anyone have an opinion to share?

 

[Jim March]

All Ruger 357s since 1973 are on the 44Mag frame EXCEPT the New Vaq and 50th Anniversary 357.

 

[Colt46]

.45 Colt is THE original SAA caliber

The SAA hasn't changed since its first introduction(nitpickers will disagree). You gotta think it has been the proven companion of outdoorsmen, cowboys, prospecters and others for over a hundred years.
It doesn't have the sexy 'magnum' printed anywhere on it. Too bad.
It shoots a bigger, heavier bullet than the .357. Don't expect it to expand or fragment or anything else a .357 does. A .45 bullet doesn't need to.

The standard 255 grain semi-wadcutter bullet, at 850 fps, is a rock solid jack of all trades loading. In .357 you would want to tailor your loads to your situation. 125's for social work and 158's or better for fanged, four legged critters.

In defference to 100+ year old guns, pressures are really low in most factory ammo. If you carefully handload(don't attempt Blackhawk or Vaquero type loadings) you can really achieve perfection in an every day carrying single action.
I don't think the esteemed Jim March could argue with a 270 grain Keith bullet at a modest 900 fps as being beatable by the .357

 

[Stainz]

My idea of the 'perfect wood's packer' is one of my two 625 Mountain Guns in .45 Colt... but I started reloading years ago just because of the cost/availability problem of that ammo. I had amassed 2,700+ empties over the years when I bought my reloading equipment... now I reload everything from 1895 Nagant to .45 Colt... it's a disease!

No doubt I'd feel better protected with some of my .45 Colt 255gr LSWC's and Speer 250gr Gold Dots reloads, which make ~850 fps from my MG's 4" tube, but to be honest, the dangerous 'wild' animals I see are usually in the zoo. I carry an S&W Airweight 296 5-shot .44 Special with 200gr Blazer Gold Dots for 2-legged predators. In your case, you already have a 3" SP101 in .357M - and 158gr & 180gr protective loads for it. Recalling that Doug Wesson took everything up to bear with a RM .357 Magnum back in the thirties while promoting the then new round, I'd say you were pretty well covered. Plus, a DA revolver is better for an emergency responder - no hammer to cock when you draw it from your pocket/holster.

Now, let's address the real question... what do you want for your next revolver? A SA, like the Vaquero, is a lot of fun at the range. I guess my favorite .357-ish SA, especially if you like blued revolvers, is the Blackhawk convertible - like the Ruger BN34X/36X pair with either a 4.6" or 5.5" barrel. They both will take .38 Specials and .357 Magnums - and come with a second cylinder reamed for 9mm Luger. Talk about cheap to plink with... you can always find .38 & 9mm ammo on sale. The BH's have an adjustable sight, so you can better suit your sighting needs with ammo changes. They also have a BN44X/455X pair that comes with both a .45 Colt AND a .45 ACP cylinder, too. Be forewarned - I started my revolver craze with a 5.5" version to shoot up my .45 ACP stash... wrong! I just had to 'try' some .45 Colt 'cowboy' loads... they were highly addictive!

Good Luck!

Stainz

 

[AH-1]

45 colt.
a 45 hole is plenty big

 

[schmeky]

DouglasW,

You're stuck in a rut. Time to experience the joy of variety. Break out of your .38/.357 closet.

Once you go .45LC, you can't go back. Trust me. A Ruger .45 in with a 4 5/8" barrel with adjustable sights would fit the bill.

 

[Jim March]

I don't think the esteemed Jim March could argue with a 270 grain Keith bullet at a modest 900 fps as being beatable by the .357.

I dunno 'bout the "esteemed" part .

Anyways. The best 45LC factory "woods carry load" that I'm aware of for SAA-sized guns is the Buffalo Bore 255gr softcast flatnose at 1,000fps from a 5" barrel - a 566ft/lb energy load. That load probably edges out the 270 at 900. Not by much of course.

http://www.buffalobore.com/ammunition/default.htm#low45

The same vendor's best 357 woods load for black bear or hogs involves a 180gr flatnose hardcast doing 1,400fps for 783ft/lbs on target from a Ruger's 4.68" barrel.

http://www.buffalobore.com/ammunition/default.htm#357

Which of these loads would put more hurt on a black bear? In my opinion the 357/180, hands down. It will punch deeper, deform less, deflect less, deliver more energy.

"But he's got a 357"...folks, that much power in an SP101 will be a major handful. His odds of being able to get off multiple shots of that stuff aren't that good. Practice will be painful.

With the New Vaq or 50th 357, recoil will be more controllable via both the gun's weight and grip design. (With a caveat: lose the checkered plastic grips ASAP and go with smooth wood!!!)

Finally, ammo compatibility across multiple guns IS a nice thing. Critical? No, of course not. But it's nice. And when combined with everything else he'll get...

Well, I had to make this same choice, I went 357 and no regrets.

Then again, there ARE indeed advantages to a big-case, low-pressure cartridge. The moment I can afford it I'm scoring a second 357 cylinder and having it reamed to either 356GNR or 38/44B&D . Haven't decided exactly which, but I'm leaning 356GNR.

But I'll still be able to shoot standard 38/357...

 

[Vern Humphrey]

First of all, I'd say start handloading!!

Both the .357 and the .45 Colt are cartridges that beg to be handloaded. They are extremely versatile with handloading. In the case of the .357, you can go from .38 Special powder-puff loads to screaming full power loads. In the case of the .45 Colt, you can have anything from "Cowboy Action" levels to loads that rival (and slightly surpass) the .44 magnum.

That being the case, to get the versatility these cartridges offer, you need a heavy, strong pistol with adjustable sights. Personally, I like the Ruger Blackhawk in a shorter barrel -- 4 3/8" or 5 1/2". And, if I'm going to carry something that big, I'll take the .45 Colt.

 

[Just Jim]

To my point of view the muzzel blast from a 357 is too loud because the round has too much pressure. While it is true you should shoot with ear protection, the damage done by the 357 on unprotected ears will be much greater than that done by a 45 LC.

A 4 and 3/4 in single action in 45 is lighter than a 357 too because the barrel is thinner and so is the cylinder.

jj

 

[DouglasW]

Interesting. The last several posts have been strongly pro-45LC, for my situation. -- seems to be about even in the .357:45LC voting now

First of all, I'd say start handloading!!

It's part of my long-term plan...I just don't have the time/space for it now. Not only for cost reasons, either. I am fascinated by the science/artistry behind it...along with the pride of "rolling your own". Hopefully, I'll get there someday.

"But he's got a 357"...folks, that much power in an SP101 will be a major handful. His odds of being able to get off multiple shots of that stuff aren't that good. Practice will be painful.

I've touched off some of those 180s in the SP101 already...and yes, they're a handful. I have a 4" GP100 too, which handles the recoil much better, but I don't find it nearly as "handy" or carry-able...maybe a 3" GP100 would split the difference, in a double action revolver.

Okay, here's another ig'rent question for you: Can 45LC or other big bore (.4x) pistol caliber be shot from a full-size center-fire rifle (Marlin 45-70, etc)...or are they all incompatible. Just have similar bullet sizes? Yes, I know the cartridge lengths will be quite different...and that there are 45LC lever-actions available...but I thought I'd heard something about the 444 or the 454causal or one of those.

Thank you, everyone

 

[LubeckTech]

Money Talks

.45 colt is a fine caliber BUT a .44 mag Blackhawk preferably the longer barreled one (7.5?) would give the best of many worlds. There are many of them out there at good prices and they will shoot .44 special which is close to .45 colt plus .44 mag which makes ammunition more plentiful and less expensive from my experience. Vaqueros are also great and hansome guns in 44 mag and can be had for about $400 if you watch. If you enjoy shooting centerfire hand guns enough to consider the kinds of guns you are looking at the next logical step is reloading. The .357/.38 and .44mag/.44spl cartridges provide the most versitile variety of loads for ANY purpose weather it be large or small game hunting, self defence, plinking or sport shooting like IDPA or Cowboy Action. Unless you are very wealthy and money is no object you can load a whole lot more ammo than you can buy for the same money!! Which makes shooting and therefore owning guns affordable. More practice makes you a better shot.

 

[Jim March]

The classic problem with 45LC leverguns is that the rim is smaller on the 45LC than most other centerfire revolver cartridges. In the 19th century very few if any 45LC leverguns were built for this reason.

MOST of the problems have been overcome today, via better leverguns and stronger brass. But there is still a small reliability deficit in some cases, with some specific specimens of 45LC leverguns having "issues" - at least unless tuned by a gunsmith. You're more likely to get a reliable out-of-the-box levergun in other calibers.

This is why 44-40 and 38-40 SAAs were built up in the 19th century - for cross-compatibility with similar leverguns.

 

[Jim March]

Vern, we agree completely that the 45LC is a WHOLE 'nuther critter in a 44Mag-sized-gun. And to a lesser degree, the 357 can be tuned up in such big actions by a competent handloader, probably at least somewhat beyond Buffalo Bore specs.

But there are advantages to going with the new smaller mid-frame Rugers. Not only are they a bit more "packable" but the *average* quality of the new series appears to be better than the average quality of the older 44Mag-frame guns.

Ruger took the opportunity presented by the new series to re-think how the guns are made. On the larger frame guns, six drill bits at once ream out the cylinder. In the new mid-frames, a single drill bit is used sequencially on all six bores, one at a time, spinning the cylinder in place between holes. It's a bit slower but it has eliminated the classic Ruger problem of different sized bore holes on each bore of the same cylinder, and has done much to correct undersize bores. It is likely easier to maintain and inspect a single drill bit versus six at once. I suspect that even if they had the same posted maintenance schedule, the ease of actually doing it meant that the guy on the shop floor does a better job of checking one drill bit versus six, even if it's six times more often per station.

The average cylinder gap appears to be smaller. Fit and finish is in all respects as good as Rugers have been for a very long time. We're seeing fewer cases of windage being off in the New Vaquero - my stock sight was dead on before I had it milled off .

There's the mechanical differences: as you spin the cylinder, the "clicks" line up perfectly with the bore and loading gate. The new half-moon ejector is much nicer than the "button", and the new grip shape is better for most hands, being based on the SAA.

Yet Ruger maintained as much mechanical interchangability as possible: you can see the SBH hammer on my gun, and grip frames interchange too (so long as you swap the mainspring, mainspring pawl and keeper with "Old Vaquero" parts). So if you want a "Bisley New Vaquero" (or Bird's Head) just drop $200 at Brownell's or buy used bits.

The mid-frame Ruger SAs are damned fine guns.

 

[highlander 5]

I have a 45 Colt Blackhawk that I had a Bisley grip frame,trigger and hammer and it makes it a much easier pistol to shoot.I have a SBH in 44 mag at Mag Na Port waiting to be port and grip frame etc waiting to be fitted. You can get 45 Schofield ammo from Black Hills to shoot in a 45 Colt and if you reload the Schofield has better loading densities than the 45 Colt with the same weight bullets. OTOH a 357 rifle/pistol combo has it advantages as well rifle will give 200+ fps over pistol the rifles are usually quite compact and carry 10 rounds in the mag and 1 in the chamber recoil is nil.

 

[MCgunner]

Pic is kinda big, so I post the link. The grips I have on my .357 sure are comfy and conducive to great shooting, though they are non-traditional. Don't ask what they are, don't know, picked 'em up at a gun show. I like the feel and hand filling size. Even full power 180 grain loads are tame in this revolver. Might not like the look, but I sure like the feel. This is a working gun, after all, not a display model.

On the rifle question, I have a Rossi 92 .357 carbine, but they offered a .45 Colt. I believe Marlin's 94 is offered in .45 Colt and I know it's offered in .44 magnum.

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=36061&d=1140748446

 

[JN01]

One other possible consideration: the .45 seems to have a much better balance than the .357, at least to me.

 

[DouglasW]

You're stuck in a rut. Time to experience the joy of variety. Break out of your .38/.357 closet.

I went by the local fun store today and fondled a couple of New Blackhawks and New Vaqueros/50th Anniv in .357 and .45LC. The Blackhawk frames only seemed a 'tad' larger than the NV...and those large .45 holes sure looked interesting

The empty .45LC was noticably lighter than the empty .357, though I'm sure some of that is negated once fully loaded with 250gr bullets instead of 158gr in .357.

So two follow-up questions:
1. If I make the leap to 45LC, what are the pros/cons of the 4 5/8" vs. 5 1/2" barrels? I'm guessing only slight increases in velocity and sight radius for the longer barrel. Which do people prefer, and why?

2. Any disadvantages to the 45LC/45acp combo package (which looks to be about $40 more than the straight 45LC). Would the 45LC cylinder provide the same strength/accuracy, etc. as a dedicated 45LC New Model Blackhawk? I seem to remember hearing that the .22/.22mag bearcat combos had some accuracy issues...

Thanks.

 

[Leanwolf]

Douglas, given that you don't hunt and don't reload, I suggest you stick with a .357 Magnum. Easier to find ammo, plus you can shoot .38 Special ammo in it all day long for practice.

It'll handle whatever needs you have out in the boonies.

BTW, it is ".45 Colt," not ".45 Long Colt."

Good luck.

L.W.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

1. If I make the leap to 45LC, what are the pros/cons of the 4 5/8" vs. 5 1/2" barrels? I'm guessing only slight increases in velocity and sight radius for the longer barrel. Which do people prefer, and why?

I personally like the 5 1/2" barrel, but wouldn't cry if someone gave me a 4 5/* inch barrel to go along with it. I also have a 7 1/2" barrel and for most purposes that's too long.

2. Any disadvantages to the 45LC/45acp combo package (which looks to be about $40 more than the straight 45LC). Would the 45LC cylinder provide the same strength/accuracy, etc. as a dedicated 45LC New Model Blackhawk?

No disadvantage whatsoever.

 

[MCgunner]

1. If I make the leap to 45LC, what are the pros/cons of the 4 5/8" vs. 5 1/2" barrels? I'm guessing only slight increases in velocity and sight radius for the longer barrel. Which do people prefer, and why?

The hot .45 Colt stuff will show significant ballistic increases with barrel length. My 300 grain loads shoot about 850 ft lbs energy out of a 4 5/8" Blackhawk and about 1000 ft lbs energy out of a 7" contender. I like the 4 5/8" for woods bummin', but purely for hunting I think I'd get the longest barrel possible. The Bisley is available with 7 1/2". Just sorta depends on what you wanna do with it, but the 4 5/8" gun is nice to the eye and very handy to carry afield in a utility/backup role. That's what I like to carry in bear country and down at my place a lot where I might see a hog any old time. Most of my handgun hunting is done with a scoped TC Contender in .30-30 cause I like to cheat.

If you're going to get the new Vaquero and ain't going to be shooting the Blackhawk hot stuff, barrel length makes much less impact on ballistics. I don't recall chronographing my "light" load in the Contender, but I don't imagine it would make the difference with Unique the way it does with a heavy charge of 2400 behind that 300 grain bullet.

2. Any disadvantages to the 45LC/45acp combo package (which looks to be about $40 more than the straight 45LC). Would the 45LC cylinder provide the same strength/accuracy, etc. as a dedicated 45LC New Model Blackhawk? I seem to remember hearing that the .22/.22mag bearcat combos had some accuracy issues...

Far as I know, the ACP cylinder is just an add on to what is the .45 Colt Blackhawk. I would not expect any difference in the accuracy or otherwise of the .45 Colt, though I doubt the ACP produces really stellar accuracy. I don't reckon it'd be too bad, though. It's just sort of a way to shoot the gun when you can't afford the high dollar ammo or can't find it and Wallyworld always has .45ACP. Since I handload, I ain't interested.

 

[RoyJackson]

I do understand your lust for a SAA. I've got a real hankering for such a gun myself! I'm leaning toward a Schofield.

However, if the gun you decide on requires the hammer on an empty chamber, I'm not so sure that would be a good gun to pack. A standard "modern" revolver in .357 or .45LC might be a better choice.

Good luck with your decision!