Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns 44 Magnum or 45 Colt. Which one would you pick?

Not really, the path is quite clear. He did start with the .45 and the guns weren't strong enough for what he was trying to accomplish. It couldn't have happened any other way.

The large frame Ruger .45 did not come about because Ruger wanted to build a stronger .45 to explore the cartridge's potential. It came about because when the .45 debuted, they were only two years from consolidating all Blackhawks into the large New Model frame.

OK but Elmer still needed a stronger built gun for what he was trying to do. I thought SaW were the ones he worked with in the beginning.

It really makes no difference to me. They both do the job. I like my 45 Colt Blackhawk and have no plans to add a 44 Mag to my small collection but would love to play with a 44 Special, maybe in a flat top. I still kick myself for selling my Charter Arms target bulldog in 44 Special. One of the few double actions I could shoot well.

In reality i can load the 45 Colt down for can killing or use my small herd of 45 Auto Rim to duplicate 44 Sol loads. Its all fun.

FWIW, if any one has a 1917 Colt or a 45 New Service lying around, please show where at all it has less meat than a SAA or S&W in 44 Special from the same period...also check the bolt notches, where more than a few 44 Specials in SAA were ruined using his loads. Compare the notch location of those guns to the New Service, then compare it to the Smith.

Elmer did what he did for he himself alone "wanted".

His primary reason for going to the 44 Special was shooting at long range and not for killing power alone.

I can pretty much guarantee he would scoff at the LBT WFN's and WLN's because he had already ditched the concept.

He hated the New Service because the gun and grip did not fit him; he liked the size and fit of the SAA and the N frame Smith. he also felt (incorrectly) that the triple lock and ejector shroud and foreward lock of the Smith guns made them stronger.

Another FWIW, the New Service frame is still the largest framed revolver produced by Colt....

If anyone wants to know, the 1917 Colt will eat +P+ all day long.

[quote=Dirtfarmer]Non-handloader, I'd say .44 mag.

For Loonies, the .45 Colt offers a lot. It's my pick of the two and I have both.

I took a .44 three screw SBH, had Jim Stroh line bore to .45 Colt, fit a 6" Shilen barrel, build custom sights, fit a long ejector. I did a trigger stop, tweaked the trigger to near perfection.

DF


DF, that came out really nice.

It's a keeper, for sure.

DF

my choice:



1873 Colt Series 3 Manufacture by Colt





45 LC

The bearing surface of the 45 Colt is approximately 15% more than the bearing surface of the 44 mag, thus the Colt 45 is acting against more friction with the contact of the interior of the bore than the 44 mag. How much does that off-set the 10% larger surface area for pressure to act on of the rear of the 45 Colt bullet?

The New Service is big but it's deceiving. Due to their heat treatment, or lack thereof, they're not suitable for loads exceeding that of .45ACP.

Keith never blew a .44Spl. Pure myth.


"His primary reason for going to the 44 Special was shooting at long range and not for killing power alone."
BS. He was very clear why he went to the .44Spl.

They had the same lack of heat treatment as the 44's of the era...plus there was more meat and no bolt notch directly above the cylinder, even in 45 Colt.
Elmer wasn't a New Service fan.

Never said Elmer blew a 44 Special; plenty of others chasing his tail and using his loads wrecked perfectly good guns doing so.

Mike Venturino knew Elmer and as a young lad "chased his tail"...ask him about using "Elmer loads" in a 44 Special, or even the 38-44.

Elmer ditched blunt heavyweight 44 slugs because they lacked accuracy and had high trajectory at long range, no lack of killing power. The 45 Colt gave the same results.

He was loading the 45 Colt to 1,100 fps and the 44 Special to 1,200 with the same weight bullet.
The 44 obviously shot flatter, penetrated better, but darned if it didn't cut as large of a hole...adding more powder didn't change this.

Anyone who damaged their .44Spl with the Keith load used it in the wrong gun.

And what's the point of this?

All I know for sure was that Elmer didn't invent smokeless powder and jacketed bullets. What he did is incidental in that regard as this type of conversation would still exist today with some one else trying to get more out of what was available.

I have 3 45 Colts and not a single 44 magnum and have not missed out on any hunting or shooting opportunities because of that. The 45 Colt hasn't given me any advantage over someone else shooting a 44 magnum and I never would make that claim other than I probably shoot my 45 better than most will shoot their 44 magnum.

The OP was a question of preference not superiority...

I know its not privy to this discussion, but someone has been busy making 41 Magnum bullets....

I asked on this forum a while back about 45's. Member offered to let me shot his 25-7. To say I liked it would be an understatement. Wound up buying a unfluted 25-9 then a 625-4.
Was offered a 25-7 a month ago and could not pass it up. No experience with a 44. Hasbeen

I've got seven .44Mag's, five .44Spl's, two .44Colt's and six .45Colt's and it ain't nowhere near enough. I'd say you're missing out on a good bit.



Oh really?



No but this conversation can never exist without 'some' stating that there is superiority of one over the other. Most of it being myth, legend and wishful thinking sprinkled with a liberal portion of bullshit. Of course, statements like that below do little to maintain civility.



You can shove ten .45 Colt's up your ass as far as I'm concerned. It won't change anything.

Negligible. Peak chamber pressure generally occurs about the time the bullet breaks neck tension and jumps to the lands. As the bullet moves down the bore the volume of the combustion area is rapidly increasing with a corresponding decrease in pressure. Generally every time the combustion volume behind the bullet doubles the pressure is cut in half.

I am happy for you and your gelatin block, bent bullet discoveries. You want to keep on pressing forward with your vast knowledge of ballistics that have little or no value to anything but a gelatin block or a lead pot.

I doubt you have or will contribute to this forum any more than criticism. Arguing with you is like wrestling a girl, winning is easy and pointless...

For the sake of this argument you can't make any value statements that are valid unless you have the following:

1. Bullets made of the exact same material and constructed identically - the only difference being one is .45 cal the other is .429 cal.

2. The cylinders must have the same amount of clearance between the chambers and the OD of the loaded rounds.

3. The barrels must be the same length, identical metallurgically, and rifled as close to identical as possible.

4. The throats have to give identical clearance to the bullets.

5. Then you could pull a bullet through each bore to determine if the coefficient of friction is identical as you claim. Absent the above, you can tell the world the difference is negligible, but you wouldn't know if you were right or wrong.

I never claimed anything of the sort. Your question was:



My answer was "negligible".

I'm curious where you come up with the greater bearing surface on the 45, looking at bullet designs on the Mountain Molds website I come up with less bearing surface for the.

For the same weight bullet the 45 is shorter and assuming one uses the same nose length i.e. forward of the canalure on an ogival wadcutter i.e. lfn shape the 44 has a longer base and longer driving bands than the 45 for a given weight. In the case of a 250 gr with a .35" nose and 75% meplat the 44 had roughly 10% more bearing surface due to the longer base bands for a single lube groove bullet.

If you want to have a closer comparison it's better to use a 10% heavier bullet and at that point the 45 has 10% more weight, base dia, wound channel and due to lower operating pressure about 100 fps slower all while burning the same amount of powder than the 44.

Everyone has their preferences, but the math doesn't lie.

Dang. I leave for a day or so and guns are being shoved up backsides. Rough neighborhood!