The New-Age .45 Colt - by Max Prasac
- Thread starter CraigC
- Start date
- Status
USSR
Member
Actually, no need to use that heavy of a bullet at that velocity/pressure level. I have shot deer with both the .357 Magnum and the .45 Colt loaded with 265gr SWCHP's at 1100fps, and the .45 Colt is heads above the .357 Magnum for any game found East of the Rockies.
Don
OP
OP
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
That depends on the game being hunted. Some folks, Max in particular, are hunting game a good bit larger and more heavily constructed than deer. Those 335-360gr bullets are going to be the preferred medicine for game like moose, buffalo or bigger. The 335's are not a bad choice for big hogs and elk sized game either, as there's never such thing as too much penetration.
200Apples
Mojave Lever Crew
.
Great stuff!
Another well-written, informative and experienced perspective on a great revolver and an even-greater round.
What is particularly appealing about this combination is that it is off-the-shelf!
Great stuff!
Another well-written, informative and experienced perspective on a great revolver and an even-greater round.
What is particularly appealing about this combination is that it is off-the-shelf!
horsemen61
Member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2011
- Messages
- 6,755
335 grains at over 1300 fps damn that's moving I like the old 45 colt myself
BullRunBear
Member
CraigC, Thanks for posting the link. That is a great article. Like Kruff, I don't hunt anymore and am happy with my Unique loads. But if I did hunt, that story would have me thinking seriously about the Ruger Bisley and leather combo.
Jeff
Jeff
huntsman
Member
Me likey, killing deer with my .45C Blackhawk is at the top of my Bucket List.
ArchAngelCD
Member.
I always choose a 45 Colt for woods carry over any .357 Magnum I own. Big and slow has worked well for centuries.
Good read, thank you.
Good read, thank you.
1KPerDay
Member
If anyone here knows him tell him it's "to err" not "to ere."
He is a member here. Bet he will be along at some point.
I actually just ordered that same Williams 5.5 SS Bisley yesterday after talking to a smith and hearing how much he wanted to cut down my Bisley from 7.5 to 5.5. I had been fighting the urge to order one for quite awhile, and that was the straw that broke the camel's back. Buds had it for just under $600 which seemed like a good deal.
I actually just ordered that same Williams 5.5 SS Bisley yesterday after talking to a smith and hearing how much he wanted to cut down my Bisley from 7.5 to 5.5. I had been fighting the urge to order one for quite awhile, and that was the straw that broke the camel's back. Buds had it for just under $600 which seemed like a good deal.
OP
OP
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
Yeah, you need to fire that worthless derelict!
ArchAngelCD
Member.
I enjoyed the article MaxP, thank you. I'm a huge 45 Colt fan as well as the 45-70 but at lower pressures suitable for a Trapdoor. A man is well armed with a 45-70 in his hand and a 45 Colt on his belt. (or across his chest)
USSR
Member
Knowing that the "Old-Age" .45 Colt created in 1873 with a 255gr RNFP bullet at 900+fps was designed purposely to be able to penetrate a horse at 100 yards, I would have zero hesitation taking on a moose or Elk with my 270gr SWC at 1100fps. You can say a lot of things about the .45 Colt, but lack of penetration with any 255+gr bullet traveling at 1000+fps or more is not one of them.
Don
Don
In theory, Don. You still need a good bullet with a good nose profile and a hard enough alloy that won't distort but isn't too hard to be brittle. Lack of penetration is a function of the bullet, not the caliber. Have you used your 270 grain load on elk or moose? How well did it do? I don't use semi wadcutters any more as the meplat is typically small, limiting wound channel size. The whole point of the article was to emphasize that the .45 Colt can be a whole lot more than the 14,000 psi iteration. I have tested modern low-pressure loads from Grizzly Cartridge and Garrett Cartridge that both feature a much better bullet than some mass produced round nose flat-point (it sounds contradictory!) bullets (that are typically soft), and they did okay, but I wouldn't use them on anything really big. I would opt for a heavier bullet (not necessarily with more velocity), but heavy weight is your friend.
OP
OP
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
The old wives tale about the original .45Colt being designed as a horse killer shouldn't really be taken as gospel. We've learned a lot since 1873 and I'm sure that few today would choose a 250gr swaged bullet at 900fps for 1000lb critters. Sure, a 270gr SWC is quite capable but when the critters get big and the investment in hunting them goes up exponentially, I'd want more. Fact of the matter is, the heavyweight LBT's are a better tool for the job. The WFN/WLN designs have larger meplats for larger wound channels and their heavier weight coupled with a superior nose shape makes for very deep, straight penetration. Depending on bullet hardness, a heavy LBT might yield double the penetration of your typical 270gr SWC. On bigger critters, it DOES make a difference.
Risky buisness
Member
45 colt
ok Max, great article by the way, here's my question, by the way, I have taken elk with my .45 Colt, 270~ grn Lyman Keith type gas check @ 1100 fps, broadside at 65 or so yards. DRT, performance was stellar. You mention a 'better type nose configuration than that of the SWGC, what do you like? Im iffy on your comment regarding meplat too, the SWGC I shoot is, within 3/16 or so of the nose, .452 diameter same as the wide flat I have shot previously, Im not trying to roast ya here, Im curious what you believe to be superior and for what reason, thanks,,,, risky
ok Max, great article by the way, here's my question, by the way, I have taken elk with my .45 Colt, 270~ grn Lyman Keith type gas check @ 1100 fps, broadside at 65 or so yards. DRT, performance was stellar. You mention a 'better type nose configuration than that of the SWGC, what do you like? Im iffy on your comment regarding meplat too, the SWGC I shoot is, within 3/16 or so of the nose, .452 diameter same as the wide flat I have shot previously, Im not trying to roast ya here, Im curious what you believe to be superior and for what reason, thanks,,,, risky
The reason I have strayed from semi wadcutters is not a matter of penetration, but rather the smallish meplat -- particularly a real Keith. I prefer real LBT bullets, particularly the WFN. It simply makes a bigger hole all things being equal. I know they are often derided for their long range stability, but I handgun hunt to get close. Even then, I have never seen WFNs not fly well out to 100 yards anyhow. I like LFNs to a lesser extent, even though they sometimes go deeper, the bigger meplat of the WFN leaves a bigger impression (literally and figuratively speaking). I know semi wadcutters work and in fact one of the greatest attributes of the real Keith (you must draw this distinction as there are many imitators) was accuracy. Still no replacement for placement. Not suggesting they don't work, I just feel there is a better mousetrap. Will it matter on deer-sized game? Not really. In fact, you need to step up in game size considerably to actually see the differences IMHO.
BCRider
Member
As rcmodel pointed out to me in a thread some time back asking about reduced .44Mag "plinking" loads the 240gn LRNFP bullets I was shooting at "only" 1100 fps would past cleanly from stem to stern through a typical horse.
So 335gn at 1300 is nothing short of a big bear and moose load from where I'm sitting. A punch right through and leave a big exit wound sort of load.
So 335gn at 1300 is nothing short of a big bear and moose load from where I'm sitting. A punch right through and leave a big exit wound sort of load.
35 Whelen
Member
Great write up, Max and a beautiful revolver.
Who was it that said there is no such thing as "deader"?
I wish I could speak from experience with regards to WFN vs. SWC, but I've only take game with SWC's. Every head of game shot with the latter assumed ambient body temperature in short order, so I reckon I'll stick with the SWC. This argument, or rather discussion is no different than the .270 vs. 280 vs. 30-06 argument. Given properly constructed bullets of similar sectional density striking at similar velocites knifing through the lungs of a bull elk, the bull will die regardless of the caliber used. The .30 caliber bullet will most likely make a larger hole, but a hole through the lungs is a hole through the lungs.
Regarding the 45 Colt, it is to me a fascinating cartridge for which to load. One can load a 285 gr. cast SWC a smidge over 1000 fps while staying within 14,000 psi. Jump pressures up to 20k or so for your New Vaquero and you can realize around 1100 fps with the same bullet. Like someone else said, loads such as this will handle most anything a fella will chase with a handgun.
35W
Who was it that said there is no such thing as "deader"?
I wish I could speak from experience with regards to WFN vs. SWC, but I've only take game with SWC's. Every head of game shot with the latter assumed ambient body temperature in short order, so I reckon I'll stick with the SWC. This argument, or rather discussion is no different than the .270 vs. 280 vs. 30-06 argument. Given properly constructed bullets of similar sectional density striking at similar velocites knifing through the lungs of a bull elk, the bull will die regardless of the caliber used. The .30 caliber bullet will most likely make a larger hole, but a hole through the lungs is a hole through the lungs.
Regarding the 45 Colt, it is to me a fascinating cartridge for which to load. One can load a 285 gr. cast SWC a smidge over 1000 fps while staying within 14,000 psi. Jump pressures up to 20k or so for your New Vaquero and you can realize around 1100 fps with the same bullet. Like someone else said, loads such as this will handle most anything a fella will chase with a handgun.
35W
- Status
