the "most powerful"?

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Nicodemus38

Member
Joined
May 11, 2009
Messages
583
does the old standard loading for the Colt Walker still have the same oomph as they did?
60 grains bp with a .454-.457 diameter roundball. how many modern cartridges can do the same?
 
First, what's the wieght of that round ball? 130 - 140 grains?

Second, what's the Muzzle Velocity of that charge? I've read a whole lot of very different numbers.

Once you have a those, then we can tell the energy level. I'd bet the BB .38 Special +P FBI load (1000fps/350f/lbs) would be equal to it and any full .357 Magnum load would be well beyond it.

And then plenty of other rounds are way beyond those for simple muzzle energy.

William
 
Pretty sure it was a .44 caliber ball, and it weighed 141 grains. I don't know the velocity, but it wasn't very impressive by today's standards. .40 S&W or mild .357 Magnum way outclasses it, and with a far better projectile to boot. It might have been the most powerful handgun in the world at one point, but we have innovated and made far more powerful rounds in smaller packages.


I'd really like a percussion revolver to screw around on a range with sometime.
 
G&A did a ballistic jello test about 20 years ago. The velocity out of a Walker was close to 1200 FPS and the ball flattened somewhat and penetrated 10" or so. A 180gr 44 Mag at 1600 FPS penetrated 8" in the same jello block.
 
They shoot as strongly now as they did back in their day. Powder is just as powerful and lead just as heavy... :D

I got to shoot one last fall. He was running a little less than the full on 60 grain load and it had a kick that was impressive. I have no doubt that a full charge would have produced a recoil that compared to a .44 Magnum from a similar weight of gun.

It's hard to compare the recoil directly because I've found that black powder doesn't go off with the abrupt snap that smokeless does. Being a slower burn it produces more of a strong push than the snap that you get from smokeless.
 
The Walker Colt load was outclassed by 1873 when the first Colt Single Action Army revolvers rolled off the line. A 255 grain round-nosed lead bullet over 40 grains of black will exceed 1000 ft/sec out of a 7.5" barrel and only 50 to 75 ft/sec less out of a 5.25" barrel. And this was had out of a far easier-packing gun. Even the puny Government load, and the .44 Russian load for the Smith and Wesson guns carried a bit more momentum (though they had less energy.)

As for modern handgun rounds; the .357 Magnum will easily outclass the old Walker Colt. So will the .40 S&W in some 165 grain loads, most 155 grain loads, and all 135 grain loads. The .357 SIG in its standard loads will also meet or exceed the old Walker Colt. The 10mm Auto, the .41 Magnum, and .44 Magnum far exceed the Walker, and we'll not mention fire-breathing moose-stompers like the .454 Casull and the like.
 
My own experience is that 30 grains of FFFg and a 141 grain .454 round ball from a Remington New Army (weighing about 3 pounds) seems to recoil about as much as a mid range .357 from my GP-100.
But it's still only in .38 Special territory in terms of actual energy.

Recoil and noise don't equal "power".
 
sorry for my latenight caffeine deprived question, i was wondering what modern calibers loaded with a full powder charge and a roundball would equal the walker in power.

all the ones i can think of would be 454, 445 supermag, the linebaughs, 460, maybe 480 ruger, the 500 sw.
 
sorry for my latenight caffeine deprived question, i was wondering what modern calibers loaded with a full powder charge and a roundball would equal the walker in power.
Click to expand...

Smokeless is a whole different animal from BP. You can't just load up a cartridge with any smokeless powder and expect the gun to not blow up.
 
According to the chart in one of my old guns annual the Colt walker Replica loaded with a .440 bullet weighing 130grs and 65gr of FFFG Black Powder leaves the muzzle of its 9" barrel at 1,150 fps. Kind of 9mm territory if just comparing bullet weight and velocity but it does make a larger hole.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top