Rossi 45 Colt - is it Long Colt?

[CyberRon]

My gun club is raffling off a Rossi Ranch Hand in .45 Colt caliber. I thought this was a .45 Long Colt for which I have brass and dies (for my Raging Bull .454 Casull).

I decided to check at the Rossi site for clarification, and discovered they have models for the Ranch Hand in 45 LC (model RH92-57203) and 45 Colt (model RH92-57121).

Check the site at: http://www.rossiusa.com/product-list.cfm?category=17

So now I am confused again - especially after your thread on .45 Colt vs .45 Long Colt declaring them the same.

What's the difference?

 

[Hondo 60]

Technically, there's no such thing as "Long Colt"
The actual designation is 45 Colt.

So yes, this is what some call 45 Long Colt
Not sure why one say 45LC & the other just says 45 Colt

 

[1KPerDay]

It's the same caliber. Rossi mistakenly calls one 45 Colt and one 45 LC. Must have been a different guy running the web that day. It appears that one is case hardened and one is blued.

The Ranch Hand is available in three popular pistol rounds- .38 Spl./.357 Mag., .44 Mag. and .45 Colt.

 

[PapaG]

Thanks to our friends from the south and the advertising world we have two new terms (well, relatively newly applied) in more common use...Long Colt, which is next to impossible to find in any loading manual over five years old but which was infrequently used for quite a while...and the .410 3" Magnum which, I believe, was always just the 3" .410 or the .410 3" Express (Remington) until Taurus started calling their Judge with the 3" chamber a 3" magnum.
I bet we could have lots of fun looking at how the firearms language has changed and changed again over the years.

 

[Lost Sheep]

When the 45 Colt cartridge was developed there was only one name. When Smith & Wesson introduced their break-top 45 revolver, the cylinder was shorter than the Colt and they dubbed their cartridge the 45 Schofield.

Ultimately, the acceptance of the Schofield revolver into the military inventory led to logistical problems in the supply chain. The 45 Colt revolvers could chamber and fire the 45 Schofield ammunition, but not the other way around.

Same thing with 44 Special and 44 Russian.

The 45 Colt was sometimes called the Long Colt to distinguish it from the Schofield cartridge. Because the 45 Schofield is rarely found nowadays, and any ammunition you do find may be worth more as a collector's item than to shoot with, THAT distinction has become academic. Nowadays, people often use the 45 Long Colt to distinguish the cartridge from the (very much shorter) 45 ACP.

Adding to the confusion is the 38 Long Colt, which is a name the Colt officially used, and the fact that some ammunition manufacturers eventually caved in to the common practice and started labeling their ammo boxes with the .45 Long Colt name.

Just remember this. The 45 Colt chamber will take the 45 Schofield cartridge (though it is rare to find any) and the 45 Colt IS the 45 Long Colt in every way.

Read more here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.45_Colt

Bottom line; 45 Colt and 45 Long Colt are the same cartridge.

 

[CraigC]

Actually, .45Schofield is really a nickname, much like "Long Colt". Technically, it is the .45S&W. It has a larger rim but shorter length and sometimes that larger rim caused problems in the Colt pistols. Since the Army issued both sixguns they consolidated and produced the .45Gov't, which had the Colt's smaller rim but the S&W's shorter length. It was this cartridge that originated the perceived need for "Long Colt". Even though the cartridge's official name, at Colt and as registered at SAAMI, is .45Colt. The .45Gov't is long defunct, so much so that most shooters have never even heard of it. Still, some folks cling to the misnomer, Long Colt due to a perceived need to differentiate it from the .45ACP. Personally, I do not feel compelled to use incorrect terminology so that the countermonkey at the local gunshop knows what I mean. Which is moot because I don't buy .45Colt ammo anyway, I handload it.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

All the good information above is correct.

45 Colt = 45 Long Colt = 45 LC
.45 Smith & Wesson = 45 Schofield = 45 S&W Schofield

Just as a side note, the S&W .460 Magnum revolver can safely fire the 45 S&W, 45 Colt, 454 Casull as well as the .460 S&W Magnum rounds.

 

[CyberRon]

Firing 45 colt in 454 Casull bad?

I have a Taurus Raging Bull in .454 Casull. Taurus says that it will safely fire the .45 Colt (or LC).

When I picked it up at the gun store, there was some discussion from some patrons that it was never a good idea to fire a shorter round in a gun. Said the same problem exists with firing .38 Special in a .357 Mag revolver.

Is any of this true? Could I "ruin" my gun by using .45 Colt in the gun? I thought the idea was to practice with the lighter loads of the shorter caliber to save money and recoil wear and tear.

The response was to always use the longer brass and just "download" the charge?

Does any of this make sense or is it all some kind of hooey?

PS I don't hunt snipes or left-handed smoke shifters.
Ron

 

[murf]

the shorter rounds are used all the time. a crud ring (burned powder residue) will develop in the cylinder just in front of the shorter cartridge. if you don't first clean out the ring, loading the longer cartridge (454 casull) on top of the ring will cause extraction problems.

murf

 

[CyberRon]

Crud ring - damaging - permanent?

Is this the only thing that happens? Does it produce extra wear and tear on the revolver cylinder beyond normal wear (using longer rounds)?

Wouldn't regular cleaning after shooting prevent this build-up, or does this require special attention and more thorough cleaning?

I clean my gun right at the range with a bore snake and gun oil. The bore snake has a bronze brush built in. Is this adequate to prevent this problem?

Ron

 

[Waywatcher]

I doubt the bore snake will do the job. Crud ring is niether damaging nor permanent.

I use a brush one size bigger than normal to clean revolver chambers. For example, a .357 magnum cartridge wall should be about 0.379". I used to use a bronze .40 cal brush. For .45, I would look for a .475/.480 brush to clean the chambers.

Recently I bought one of the Nylon multi-cal brushes, the looks a bit like a christmas tree, and is supposed to clean 9mm all the way to 45. I find it works great for .357 bores, chambers, .40 bores and chambers, and also .223 chambers!

 

[orionengnr]

Same thing.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Does it produce extra wear and tear on the revolver cylinder beyond normal wear (using longer rounds)?

If anything using the lighter loads will cause LESS wear because of the lower pressures. There are more .38 Special rounds fired in .357 Magnum revolvers each year than magnum ammo. There's no reason at all not to fire .45 colt rounds in your 454 Casull. Shoot away and clean the cylinder with a bronze brush when you're done.

 

[FROGO207]

I do it all the time with several calibers and have NEVER had trouble as long as I really clean the cylinders before using the longer rounds. As you can see there are a lot of people that think that they know more than you do and often prove otherwise sadly. In my 357 it is a three hundred rounds 38 SPL to six 357 rounds ratio most range trips.

 

[CyberRon]

Thank you everyone for your input. I thought that was the case but you just never know - learn something new every day!

My next pistol will probably be a .357 Mag revolver - possibly the Ruger SP101 in .357 cal. I have the new SP 101 in .22 LR and like it a lot! The only downside is the stiffer trigger pull. It seems stiffer than my Raging Bull (or any other Taurus I have tried). Still, I like Ruger and have a second hand Mark II I picked up in '86 and it has served me well. But that stiff trigger...

Why is it that Ruger revolvers have such stiff trigger pulls? I'm hoping it breaks in a bit as I use it. Even cocking it (Single Action) was troublesome for my two grandsons - 9 & 10. The older struggled after about 5 shots, while the younger couldn't even pull the hammer back.

 

[Jim Watson]

The main reason is that rimfires require a harder blow for reliable ignition than a centerfire.

I guess you could also say that Rugers are rougher made than S&Ws and need more spring to overcome the friction.