The colt .45
- Thread starter Barry the Bear
- Start date
- Status
Jim Watson
Member
.455 & .476 and 1909 vs 1906.
I recall, but do not still have, an article in The Handgunner, Ltd. about the Colt SA in .455 and .476, regular options for the British market. The author wondered how they got cartridges with .530" rims into the relatively small Colt cylinder. He enlisted a contact in the Rolls Royce tool room for precise measurements.
They found chambers slightly diverging from throat exits at the standard set out to a wider spacing at the breech to clear the rims. Unfortunately I recall no discussion of firing pin placement on the hammer or firing pin bushing placement in the frame.
In 1906 Frankford Arsenal specified and provided the cartridges to be used in .45 test pistols, the one for autos not enough different from .45 ACP to matter, and very close to the 1905 Colt .45 Rimless Smokeless except with heavier bullet. The round for prospective revolvers was the same except rimmed. (Not to be confused with the post-WWI Auto Rim.)
Which makes me wonder why FA tooled up for an all new round, with .45 1873 length, simultaneous extraction rim, and smokeless powder for the interim 1909 .45 revolver.
Why did they not go with the previously specified official revolver round? Is it known or knowable at this late date?
I have read a number of reports of Ruger .45 revolvers having to be altered to accept Starline "Moderm Schofield" cases. Just goes to show Ruger is not Colt... or S&W.
I recall, but do not still have, an article in The Handgunner, Ltd. about the Colt SA in .455 and .476, regular options for the British market. The author wondered how they got cartridges with .530" rims into the relatively small Colt cylinder. He enlisted a contact in the Rolls Royce tool room for precise measurements.
They found chambers slightly diverging from throat exits at the standard set out to a wider spacing at the breech to clear the rims. Unfortunately I recall no discussion of firing pin placement on the hammer or firing pin bushing placement in the frame.
In 1906 Frankford Arsenal specified and provided the cartridges to be used in .45 test pistols, the one for autos not enough different from .45 ACP to matter, and very close to the 1905 Colt .45 Rimless Smokeless except with heavier bullet. The round for prospective revolvers was the same except rimmed. (Not to be confused with the post-WWI Auto Rim.)
Which makes me wonder why FA tooled up for an all new round, with .45 1873 length, simultaneous extraction rim, and smokeless powder for the interim 1909 .45 revolver.
Why did they not go with the previously specified official revolver round? Is it known or knowable at this late date?
I have read a number of reports of Ruger .45 revolvers having to be altered to accept Starline "Moderm Schofield" cases. Just goes to show Ruger is not Colt... or S&W.
45 colt and 45
Wow, here is how it was done when I was boy growing up.
I am getting the 45--meant I was getting the commander 1911 or one of the full sizes.
I am getting the colt meant the 45 colt.
Sometimes the "Automatic" meant the 45 ACP or one of them.
I am getting the MAG or the 44 MAG meant the blackhawk. I always new by Dad's inflection.
So to this day! I say 45 colt for SAA Ruggers and 45 only for 1911s. I call my glocks by model number 36, 30, and 21.
Wow, here is how it was done when I was boy growing up.
I am getting the 45--meant I was getting the commander 1911 or one of the full sizes.
I am getting the colt meant the 45 colt.
Sometimes the "Automatic" meant the 45 ACP or one of them.
I am getting the MAG or the 44 MAG meant the blackhawk. I always new by Dad's inflection.
So to this day! I say 45 colt for SAA Ruggers and 45 only for 1911s. I call my glocks by model number 36, 30, and 21.
"Which makes me wonder why FA tooled up for an all new round, with .45 1873 length, simultaneous extraction rim, and smokeless powder for the interim 1909 .45 revolver."
I think the easy answer is that they didn't know it was interim. The hunt for a satisfactory auto pistol had by then been going on for 9 or 10 years and the end was not in sight. But while the gun guys on the boards were having fun playing with all sorts of neat futuristic hardware, the real Army had to look to getting guns to shoot people with if there was another war (and there always seems to be another war). The old SAA was obsolete (some would say it was obsolete before it was adopted); the .38 revolver had been a long drawn-out disaster; and the new pistol was somewhere in the future.
So, the idea was to adopt an available, reliable revolver and go with it, and that is what they did. Did they say, "Let's adopt something for a couple of years until the Model 1911 is adopted?" No, not any more than a car buyer today chooses to wait until the 2015 model because it will have more features. They adopted a perfectly good revolver they felt suitable for the indefinite future. That it was short-lived was something they could not have known or been sure of.
FWIW, when Colt and Savage were going down to the wire in the Army tests, and counting failures and broken parts, two Model 1909 revolvers used as controls paced the pistols round for round with NO failures except for two rounds that had no powder in them.
Jim
I think the easy answer is that they didn't know it was interim. The hunt for a satisfactory auto pistol had by then been going on for 9 or 10 years and the end was not in sight. But while the gun guys on the boards were having fun playing with all sorts of neat futuristic hardware, the real Army had to look to getting guns to shoot people with if there was another war (and there always seems to be another war). The old SAA was obsolete (some would say it was obsolete before it was adopted); the .38 revolver had been a long drawn-out disaster; and the new pistol was somewhere in the future.
So, the idea was to adopt an available, reliable revolver and go with it, and that is what they did. Did they say, "Let's adopt something for a couple of years until the Model 1911 is adopted?" No, not any more than a car buyer today chooses to wait until the 2015 model because it will have more features. They adopted a perfectly good revolver they felt suitable for the indefinite future. That it was short-lived was something they could not have known or been sure of.
FWIW, when Colt and Savage were going down to the wire in the Army tests, and counting failures and broken parts, two Model 1909 revolvers used as controls paced the pistols round for round with NO failures except for two rounds that had no powder in them.
Jim
At the risk of going backward here:
"A few years later the Army also adopted the S&W Schofield adapted #3 but in the caliber named 45 Schofield...The 45 Colt round would not fit in the Schofield and the 45 Schofield might fit in some Colts and maybe could function but not always reliably. We all agree on this."
Well we all don't. Those statements assume that there was a cartridge (made by/for S&W?) called the .45 Schofield, that preceded and differed in some significant way from the combination cartridge adopted and made by the Army. If there was, I can find no record of it. I know what COTW says, but no other source I can find mentions, pictures or cites any reliable source indicating the existence of a separate and distinct cartridge for the Schofield before FA production. The first production order for the Schofield length ammo was issued to FA in August, 1874, before the Army had revolvers for it.
The first Army tests of the Schofield system were carried out with altered No. 3 revolvers chambered for .44 S&W American. (I found one report that says S&W tested early .45 Schofields with cut down .45 Colt cartridges, which seems to make sense, but I found no confirmation of that statement.)
So, if someone can show documentation of the existence of a ".45 Schofield" which had too large a rim to fit in the SAA, etc., I would appreciate seeing it.
On the two Schofield brothers, my error and I apologize for that confusion.
Jim
"A few years later the Army also adopted the S&W Schofield adapted #3 but in the caliber named 45 Schofield...The 45 Colt round would not fit in the Schofield and the 45 Schofield might fit in some Colts and maybe could function but not always reliably. We all agree on this."
Well we all don't. Those statements assume that there was a cartridge (made by/for S&W?) called the .45 Schofield, that preceded and differed in some significant way from the combination cartridge adopted and made by the Army. If there was, I can find no record of it. I know what COTW says, but no other source I can find mentions, pictures or cites any reliable source indicating the existence of a separate and distinct cartridge for the Schofield before FA production. The first production order for the Schofield length ammo was issued to FA in August, 1874, before the Army had revolvers for it.
The first Army tests of the Schofield system were carried out with altered No. 3 revolvers chambered for .44 S&W American. (I found one report that says S&W tested early .45 Schofields with cut down .45 Colt cartridges, which seems to make sense, but I found no confirmation of that statement.)
So, if someone can show documentation of the existence of a ".45 Schofield" which had too large a rim to fit in the SAA, etc., I would appreciate seeing it.
On the two Schofield brothers, my error and I apologize for that confusion.
Jim
Jim Watson
Member
"I think the easy answer is that they didn't know it was interim."
I think they did know the 1909 was an interim solution, the Army had its mind made up that the auto was the way to go. They just didn't know that the interim was to be only 2 years. Had it been longer, we might have gone to France with revolvers to start with instead of as supplements to autos.
But my question remains, is it known why they devised a new cartridge when there was an official revolver round already specified from 1906?
I think they did know the 1909 was an interim solution, the Army had its mind made up that the auto was the way to go. They just didn't know that the interim was to be only 2 years. Had it been longer, we might have gone to France with revolvers to start with instead of as supplements to autos.
But my question remains, is it known why they devised a new cartridge when there was an official revolver round already specified from 1906?
tipoc
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,563
Jim K,
On the 45 Schofield. I think Roy Jinks and Charles Pate covered that. The military liked the #3 as improved on by Schofield but they wanted it in 45 Colt (long Colt). S&W said "no way Jose" for reasons that Jinks, Pate and others cover and were discussed above. So the "45 Schofield" round was developed.
Several sources, some linked to already in this thread, have said that the round was developed with the S&W gun in mind and worked well from it but had trouble firing from the Colt SAA particularly once it was fouled from black powder or dirty, etc.
These troubles led apparently to the 45 Colt Government as an attempt at a solution.
This led to at least 3 45 caliber revolver rounds in use by the U.S. military in the 1880s not counting the British rounds floating around.
A reprint of the old 1899 Winchester ammo catalog I have on hand shows three 45 caliber revolver rounds that they offer, the 45 Webley, the familiar Colt and the "45 S&W" which it describes as "Adapted to the S&W Revolver, Schofield Pattern".
tipoc
On the 45 Schofield. I think Roy Jinks and Charles Pate covered that. The military liked the #3 as improved on by Schofield but they wanted it in 45 Colt (long Colt). S&W said "no way Jose" for reasons that Jinks, Pate and others cover and were discussed above. So the "45 Schofield" round was developed.
Several sources, some linked to already in this thread, have said that the round was developed with the S&W gun in mind and worked well from it but had trouble firing from the Colt SAA particularly once it was fouled from black powder or dirty, etc.
These troubles led apparently to the 45 Colt Government as an attempt at a solution.
This led to at least 3 45 caliber revolver rounds in use by the U.S. military in the 1880s not counting the British rounds floating around.
A reprint of the old 1899 Winchester ammo catalog I have on hand shows three 45 caliber revolver rounds that they offer, the 45 Webley, the familiar Colt and the "45 S&W" which it describes as "Adapted to the S&W Revolver, Schofield Pattern".
tipoc
Last edited:
JRH6856
Member
Since we are into old catalogs, the 1897 Sears & Roebuck Consumer Guide (Catalog), page 581 lists only one (under "Center Fire Cartridges for Target and Sporting Rifles":
The engraved picture appears to be of the long cartridge.
The only .45 caliber revolvers listed are on page 574: "Colt's Single Action Army, Frontier and Target Revolvers" ($12.95), and "Colt's Army Double Action Revolver" ($13.75).
.45 Colt's
No, 8327. Colt's
Army and D.A.
revolvers, 45
caliber, center
fire. Per box of
50, 84c. Per 100,
$1.57; wt. 3¼
lbs. per box.
No, 8327. Colt's
Army and D.A.
revolvers, 45
caliber, center
fire. Per box of
50, 84c. Per 100,
$1.57; wt. 3¼
lbs. per box.
The engraved picture appears to be of the long cartridge.
The only .45 caliber revolvers listed are on page 574: "Colt's Single Action Army, Frontier and Target Revolvers" ($12.95), and "Colt's Army Double Action Revolver" ($13.75).
Let's take one question at a time.
Jim Watson asked, "But my question remains, is it known why they devised a new cartridge when there was an official revolver round already specified from 1906?"
The 1906 round was originally intended for testing revolvers for the 1906 trials, which were open to both revolvers and auto pistols. It was essentially the .45 Government with a slightly larger rim and a jacketed bullet. The drawing spec showed a rim diameter of .533", but one source indicates specimens as small as .525". FA made 10k rounds and UMC made 5k. There was no further production, but presumably the tooling would have still been available in 1909. I can find no indication that the Model 1906 round was intended or required to be usable in the SAA.
The reason for the 1909 cartridge was (AFAIK) that because of its small rim, the .45 Colt cartridge "jumped" the extractor and hung up the gun. That could certainly happen with the .45 Government, but was less likely with the commercial .45 Colt. (There was no government .45 Colt and had not been since 1874 or 1875.) For that reason, the Model 1909 cartridge had a larger rim (.536"-.538").
Note that the Model 1909 revolver was not "chambered" for the Model 1909 cartridge. It was sold by Colt as chambered for .45 Colt; the government round was ISSUED FOR and USED IN the revolver, but its original chambering was .45 Colt.
To try to see if the jamming concern was valid, I deliberately tried to get both a .45 Colt and a .45 Government to jump the extractor of a Model 1909 revolver. It took me over 15 minutes in each case to get the jam fixed and the gun back in operation, so the Army's concern was very valid. In fairness, getting the .45 Colt to jam was harder than to get the .45 Government to miss the extractor.
Jim
Jim Watson asked, "But my question remains, is it known why they devised a new cartridge when there was an official revolver round already specified from 1906?"
The 1906 round was originally intended for testing revolvers for the 1906 trials, which were open to both revolvers and auto pistols. It was essentially the .45 Government with a slightly larger rim and a jacketed bullet. The drawing spec showed a rim diameter of .533", but one source indicates specimens as small as .525". FA made 10k rounds and UMC made 5k. There was no further production, but presumably the tooling would have still been available in 1909. I can find no indication that the Model 1906 round was intended or required to be usable in the SAA.
The reason for the 1909 cartridge was (AFAIK) that because of its small rim, the .45 Colt cartridge "jumped" the extractor and hung up the gun. That could certainly happen with the .45 Government, but was less likely with the commercial .45 Colt. (There was no government .45 Colt and had not been since 1874 or 1875.) For that reason, the Model 1909 cartridge had a larger rim (.536"-.538").
Note that the Model 1909 revolver was not "chambered" for the Model 1909 cartridge. It was sold by Colt as chambered for .45 Colt; the government round was ISSUED FOR and USED IN the revolver, but its original chambering was .45 Colt.
To try to see if the jamming concern was valid, I deliberately tried to get both a .45 Colt and a .45 Government to jump the extractor of a Model 1909 revolver. It took me over 15 minutes in each case to get the jam fixed and the gun back in operation, so the Army's concern was very valid. In fairness, getting the .45 Colt to jam was harder than to get the .45 Government to miss the extractor.
Jim
OK, tipoc, I am still not clear on this so-called .45 Schofield or .45 S&W or whatever it was that supposedly came out BEFORE the Schofield was adopted and FA began production of a common cartridge for both guns.
I can find no evidence that such a cartridge existed. If S&W had .45 cartridges for testing of the Schofield, other than those provided by the government from FA, I can find no record of it. As I said, one source says S&W used cut down .45 Colt cases, but I can find no confirmation. While the Schofield was in service, there was no commercial production of ammo for it; there was no need. AFTER Schofield revolvers were sold off, several companies made ammo, but that was later.
So, AFAIK, there was no ".45 S&W" or ".45 Schofield" cartridge as distinct from the FA-made ".45 Government" and the later commercial cartridges were identical with the FA round. All, of course, would fire in the SAA Colt. .45 S&W, .45 Schofield, .45 Government, were all the same cartridge.
I am not clear on the statement that "the round was developed with the S&W gun in mind and worked well from it but had trouble firing from the Colt SAA particularly once it was fouled from black powder or dirty, etc."
The round was developed by the Army at Frankford Arsenal as a common cartridge for both revolvers. I have not seen any information that it "had trouble" firing from the SAA. It was the same diameter as the .45 Colt and would have no more "trouble" than a .38 Special in a .357 Magnum chamber. In later civilian use, the short case might have left residue that would prevent the longer case from seating, but that would not have been a problem for the Army, as they issued ONLY the .45 Government, not the .45 Colt, from 1874/5 to the end of the SAA era.
Jim
I can find no evidence that such a cartridge existed. If S&W had .45 cartridges for testing of the Schofield, other than those provided by the government from FA, I can find no record of it. As I said, one source says S&W used cut down .45 Colt cases, but I can find no confirmation. While the Schofield was in service, there was no commercial production of ammo for it; there was no need. AFTER Schofield revolvers were sold off, several companies made ammo, but that was later.
So, AFAIK, there was no ".45 S&W" or ".45 Schofield" cartridge as distinct from the FA-made ".45 Government" and the later commercial cartridges were identical with the FA round. All, of course, would fire in the SAA Colt. .45 S&W, .45 Schofield, .45 Government, were all the same cartridge.
I am not clear on the statement that "the round was developed with the S&W gun in mind and worked well from it but had trouble firing from the Colt SAA particularly once it was fouled from black powder or dirty, etc."
The round was developed by the Army at Frankford Arsenal as a common cartridge for both revolvers. I have not seen any information that it "had trouble" firing from the SAA. It was the same diameter as the .45 Colt and would have no more "trouble" than a .38 Special in a .357 Magnum chamber. In later civilian use, the short case might have left residue that would prevent the longer case from seating, but that would not have been a problem for the Army, as they issued ONLY the .45 Government, not the .45 Colt, from 1874/5 to the end of the SAA era.
Jim
tipoc
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,563
Jim K.
On the origins of the 45 Schofield/45 S&W round.
Roy Jinks in his work "History of Smith and Wesson", Charles Pate in his work on U.S. service revolvers, and Supica and Nahas in the Standard Catalog all tell the same story on the origins of the round. On page 98 of the Third Edition of the Catalog they state that beginning in 1871 Schofield and S&W were working to improve the #3 for sale to the U.S. Army. As a part of this the Army wanted the gun in 45 Colt but...
"S&W demurred, noting that the rim of the 45 Colt was inadequate for positive extraction in the S&W design,...Instead, S&W offered to redesign the military cartridge to a .45 caliber round that would function in both types of revolvers."
The Army accepted this and ordered the guns and adopted the ammo as well.
Further in Michael Bussard's 3rd edition of the "Ammo Encyclopedia" he states on page 764;
"In 1875, the U.S. Army adopted the .45 Colt cartridge...along with the .45 Schofield, .45 S&W American and the .45 Colt Government (an unsuccessful compromise cartridge to fit all)."
On page 765 he treats the 45 Schofield and the 45 S&W as the same cartridge.
These are discussed in the section of his book on "Centerfire Military Handgun-Obsolete"
Barnes on page 319 of the 10th edition of his "Cartridges of the World" on the 45 Colt Government says:
"This is something of a bastardized cartridge, combining the length of the S&W Schofield revolver round with the rim of the Colt SAA round."
So Jinks, Pate, Barnes, Supica and Nahas, and Bussard all state similar origins for the 45 Schofield round and also identify a separate .45 Colt Government round. 3 separate cartridges.
I said this earlier that the Schofield round was developed by S&W as a part of the Army adopting the gun and a condition of it. The round did not appear before the gun did.
Barnes and Skinner state on page 319:
"It seems likely that some early 45 Colt SAAs would not have chambered the Schofield ammunition, even when the gun was clean."
Barnes and Skinner maintain that the .45 Government round (which was developed to work in both the Colt SAA and Schofield) had trouble in the Schofield:
"...the Schofield does not function as dependably using the smaller rimmed 45 Colt Government cases: incautious manipulation or a somewhat worn gun can result in the extractor slipping past the rim...The gun cannot then be closed."
They also mention the potential problems if the gun is fouled by black powder or dirt.
So there are several sources here that state there were 3 distinct rounds. The 45 Colt, the 45 Schofield/45 S&W American and the .45 Colt Government. The latter was developed by the military as a stopgap because the Colt round would not fit in the Schofield and the Schofield round had trouble in the Colt. Has the S&W round worked well from the Colt SAA there would have been no impetus to develop the .45 Government.
tipoc
On the origins of the 45 Schofield/45 S&W round.
Roy Jinks in his work "History of Smith and Wesson", Charles Pate in his work on U.S. service revolvers, and Supica and Nahas in the Standard Catalog all tell the same story on the origins of the round. On page 98 of the Third Edition of the Catalog they state that beginning in 1871 Schofield and S&W were working to improve the #3 for sale to the U.S. Army. As a part of this the Army wanted the gun in 45 Colt but...
"S&W demurred, noting that the rim of the 45 Colt was inadequate for positive extraction in the S&W design,...Instead, S&W offered to redesign the military cartridge to a .45 caliber round that would function in both types of revolvers."
The Army accepted this and ordered the guns and adopted the ammo as well.
Further in Michael Bussard's 3rd edition of the "Ammo Encyclopedia" he states on page 764;
"In 1875, the U.S. Army adopted the .45 Colt cartridge...along with the .45 Schofield, .45 S&W American and the .45 Colt Government (an unsuccessful compromise cartridge to fit all)."
On page 765 he treats the 45 Schofield and the 45 S&W as the same cartridge.
These are discussed in the section of his book on "Centerfire Military Handgun-Obsolete"
Barnes on page 319 of the 10th edition of his "Cartridges of the World" on the 45 Colt Government says:
"This is something of a bastardized cartridge, combining the length of the S&W Schofield revolver round with the rim of the Colt SAA round."
So Jinks, Pate, Barnes, Supica and Nahas, and Bussard all state similar origins for the 45 Schofield round and also identify a separate .45 Colt Government round. 3 separate cartridges.
I said this earlier that the Schofield round was developed by S&W as a part of the Army adopting the gun and a condition of it. The round did not appear before the gun did.
Barnes and Skinner state on page 319:
"It seems likely that some early 45 Colt SAAs would not have chambered the Schofield ammunition, even when the gun was clean."
Barnes and Skinner maintain that the .45 Government round (which was developed to work in both the Colt SAA and Schofield) had trouble in the Schofield:
"...the Schofield does not function as dependably using the smaller rimmed 45 Colt Government cases: incautious manipulation or a somewhat worn gun can result in the extractor slipping past the rim...The gun cannot then be closed."
They also mention the potential problems if the gun is fouled by black powder or dirt.
So there are several sources here that state there were 3 distinct rounds. The 45 Colt, the 45 Schofield/45 S&W American and the .45 Colt Government. The latter was developed by the military as a stopgap because the Colt round would not fit in the Schofield and the Schofield round had trouble in the Colt. Has the S&W round worked well from the Colt SAA there would have been no impetus to develop the .45 Government.
tipoc
Jim Watson
Member
J.K., I conclude that the likely reason for the .45 1909 was that it was easier for the Army to have FA tool up for a new cartridge - same as .45 1873 with larger rim for simultaneous extraction - than it was to get Colt to deliver New Service revolvers for the .45 1906 that had been produced only for trials. That let them use off the shelf guns.
Still have to wonder, though. We had a guy shooting a New Service .38-40 at IDPA last week. Extraction and ejection were normal with a cartridge that fits the SAA.
Seems FA could have made 1909 cases with rims larger than 1873 but still usable in SAA.
Which is what we are told is the case with modern drawn brass .45 Colt.
But I don't know anybody who routinely shoots a DA .45 Colt who can comment on its reliability.
Still have to wonder, though. We had a guy shooting a New Service .38-40 at IDPA last week. Extraction and ejection were normal with a cartridge that fits the SAA.
Seems FA could have made 1909 cases with rims larger than 1873 but still usable in SAA.
Which is what we are told is the case with modern drawn brass .45 Colt.
But I don't know anybody who routinely shoots a DA .45 Colt who can comment on its reliability.
tipoc
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,563
Jim K.,
Here is a link to a discussion of this subject and pics of the 45 Colt, 45 Schofield/.45 S&W, and the .45 Government. The pics here show rounds manufactured from Frankford Arsenal.
Also some nice pics of the balloon head brass cases of the 45 Colt.
There are also pics of the later 1909 45 rounds with names and dates of manufacture which I believe can be helpful to us.
The link is from the Colt Forum...
http://www.coltforum.com/forums/colt-revolvers/63694-colt-45-a.html
The take in this discussion is that the early "45 Government" of the 1870s was essentially the Schofield round. That though contradicts the reports that I quoted from above.
tipoc
Here is a link to a discussion of this subject and pics of the 45 Colt, 45 Schofield/.45 S&W, and the .45 Government. The pics here show rounds manufactured from Frankford Arsenal.
Also some nice pics of the balloon head brass cases of the 45 Colt.
There are also pics of the later 1909 45 rounds with names and dates of manufacture which I believe can be helpful to us.
The link is from the Colt Forum...
http://www.coltforum.com/forums/colt-revolvers/63694-colt-45-a.html
The take in this discussion is that the early "45 Government" of the 1870s was essentially the Schofield round. That though contradicts the reports that I quoted from above.
tipoc
- Status
