This topic came up on the Hunters Campfire page, and I thought many of the responses were kindasorta bullschitt because the guys writing them weren't really pistol people. Which kind of blows the whole deal outta the water, since if a guy has little or no ACTUAL pistol experience, his opinion is pretty much bu... Anyways. I expect y'all know what I mean.

So I thought I'd repeat the question over here, where the handgun experience factor is a tad higher than the General Population, so to speak:

Hypothetically speaking: if you were able to have only ONE pistol and ONE rifle, and they both had to be chambered in the SAME caliber, what would you choose?

Okay, so I'll post the first response.

I've done a fair bit of reading & research on the "one-caliber-only" question over the years. There are a thousand questions you can ask to try to make your choice, including which caliber(s) you have come to love, which particular guns are your pet guns, and so forth. But those are all of secondary consideration, IMHO.

If you're going to do a one-caliber exercise, IMHO the first question you need to ask is "which caliber/cartridge is suitable for all-purpose handgunning, yet can be loaded-up to produce true rifle performance?"

When you apply that criterion, your choices become vastly limited. This is because case capacity in the wonder-auto calibers limits powder capacity, and has nothing to do with the strength of the action of the firearm. NONE of the modern semi-auto calibers really gain anything in velocity or bullet weight when loaded in carbines, and by this I include 9mm, 357 SIG, 40 S&W, 10mm, and 45 ACP.

So what you're left with are cartridges that descend from the black powder era. The only ones that truly make the transition from pistol to rifle with any appreciable difference in performance are the 357 Magnum, 41 Magnum, and 44 Magnum. And since 41 Magnum carbines are more scarce than powdered unicorn horn, that means you've only got 2 real choices.

The 44 Magnum is a poor choice for most people. Even in modest factory loadings in a stout handgun, it recoils like a sonofabitch. Yes, you can download it to 44 Spl loads if you like, I'll give you that. Standard 44 Magnum pistol loads will fire a 240 gr bullet at 1200+ fps, but in a strong carbine action like the Winchester 92, you can make that puppy REALLY bark: try a 280 gr bullet at 1800 fps, or a 200 gr bullet at 2100 fps. But, as I said, the problem is that 60-70% of people can't shoot a 44 Magnum handgun with the degree of comfort needed to make it a useful everyday tool.

Which leaves us with Elmer Keith's venerable 357 Magnum, which is, IMHO, the most versatile cartridge ever invented. EVER.

In a very handy and portable handgun such as the S&W Model 13/19/65/66 (they're all the same frame, just different sights and finish), you can shoot the lowliest, tiniest 38 Special loads (hell, you can shoot 38 short Colt, if'n you want!), and you can shoot barn-burner SuperVel MAGnum loads. In my experience, there is no normal adult who can't handle a K-frame S&W revolver loaded with 357 Magnum ammunition.

Now, if you put the SAME ammo in a Uberti or Rossi Model '92 carbine, you'll gain 200+ fps... but it gets even better. If you put stout-loaded but still SAAMI loads with a 180 gr bullet in that same '92 carbine, you can push it to 2200 fps... which puts you into the same performance category as the 30-30 Winchester was when it was the whiz-bang Wunderkind of the shooting world in 1894!!!

So that's my deal. A K-frame S&W or Colt's revolver chambered in 357 Magnum, 4" or 5" barrel, and a Rossi or Uberti or USRAC carbine chambered for the same cartridge. For me, given what guns live in my safe at present, that breaks down to a Rossi 1892 carbine (20" bbl) and a S&W M66 (4" bbl).

Those two will get anything done that can be done by one man or woman with a firearm.

EDITED TO ADD:

Thanks to crowrifle's incisive intellect, I gotta add this:

If I wasn't thinking of other folks' needs, I'd have taken a slightly different tack: the .45 Colt, my all-time favorite handgun caliber. I'm a biggish kinda guy, and I like biggish kind of guns. The big Colt fits me in that manner.

So, my personal rifle choice would remain the same, oddly enough: a Rossi 1892 carbine. Chambered in 45LC, though, of course. Standard factory 260 gr bullets that poop along at 860 fps from a handgun will step out at close to 1100 fps out of the 22" barrel of the Rossi. Using my own handloads, I can drive a 300 gr hard cast bullet at close to 2000 fps, which is a motherthumper on the receiving end and capable of killing any quadruped on the North American continent, the big bears included.

As for pistolas, that gets harder. I prefer double-action revolvers, and am really fond of the M625 Mountain Gun. But it's just not as light and handy for every day carry when you compare it to the pistola the cartridge was designed for: the Colt's Single Action Army. So I'd go with a modern steel (4th Gen) Colt's Single Action Army, 4.5" barrel model for my pistola.

That's enough from me. My late friend DonOTMW would be proud.

Your sig line says it all. .45 Long Colt. Great in a wheel gun and a potent thumper in a lever action.

Well, yes it does. Damn. Thanks for pointing out my logical inconsistency.

The only reason I didn't pick a 45 Colt combo is that the guns so chambered are harder for smaller folk to work with. And since I have a fair number of smaller folk in my family, I was thinking I wanted to have guns that not only me, but ALL of my kin from my petite youngest daughter up to my 6'5" stepson could use.

But it's true, and I will amend my first response to include the 45 Colt.

But that's the beauty of the Colt. I can load it down for my wife and daughter to enjoy, or load it hot for any situation.

I suppose it would depend on the situation..Hunting or defense being the issue. I have had combo guns for many years. Some have worked out well some not. I quess my early thinking was to have a handgun and rifle/carbine in the same caliber that shot well with the same ammo/load because I was primarly a handgun hunter but had ocassion to hunt at times in an area where I needed to use a long gun due to area regulations. Usually I hunted several states on a given trip and the ease of carrying only one caliber seemed useful. I could hunt the handgun area and then move to the rifle area without much issue. The problem with my train of thought was that the carbine seldom shot well with the pistol ammo so they had to be segregated and that kinda shot the idea somewhat.
In those days I had mostly single shot Contenders and always had a pistol length and a 18 inch to 24 inch barrel in the same chambering, usually a rifle caliber. I aquired a fairly large collection of these over the years but recently lost my job due to health issues and have been forced to sell many of them. Currently I have just two of those combos remaining. A 30-30AI and a .358 Bullberry.
I also have some more conventional combos in pistol calibers like .357 mag, 41 mag and 44 mag,and 45 colt.. all Ruger/Marlin combos. These are hunting combos that can do double duty as defensive arms.
I also have 40S@W and 45acp combos that are limited to defensive duties and plinkin/fun at the range..and they certainly are that!
I suspect my thinkin on combo guns was influenced by my upbringin in the west where all the cowboys carried pistol/rifle combos in like caliber as a general rule.

My rifle pistol combination is in 45-70..My 45-70 BFR and 45-70 Guide Gun.

If you look at the recoil charts,the 45-70 BFR has less recoil with factory ammunition than the 44 Mag.



Jayco

I'd dig up a Ruger Bisley Blackhawk with 5.5" I want a switch cylinder for 45 Colt and 45 ACP (Just for the sake of cheating) Then find one of the Marlin Cowboy's like I had back in the late 90's. As much as my first love was the .44 Magnum, the .45 Colt will do all the work I need done out of a shortgun, and is fairly impressive out of a rifle barrel.

I had my "one caliber" combination. It was a 94 Trails End Winchester and Blackhawk combination. The winchester had some of the nicest factory wood I have ever seen.






It was perfect for the under 100 yard area's I hunted at that time. Plenty of power and ten rounds in the magazine for hogs. Nice quick handling combination. I have since sold both in the last year and am looking into building a custom Blackhawk in stainless in .45 colt ofcourse. Love the round!!

I see virtually no difference between the 45 Colt, 44 WCF and 44 Mag. I've already got a combo in 44 Mag, so that's what I'd choose. If my wife and kids had to use it too, I guess I'd pick up a Marlin or Rossi in .357 Mag. and use it instead.

An Auto Ordnance Thompson semi-auto might be a good wild card to go with either of my 45 autos.

Oh no you di'nt! You didn't just post a pic did you? Well...

200-fps is reeeally conservative, IME. I'd say more like 400+ fps faster with 'conventional' .357 Mag loads. It seems most loads top out, or at least have greatly diminishing returns, at a barrel length of 14" or so and it's not uncommon to lose some velocity beyond 18".

For me the whole point of a one rifle-pistol combo would be one load. A pocketful of different loads defeats the purpose - I may as well be carrying both handgun and rifle cartridges. The one cartridge would be a 158-grain .357 Mag at 1,200 fps from a 4" K-frame and 1,600-1,700 fps from a 18.5" Ruger 77/357.

Are we talking strictly revolver calibers, or both revo & semi-auto calibers?

45 Colt, hands down... 340g hard cast loads at around 1,200 fps in a Ruger BH, SBH or Vaquero (pre-2005 model) 5 shot conversion or a Freedom Arms and the rifle a stout lever gun.

Man, that would be a hard call for me. The only overlap I have right now is .22 LR. I guess I would have to go to a 3 inch Ruger SP101 and a .357 lever gun if forced to choose. I have to give preference to the defensive capability and concealability of the handgun over the versatility of the .22. As a bowhunter, a .357 magnum rifle would feel like cheating.

Location is everything and where I'm at the .22lr wins the discussion. Here in rural Iowa I don't need and sometimes don't want anymore than the little rimfire in rifles and handguns and if I had to sell off guns the rimfires (and shotguns) would be the last to go.

Now if we have to stick to centerfires than the venerable .357 would be my pick with a .32H&R combo being a sentimental runner up.

While my location definitely bias's my choice and I'm far and away a revolver/lever gun/bolt action guy I'll throw out that there are many semi-auto combos that could get a lot done albeit a little unconventional in threads like this.

CB

I won't subscribe to scenario of being reduced to just one of anything.
That said, I'll state here what I did in the original thread. Marlin 1894 and Ruger SA in .44 Mag would be my choice.
I hope that it is a valid choice, my not knowing if I am a 'true handgun person' or not..............

Mine is a Marlin 1894m and Colt New Frontier in 22 mag....

other days it's a Marlin Mountie and Colt Peacemaker in 22LR....

Sometimes, when I'm in auto-mode its a TC Classic and Woodsman in 22 LR...

If it is a Smith&Wesson day, I'll run the 15-22 and 63.....

I'll take a Glock in whatever and an AR in .223.



Travis

For me personally, it would be hard to beat my 4" 586 and Marlin 1894C with either 158s or 180s. Close second would be my 6" 629 and Marlin 1894 with 270s going 1300+ and 1700+ respectively.

The 44s are in my truck now. 1 box of ammo, 2 guns, makes it simpler. The Marlin wears an xs peep and I'm good with it to at least 150. The 357 Marlin wears a red dot and is the house gun for the wife, but it's been known to do truck duty too.

But if I wanted to keep it classy, I do have a Hi-point compact 9mm and the matching carbine.

I have played with this issue of combinations, mainly because my dad had a lever in 38.40, which was stolen, and i still have the colt SAA in 38.40. Common in the west, because of the one ammo for both when it was hard to get ammo.
There are issues with this tho.
I bought a marlin in .44magnum because it was a lightweight companion to the model 29 i have. Here is a critical issue. The marlin comes with a .431 diameter barrel, the model 29 a .429 barrel. Using a lead montana bullet sized to .432 in the marlin, 240grain, BN rated to 22, i got around 1900 fps out of the rifle. I tried it in the pistol and i don't want to state the velocities cause it was way to much. I attribute this to the .432 lead bullet, hard cast, in the .429 barrel. In the future i will stick to jacketed bullets, or acccept lesser accuracy in the rifle by using a lead bullet sized to .430.
I am not sure what winchester cuts their barrels to. I have a friend that has a rossi, and it had to have work done to it to make it work right. My understanding, no personal experience, is that some of the .45colt rifles also are subject to some feeding issues. But the argument is still true, that if you are careful on what you are feeding the combination, a .44magnum pistol and rifle at close to moderate ranges would do just about anything. If I were to reduce the bullet weight in the .44, in the rifle i would have something like a 30.30, but ten cartridges in the magazine. I have pretty much decided next time i load for this combination, i have going to reduce velocity to about 1000fps in the revolver, and that should be around 1400fps in the rifle. Perfectly aedequate.
I have taken the same tact in the .45/70 by the way, and am not throwing those 405grain pills at max velocity, prefering to keep them at about 1600fps which is above factory stats, but nowhere near max. I need to keep my teeth in.
I might add that when i was shooting those oversize lead bullets in the pistol, the velocities were way high through the chrony, but no signs of sticking or primer issues. Still, I ain't gonna do it again.

.44 Magnum of course.

Although as I age .357 becomes more attractive.

i might add nobody mention the 44.40 combination. What is also fascinating to me is if one were to use the .45colt in the rifle you are getting at or more than the old 38.55, which is a fine old cartridge but not chambered in the revolver. I still think the combination is a good idea.

As I posted in that thread:

New Model Vaquero & a '92 Trapper carbine in .357 Magnum. Both stainless for weather durability. Screw pistols and semi-auto carbines with detachable (losable) magazines.

The "old technology" will get ya through MANY situations if properly used and ain't near as easy to break or become disabled. And the Trapper Carbine is right handy even in a home or building but will still reach out to reasonable distance with the 16" barrel.

This discussion only reminds me why the only "1 caliber handgun/rifle combination" I have is in .22lr.

Doc - I thought you were right on track there for a minute - but then you diverged. As JOG stated, the only reason I see for such a set is for the purpose of using one load. With all the centerfire rounds, you either have to load up for the rifle or down for the handgun to make it truly optimum for most people.

If it were me - I might prefer to go with a .44mag. I don't see any reason to subject myself to full-power .44mag loads in an easily-carried revolver if I also have with me a rifle, so I would load down for that. Now I have two loads that must be kept separate. If I were to go with .357, it would be the opposite. I have no problem at all with full-power .357 loads, but I might want a little more oomph to justify carrying the rifle. Separate loads again...I think that's cheating the concept.

If I have to load differently for the different guns, I'm gonna go with my best handgun fit for the mission, and a preferred rifle. In 99% of the backwoods excursions I've ever done or am likely to do (unless maybe I get lucky enough to hunt Brown Bear in Alaska) I could be happy as a clam with any of the major-caliber handguns (.45acp, .357mag, .41mag, .44mag, .45 Colt) and a .308win or 30.06, or whatever fits the occasion (lately for me - a .243).

Small-game hunting is another story. There, I really prefer to take game with a .22lr handgun when I can get close enough - but I often bring the .22 rifle along, in case conditions force longer distance shots.

OTOH - and thinking out loud here....

If you look at it that way - I mean not as a matter of power gained, but more of a range and ability to aim issue - then a "normal" max-loaded .357 starts to look pretty good. Carried in a medium-frame 4" revolver, it is a very useful tool. Put that same load in a rifle, and my reliable range increases two or threefold - with still enough power to do terminally what I could have done with the handgun close-up.

If we're talking about urban life pistol/rifle combos (and I think we're not), it's a whole 'nuther story.

Comparing a gun that weighs 4 1/2lbs to one that weighs just under 3lbs is hardly apples to apples....

+1 and if your gun weighs 4.5lbs or more - it might as well be a rifle.

Rossi carbine

I thought the same thing - the rifile I chose (77/357) is only a pound heavier than the BFR.

I used to do some big-game hunting with a "handgun". The one I was using weighed right around 4.5lbs empty. After a few years I figured that for the weight I was packing around, I could have been a more successful hunter with a light rifle. And if I didn't care whether I was all that successful (or had the time to ensure that I was), I might as well have a lighter handgun.

I can't figure why anyone would want to pack around such a heavy handgun for any reason other than hunting. I know that hunting with one has it's own reasons (which don't necessarily apply to me) and I'm down with that - but for anything else????

In fairness my .45-70 handgun weighs a lot closer to the 2.9lbs even with its 11" barrel, and to be sure it kicks a hell of a lot more than a .44 magnum of like weight.




For my choice if I were rocking the pistol/rifle one chambering I would likely stick with my existing 5 1/2" Blackhawk and my H&R Buffalo Carbine.

I'd be curious to know what a 10mm would do out of a 16" barrel. Ditto a 460 Rowland. The OP in the Campfire thread makes the point that with a Mech-Tech carbine, you can not only run the same ammo, but use the same magazines.

Those questions aside, yes if you look at revolver cartridges, you have more case capacity to work with.

Ruger made a run of #1's in .475 Linebaugh, which would go nicely with a Freedom Arms .475. They also made a #1 run in .460 S&W, which would go with one of the S&W X frames. A single shot dodges the feeding issue with popular revolver bullets, in a lever or semi-auto.

AS someone else posted, coming up with loads that run well in both guns could be a challenge.

This is really dependent upon where you live and what activities you are engaged in.

I live in Montana, am more of a recreational shooter, out in the woods every day, unlikely to need to engage multiple threats, and I carry every day.

I guess if I actually had to choose, it would be the .45 Colt in a FA M97 with a 4 �� barrel and a Mundenized Marlin 1894 CB with 24� Oct Bbl. The M97 is light (but not too light), compact, accurate, packable and can be loaded mild or with �Ruger� only loads. The 1894 is smooth, well balanced, accurate, easy to change sighting systems (big + for us older guys and aging eyes) and will handle any load the M97 will.

Paul

While I agree with Doc that hand loading the modern semi-auto calibers won't gain anything, there is still the gain in velocity by virtue of a rifle's longer barrel. A couple hundred feet per second is typical.

The revolver cartridges gain more. My guess is because there is so much waste in the current loads - flash and blast gone to nothing due barrels that are too short. That flash and blast turns to velocity in a carbine.

I have the Marlin Traper Carbine in 44 magnum and a Superblackhawk in same. Love 'em. I ALSO have the Marlin 41 magnum carbine and a 41 mag Redhawk AND a Smith 58. Either combination floats my boat just fine. The sixguns REALLY shine when I literally crawl through "deer tunnels" in heavy pines at the edge of a slough. No way anyone could maneuver even a short long gun in one of those places.

If I have to do it, then the .357 is the most for the least where I roam. I don't need a .44 for anything I run into here. The .357 works well in a carry size revolver (SP101, 4 inch) and the would work well in a carbine (Ruger's 77/357 for me).

...but I'd rather carry a handgun round in a handgun and a rifle round in a rifle.

If 4.4 lbs is to much for you,then stay with your .22...Weight always lowers recoil and the 45-70 BFR is capable of shooting 300 grain bullets over 2,000 fps/350 grains at over 1800 fps....It's not for whimps...

The point I was making is the 45-70 BFR has less recoil than the 44 Mag both with factory ammunition by quite a bit....If 4.4 lbs is to heavy,then shoot something lighter with more recoil but If you can't handle the weight,I doubt you could handle the recoil.

How would you compare recoil in a 7lb/378 Weatherby to a 9.5 lb/.378?We know which one will recoil more,don't we.

In all fairness,I would like to see the recoil numbers on the 44 Mag in the big Super Redhawk.

I truly do not see the weight issue in a hunting handgun.


Jayco

Years ago, one of the gun mags did an article where they took a long barrel - I don't remember the caliber (think it was .357) - and cut it down inch by inch while measuring the velocities at each step. IIRC - using the same load, they lost about 35fps per inch. That sticks with me, because I see roughly the same difference in comparisons I've made. Of course, it assumes the use of a caliber with more case-capacity than needed at handgun lengths.

So - a .357 load that clocks about 1200fps in a 4" barrel should do about 1620 from a 16" barrel.

Oh - a more recent source...

Ballistics by the inch.

It would depend on what I wanted to do with them, particularly how much power I needed.
The other thing would be the ammunition needs. To my mind, they'd both need to use the same load. Otherwise, you might as well have two different chamberings.
As a practical matter, I'd go with a .22 Rimfire Magnum, a .357 Magnum, or a .44 Magnum. However, care would have to be taken with the .357 or the .44 load as much of the ammo on the market for them was designed to expand at handgun velocities. At rifle velocities you could have penetration problems. E

the superior ballistic coefficient of rifle bullets vs pistol bullets of the same weight plays, I am sure, some part in all this discussion.
I would think the difference would be so great, that the pistol bullet carbine would never be able to 'run' with a rifle bullet of the same weight and caliber.

I could counter that if you can't handle the recoil, how is it that you handle the weight? But it's a stupid argument either way. You carry the weight all day. Recoil lasts for a fraction of a second. Which one is more important to you? And besides that - any more recoil than "enough to get the job done" is next to pointless.

But that isn't the only point. If I have to carry a 4.5lb gun, why would I not want it to be capable of longer range? Is there something in your woods that a .454 or even a warm-loaded .45 Colt from a rifle can't kill?



Ummm....which .44mag? Do I even need to explain that?



Yeah - you should listen to yourself there.



It's only an issue if you want it to be. If you're hunting close to your vehicle - no, it isn't an issue.

But I don't think anyone restricted this discussion to hunting handguns. In fact - when it comes to big-game, I can't see most people wanting both a "hunting handgun" (a hunting-specific handgun) and a rifle at the same time.

That's a fact.

Check the ballistic differences for a 150gr RNFP in .30-.30 against the 150gr Ballistic Tip in the same barrel length.

I can pack my BFR along all day long in a well fit Bandoleer holster,there is know problem....

The fact is..Recoil is the major problem for "Most" people in shooting handguns capable of taking the largest critters,not handgun weight.

I bought my first 454 Casull for handgun hunting and the challenge it presented and I did not carry double(Rifle and Handgun)Handgun only..Then I got the 45-70 in BFR that is everything the 454 Casull is plus alot more..Alot more..A really lot more.At it chucks out 420 grain Cast from Garrett Cartridges at 32,000 PSI/CUP at 1560 fps with mild recoil in my mind but capable and made for 43,500 PSI or 40,600 CUP...

To each his own...If something like the BFR or the Smith and Wesson .500 is to heavy,use something lighter and less effective on Big Game...

Jayco

Howdy Jaycoff! How was you stay in the ol' grey bar hotel? Glad you exercised you poor reading comprehension here.

I shoot a .45-70 that weighs far less than that thing you tote around. I like that you choose to stick light weight bullets like 300 or 350gr too. Personally I am running Hard Cast 420gr WLN with gas checks, and 405gr JSPs. OH yeah forgot to mention my gun runs those same bullets you getting 1560fps with at around 1700fps.

Show me you 45-70 revolver or your a liar.

Your old buddy..

Jayco

Clear the booze from your vision Tipsy McStagger....
It ain't a revolver, it IS a .45-70, it weighs less than your BFR, and I already posted a picture of it.

Want me to do it again for you?

For Jaycoff....






If you'd like some fresh ones I can probably oblige when I get home from work this evening, but you'd need to say the please....

A single shot contender.

Get real.............What is the barrel length..12 or 14"?

Jayco

Tell me the load..I have about every load for the 45-70 that has been pressure checked...

Your load for a 420 grain cast at 1700 fps.

Brass stamp...

Powder used....

Barrel length...

Jayco

Jayco,

I thought you had stopped posting. Welcome back.


Travis

Even with the 11" barrel on my Contender the gun's overall length is shorter than your BFR, it weighs less than your BFR, and even better still it will run the same bullets and loads even faster....
Those Garretts you mention hit a touch over 1700fps in my gun.
The extra velocity ain't hard to understand for most folks, but I will spell it out for you simpleton.
No velocity loss from a clyinder gap like with the BFR, and 3 1/2" more barrel than a 7 1/2" barreled BFR or 1" more than the 10" barreled BFR.

Keep talking drunky. How was county lockup last week? Get any wrasslin' done?

Give me your load data...Garretts are chronographed at 1850 fps in a 22" barrel at 32K.Given 26 fps as an average of 17/45-70 loads chronoed by Rick Jamison per barrel inch,your way over and lieing.

Jayco

Jaycoff... Tell me you want my load, and I'll give it to you.
Ask for it.





Thats almost as good as Jeffo demanding someones load.

Why did you not answer me?


Travis

You only wish I was, drunky...

Ummm...Duhhhhhh...When did I quit posting?

Remember...You are the forum and should notice when a guy just post one or two a day instead of the quick liners that post dozens.....

Thank you for the welcome back Carter post.I will always have your back through thick and thin.

Jayco

I want your load data for the 45-70 with a 420 grain bullet at over 1700 fps in a 11" barrel.

Jayco

I'll bet you do.

I'll give you a hint.
RE 7...
Rem Brass...
FEd 210...
Are you really this dim?

JOG, FreeMe... Thanks for pointing out the inconsistencies in my early posts. That's what I get for starting a thread at 0600 when I've been up half the night.

Yes, the point of doing the one-caliber/cartridge combo is to use the same ammo in both for economy of effort. As such, I should say I'd likely go with the 357 Mag with a 158 gr bullet, K- or L-frame revolver, and 20" M92 carbine.

oh and as I recall there was a load I worked up with AA2495 that came in right about the same too.


If you are having such a hard time with your .45-70 handgun loads you might want to email J.D. Jones.
He was very helpful to me.

How about some numbers on the powder charge in Remington brass.

As measured by Brian Pierce!!!

1-.450 Marlin Brass/73.5 grains of water (2.7 grains less than Remington 45-70 Brass!!!)

2-.45-70 Remington Brass/76.2 grains of water (1.3 grains less than Starline Brass)

3-.45-70 Starline Brass/77.5 grains of water (2.8 grains less than Winchester Brass)

4-.45-70 Winchester Brass/80.3 grains of water (4.1 grains "More" than Remington Brass)

Jayco

Jaycoff do you seriously not get this?....
Its really not that hard.


You quoting Brian Pearce's research on H2O capacity has absolutely sero to do with this.
The only thing it show it that Brian Pearce did research to find out case capacitys.

Please feel free to quote more research from other people who worked for it at any time.

Just give me your load data..Is it that hard if your not lieing?

I can give you mine without a blink for the 420/425 cast in Starline brass.

You first.

Jayco

I can give you mine.
I just think it hilarious that you don't understand why my Contender would out run your BFR with every given load.



NO CYLINDER GAP!
LONGER BARREL!

Duhhhhh....

You're welcome.

Tell Thomas to post his load.


Travis

Jayco, WTF are you on about?

The man said he gets better velocities in his Contender than a BFR revolver will give, which is not surprising given the simple internal ballistics of a Contender vs a revolver:



How Brian Pearce's water capacity numbers are pertinent to the discussion escapes me. I mean, I like Brian Pearce's approach to evaluating guns and loads as much as the next guy, but how does H2O capacity relate to the improved performance of Garrett Hammerheads in a Contender vs a BFR? The Contender is gonna "win" every time!

Anyways, the point of this thread was to discuss single caliber combinations of rifle and pistol. You say you like the BFR and a 45-70 carbine. Fine. Thanks for sharing that.

I'll give my experiences. Every one's mileage may vary.

I had a Marlin .44 mag with a 24" barrel. I shot .240 grain truncated bullets which were PMC factory ammo out of it. Kicked like a mule and was not as accurate as I had hoped. The bullet clocked about 2,000 FPS. I sold the rifle.

I have shot a Model 92 in 44-40 loaded hot and it was a sweet shooting rifle. If I had a rifle and revolver that could handle hot 44-40 loads That's what I would go to.

I never thought to shoot .44 Special loads out of my Marlin but I bet a Ruger in .44 Special with a companion rifle would be a sweet set up.

Then post your load..I have load data pressure checked with 300/350/405/420/425/525 and 550 grain loads for the 45-70.

Just post your data....

Jayco

Got two, would be hard-pressed to go with one, but since the 44 mag packs more punch than the combo in 38WCF, reckon the 44 mag would "win"?

Both pistols are Uberti SAA clones; One orig. M92 in 38WCF, one Rossi ersatz M92 in 44 mag.

Atta-boy Jayco! Don't let up!


Travis

DocRocket

I posted my choice of pistol/rifle choices and never said another word until....Tommy boy and another questioned weight and Tommy boy was belligerent and I fired back from a personal attack from T mag.

And here we are..

Look back in my post and tell me where I started it...It won't happen and I don't roll over...

Opinions are opinions and everyone is welcome to post theres until....It gets personal...

Jayco

{yawn}


You're almost begging for my load....
Jeez
Here is a hint Jaycoff.
Its Re7 and the charge is between 40-50grs







Doc, pay no mind to Old Jailbird Jayco here. He haw a real hard on for me.
Its flattering if a bit creepy.

A 92 and blackhawk in 45 Colt

Snake

For what its worth simpleton you compared a 4 1/2lb gun to a gun under 3lbs, and touted how the recoil was less.(from the no schit sherlock files)
I called you on comparing apples and oranges.
You spun off showing your cluelessness from there jailbird.

Tim, I've thought the same thing about the 44 Special...

Grow up and post your load...Don't be a coward..Just post it...

Jayco

I think a Ruger bolt in .44 and a 629 in same, would be pretty sweet.


Travis

Now that would be just about perfect.

Tom Mag

You can't do it can you because it was a lie..........

Post it..You started this chit with your insults...

Jayco

Mauser chambered in 7mm IHMSA and Remington XP-100 in same caliber. I have a Bobby Brown custom XP that I shot in IHMSA competition for decades and it will outshoot most of my rifles. The Mauser would be a lovely, light, accurate, "stalking rifle" with a Mannlicher stock, DST, and a tiny bit of engraving.

What a great combination for everythng from pasture poodles to elk - moose might be pushing the envelope, but inside of 100 yards there ain't no moose that would take two 139 grain Hornadays and keep on trucking very far.

Terry

Jaycoff
I've given you every breadcrumb along the way to try leading you off the path of stupidity...
RE-7 somewhere between 40-50grs
Rem brass
Fed 210
Cast precision LBT 420gr WLNGC
The specific load is certainly no where near outlandish in any way.
If you can't put things together from there then I can't help you.

That you fail to grasp why any given load would run well faster in in a Contender with a longer barrel than in a BFR replete with shorter barrel and cylinder gap... is for lack of better terms "telling".

Whats wrong with you..Between 40 and 50 grains...I am not like you,that does not cut it..

Do you have any idea the difference in pressure and velocity between 40 and 50 grains of any powder in any given cartridge...Your a nut job and a liar........

Your trying to google it.....It won't work with me...

Post it liar..........

Jayco

I have no need to google it dumbschit.
In fact I PM'ed the exact load at the top of the hour to another member involved in this thread for the exact reason that you just examplified for me.
You are CLUELESS!



That you are attempting to call me a liar for not posting my exact load while I provided just about everything about it for you... while you yourself constantly fail to provide proof of anything that numerous posters on the 'fire have called you on here is laughable.

PM me the load or post it.........

Your are a dangerous man giving out load data for a load that has never been pressure checked and exceeds even Buffalo Bore loads.....

Post your load publicly....Coward...........

Jayco

Hahahahha you just keep going and going and going.


FYI it has been pressure checked...

It has been published...

And it doesn't exceed safe levels at all...

Could you post a picture of your load with an old piece of brass to prove that you've shot it?

George

Maybe I should post loads that other people have worked up and shot...
It would be in keeping with Jayco posting Brian Pearce's data on H2O capacities.

Ditto

Just the data or powder charge will work for me...I know the velocities from 40-50 grains of RL-7 out of the 45-70 with a 420 grain bullet....

Buffalo Bores old loads of 420 grain cast were the only ones that had tube ignitions out of a Marlin Levergun and Tom Magnums exceed that.....

Jayco

45 Colt Model 92 and a 5.5" Stainless BH Bisley. Now, that's perfect.

I want these to go with my Stainless Navy Arms Rossi .357 '92 BAD!!!

Jayco, FWIW... your contention with THOMASMAGNUM notwithstanding, you may want to dial it back a notch or two when you're discussing this issue.

Consideration such as "tube ignitions" in a levergun will obviously not apply to a Contender, and since we're quoting gunwriters, Mike Venturino noted has researched "tube ignitions" and never came to any firm conclusions. In any event, you can't compare a Contender to a lever gun.

You don't even have a clue about what the load is. Your assuming that because Garretts load with a 420 WLN GC tested at 1900fps from a 18"guide gun that it is impossible that my 11" Contender is doing 1700fps with the same loads. You are also claiming that I could not duplicate that velocity in another load.

You are truly clueless.

Dang! Whose grips are those?

Nice indeed. Giraffe bone?

Most unusual combo I can think of would be a S&W #3, in .44 Russian, and a Spencer, also in .44 Russian.

Oh, okay - or Italian replicas thereof, I guess

Doc..With do respect...Tube ignitions in a Marlin Levergun is from pressure/over pressure that takes the bullet and slams it into the primer in the tube full of other cartridges...

Buffalo Bores are,besides one well known reloader,are the only ones that ever did that..AKA a 420 grain bullet out of a 22" barrel at 2000 fps...I do know the pressure of that load but I will not repeat it,from two different sources.

Tom Magnum refuses to post his load because it is an overload orrrrrrrrrr..He is a fricken liar.....

Just the powder charge will tell me but he won't post it.I reload the same and with RL-7....

Jayco

For DocRocket...........



Jayco

They are Sambar Stag.

They are listed on the SASS Wire Classifieds:

Pair of custom 357 Rugers. They were built from a pair of consecutive serial numbered Ruger 50th Anniv 357 Blackhawks. 3 1/2" Stainless barrels were made up with "wedding rings", polished aluminum ejector rod housings, Stainless hammers, triggers and Bisley grip frames. Sambar stag fitted and polished to the frames. They have free spin cylinders that have been beveled at the front BP style and the chambers have been polished. 11 degree throats, 11 degree crowns were cut. The front sights were each handmade on a mill and regulated to 125 grain bullets with the common load of Clays(PM for specifics)in 38 Special cases, specifically so the rear sights would be bottomed out on the frame for the lowest possible sight picture. Oversize Belt mountain cylinder base pins were fitted and shortened to "Sheriffs" length. The guns have a smooth, light action and are very accurate. I have the original, red special edition boxes, but there is no paperwork in them. They've been shot some and show some blue wear, but overall they are in very good to excellent condition and ready to go. My son used them for a few years sporadically after I built them. $1650 shipped. PICS HERE

Just so its clear what you are not grasping...
YOUR BFR does 1560fps with a cylinder gap and less barrel...
My Contender does 140fps more with MORE BARREL and NO CYLINDER GAP!

We are talking about the same load...

Well, with all due respect, I think your understanding of the mechanism of tube ignitions is erroneous. It has nothing to do with pressure and everything to do with momentum.

And momentum is not pressure in a tube magazine?

Why is it only ammo that exceeded the pressures of the 450 Marlin(43,500 PSI) had magazine ignitions?

Why is it the 45-70 has a SAAMI of 28K yet Garret Cartridges ammo was backed up by Marlin Firearms?

None of this has anything to do about revolvers/pistols other than Tom Magnums loads are way over pressure in an 11" barrel.If his velocity is way over the line...Bet me his pressure is also.

Jayco

IS NOT OVER THE LINE RETARD!

IT IS 140FPS FASTER THAN YOUR OWN [bleep] RESULTS WITH YOU OWN [bleep] BFR!
ITS 140FPS FASTER BECAUSE A TC CONTENDER HAS NO CYLINDER GAP TO BLEED OFF PRESSURE, AND BECAUSE IT HAS A LONGER BARRREL THAN YOUR [bleep] BFR TOO!


YOU ARE TALKING OUT YOUR ASS, AND YOU'RE SO FULL OF SCHITT YOUR TEXT IS BROWN!

Post your powder charge...150 fps can and does raise pressure alot....

Post it..Liar.........

Jayco

Why won't you post it???????????????

Jayco

........On a set of dog tags!

Because you are an idiot mostly...


Futhermore I have told you I get the same results using Garrets load that runs the SAME bullets. You know the one you cited as doing 1560fps in your BFR.

The load I worked up is a duplicate of the Garrett in performance I worked up.

How stupid can you be?....


Do you not understand that the loads are the same?
YOU ARE LOSING VELOCITY BECAUSE THE CYLINDER GAP AND HAVING A SHOTER BARREL

Yeah..I can do that with my name/Serial number/blood type and faith.

Jayco

Do you honestly not understand that gasses escape from the cylinder gap which in turn robs some of the veloctiy in a revolver?

Do you honestly not understand that you are losing velocity by having a shorter barrel than by gun?


Do you honestly not understand that those two factors do not affect my Contender and that is source of the extra 140fps you find so unfathomable?

Garrett hand cast his own bullets at his diameter..What is his bullet diameter?

If you did not buy his hand cast bullets,which is impossible...Your a liar again...

Your load is "Not" a duplicate matching his bullet/his powder and his primer and brass...

Try reloading 101 again...

Jayco

Lets get something strait here:

1-You are not using the same Bullet as Garrett.

2-You are not using the same Powder as Garrett..

3-You are not using the same brass as Garrett.

4-You are not using the same primer as Garrett...

So tell me your loads are equal to Garretts in presure...

Jayco

OH my god your stupidity is boundless.


I give up... You really are a clueless [bleep].

I like the 40 S&W ... in semi-autos.
(Going with what I have:)

Ruger PC-40 Carbine / Ghost Ring Sights

Fabrique National 40 Hi-Power

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Otherwise, in 357 Mag/38 Spl:

Marlin 1894-C Carbine

Dan Wesson Model 15-2 DA Revolver

(Or Ruger Vaquero)

Post your powder charge in Remington brass.....Or...Shut the [bleep] up!!!!!!!!!!

Jayco

I just realized in your case BFR doesn't mean Biggest Finest Revolver like MRI intended...
In your case it mean Big Fugging Retard

Re-7...
Rem brass...
Fed 210...
Thats clue enough for your clueless azz.

You need to go back to reloading 101...Post your powder charge to everyone instead of some poor guy that believes you...




Jayco

{yawn}



Keep it up schit brick.
I think you starting to convince some folks.



By the way what part of "worked up to" did you not understand?

Again so you'll understand this time.

{Liar}

Get anyone on this forum to challenge me on your pressure based on:



Jayco

Again so you'll understand this time.

Just what pressure do you think it is and based on exactly What.

Does velocity mean anything on pressure?

Jayco

again....

Your a fool..Against everything written here on this forum...Pressure wise in your mind...

1-Brass doesn't matter..

2-Powder doesn't matter..

3-Bullet used doesn't matter..

4-Primer doesn't matter....

You just add powder until you get a velocity you like or can brag on...

But refuse to post it...........

Jayco

T Lee

Did I start this?

Jayco

YES and you continue to make an azz of yourself over and over. You hijacked the thread, won't quit yelling the same thing over and over and won't realize nobody in their right mind will post a full load on the internet for some IDIOT to use in a gun not capable of handling it.

Only a complete IDIOT will keep doing the same thing over & over expecting the results to change.

Really..

Show me the [bleep] where I started this..Show me where I put down anyone or slandered them until Mag Man and his jail chit.....

Show me........

Why did you delete your last post?

Jayco

Did you or did you not brag on the 'fire last week about having to go serve 24 or 48 hours for "conduct unbecoming an oldman"?

1st, I deleted the post because I should not have made it, it is beneath me and in a weak moment I put it up and realized it was inappropriate.

As to you, you are the one calling liar and DEMANDING, not TM.

Have a nice night, seriously and chill out.

Evening Gents!

I have been away, up at the cabin.

In regards to this subject, (Doc's) does anyone have a copy of the 2008 GUNS Annual?

Here's a "pic" of the statement:



Sorry, no dog tags to authenticate it....

George

I want TLee or anyone else to "Show Me" where i started this chit....Anyone........

I gave my opinion on this thread and then the name calling came,and I fight back.......

WTF.......

TLee..Back up your post with facts......Or don't post!!!!!!!!!

Jayco

...because I just made it up right?

You make a lot of demands without providing a lot in return.

Calling Terry out, really????? Yeah, that will get you some credibility.

George

Jayco

Well were you?

TLee....

With 60,000 post on this forum alone...You must know you have to read back,not just jump in the middle or you have know idea.

Jayco

Awe..You can arrest me anytime.....Another cop that heres only one side with tunnel vision.

Jayco

I could care less but I'd appreciate you just posting the load to save some bandwith for the rest of us.

My pick(s) are:

Ruger Single-Six 22lr/wmr and a Marlin 39M 22s/l/lr

or

Ruger Bisley Blackhawk 5.5" 45LC/ACP and a Marlin 1894 Cowboy 45LC. For easy shooting, it doesn't get much better than a 200gr 45LC cowboy load.....



If either of those combos were any more fun, they'd be illegal!!

...Edited, see joke below.....

Well were you? Just asking, if you were that is life but also a truth.

There is only one side of a tunnel?

What do they call that again.....

Where are you T?

You remind me of an LA Cop that retired to North Idaho with Mark Furman.We called him steroid Bob.Mouthing off about this and that and putting everyone down.

Confronted on something he said to my wife....He backed down.I think I am glad he did....

If you say chit you have to be able to back it up......Period!!!!

Jayco

Benning is a hell of a place.....

Jayco

You were quoted above.....it's a legit question.

You're the one always calling folks out, wanting to fight, demanding pics, etc. It's a simple question, though I'm not surprised you won't answer.

Terry on 'roids is a damn funny thought for those who have actually met the man.

George

Here is my final post on this.
Brag on doing time then bitch when it gets brought up...

Thought about this a bit too. Michael Bane did a podcast on the concept of a go-anywhere combo that would be legal in all of the non-friendly locals. I don't remember what his pistol choice was, but the rifle was a take-down Marlin 1894.

I like his choice there, but I might prefer a 16" Winchester trapper model with XS ghost ring sights. As for a pistol, I think a 4" Ruger Redhawk in .44 Mag would be hard to beat.

His name was Bob..Retired from the LA police department whom followed fellow officer Mark Furman to North Idaho..Sandpoint and the area....Athol was the bar..........

Jayco

This is my last post on this but it is to TLee....

I am glad you are retired and don't have the bias opinion you form from word go...Without looking at all the possibilities...And thinking it out before an opinion is made before the facts are determined...Tons of guys are getting out of jail/prison for attitudes like yours that put them there wrongly..Then the facts DNA proves it wrong.

I married a cop and none of them were like you.

Jayco

Look at the location under my avatar, I have lived here and north of the Peace River in Pt. Charlotte since 1967. I retired where I worked.

I don't posture on the net or in person, I have noting to prove. That is why I so quickly retracted the stupid post I made, as it was over my line but I am rapidly loosing my patience with folks like you that just hammer the same nail after it is set. That and seem to think they are uber tough guys.

Any shred of credibility you might have had left to you just vaporized. Congratulations?

In the 2008 Guns Annual, writer John Taffin did an article entitled "Make Mine a Marlin".

On page 61 he used a pic of my 16" Marlin Limited 44 Mag, with Williams reciever sight and Milt Sparks ammo carrier on the buttstock. It was pictured with my 4" Model 29-2 wearing Herrett's Ropers. I thought it made for an interesting little combo.

The pic was from a series of pics for a book on .44s that he had previously been working on. I ended up having a few guns in that book, which was a cool thing for a fan of both Taffin's writings and the 44 magnum.


Somewhere on a hard drive I still have those pics. I need to find the file.

Honestly I'd probably lean towards the .357 magnum. In strong 357's you can launch a 180-200 gr cast at 1300 fps from the revolver and 1700 fps from the rifle. Asside from angry brown bears in the alders, that combination will take big game at closer ranges. Best yet you can throttle down to 105 gr small game/plinker loads. There is something to be said for a pair of guns that are easy on the lead, easy on the powder, and easy on the wrists and shoulder.

Marlin had planned a .44 and. 357 in "SBL" configuration. While a .45 would have been perfect for me, I would be happy with either (given marlin's prior QC) and paired it off appropriately.

Just to get others up to speed on what transpired here - This is how the dust-up started in this thread. Logcutter's opinion was challenged politely, but he couldn't take it and had to lash out ever so subtly...



Note the implication that anyone who doesn't buy his logic on this particular subject is a wimp who should stick to rimfires.

Just thought I'd clear that up.

On behalf of the Gem State - my apologies for our troll contribution.

My little Marlin short barrel is an early '90s version and is pretty slick. That being said, for the Rocky Mountain west, where ranges are usually rather long, it is limited in practical usage.

I would rather have a .308 myself, but that is a subject for a whole other thread. For the spirit of this one, I will stick with my .44s, which I have since I was old enough to leave home. They have always worked.

185 grain wadcutters out of a .44 are a load of fun on small game by the way.

For that matter, I would not want to be a bad guy who got nailed with a fast .44 caliber full wadcutter.

I clicked on the first and last page...What happened here? Somebody's calling TLee out?

How exactly does that happen?

Mackay - I think yours is a great choice for someone comfortable with the .44mag. I'll admit to my wimp status and limit myself to the .357 for general use.

The Marlin levers are sweet. I had one in 375win that was not only smooth and accurate, but also blessed with some gorgeous wood. The guy I bought it from replaced it with a Contender in the same caliber. Idunno exactly how that relates to this thread, but I find it interesting.

Another gun I wish I hadn't sold...

FreeMe,

No worries about wimp calling here! I will gladly tell anyone that I rarely shoot fullbore, hotrod loads. There simply is no need.

A big bullet at a moderate velocity works wonders. Heck for small game, a large caliber bullet at sedate speeds works slick as snake snot! But then I am sure you know that anyways.

240 gr LSWC and about 5 grs WW231 makes a darn nice shooting load in a 44 remington mangle-um IIRC

Yep,

It is a very versatile cartridge. I have loads my little girl can shoot if she wants to. The thing I have found is that it seems it is hard to make a load that does not shoot well.

That cannot be said for .45 Colt chambered guns from my experience. I have gone down that road more than a few times. While you can get a .45 Colt to shoot very well, sometimes it can be a real chore.

By the way EH, now that I have been accepted into the fold of Turds I need to come up with a new sig line in regards to such. Perhaps some help from fellow Turds for a new title....

I like the sig line you have

Thanks.

Perhaps I will be a Turd in the shadows..

Turd in the shadows....

Now THAT'S a signature line

Yep you could add that to your sig line!

"I've lost my tolerance for diversity.
Turd in the shadows........."

Of course announcing you're in the shadows kinda defeats the purpose of being in the shadows.

Thanks for posting the reason for asking about the 2008 GUNS Annual. I've got it out in the shed somewheres, in a box...

I like your choice of 44's, but have to say that my experience with 45 Colt pistols and carbines has been pretty smooth too. I don't have problems getting an ackerit load in any of my carbines, rifles, or revolvers if I try 2 or 3 of the loads I've already got on hand. I think it's largely a matter of how much time you've put in to setting up your inventory.

As for your sig line, I have a "used" one I'm no longer gonna use and you're welcome to it:

"Turdlike long after it ceased to be fashionable."

Although, I gotta say that "A turd in the shadows.." is pretty dang cool, and may be more suitable to you..

That's what I like about the Campfire... no matter how cool you are, there is always SOMEbody ready and able to break your balls...

Sorry if I missed the wheat amongst the rat turd, but for me personally, it would be the 45 Colt.

As far as "best", I'd be hard pressed to say a 357 or 44 Mag would lack anything at all, provided the bullets were up to par, but I use cast and frontal area, which always works under 2,000 fps, so a 44 Mag or 45 Colt it would be.

That really is a good point.

Kind of like being a "Special Agent" for the FBI". I have enjoyed more than once asking if they had any regular agents...

Random things...

For an autoloader, I would be interested to try one of these someday:

http://www.mechtechsys.com/

I notice that Winchester has expanded the line to 7 models on the 1892 (made in Japan, unfortunately). I guess they are trying to take advantage of Marlin's troubles. Prices seem to have come down some, too.

Sure would be neat if somebody could build a quality reproduction of the 1892 (or the 1886) here in the states. Ruger, are you listening?

I was sad to find out a while back that they are not going to produce those in .357 and .44 (at least not at this time). The stainless, lever, and ghost ring were calling my name.....

I'll stick with the original old school combo .44-40
It worked well enough beck then and it does the same or better today.

I had a friend who was the local FBI agent, now retired. He had been issued one of the old MP5s in 10mm years ago. I was thinking that a 10mm MP5 and a Glock 10mm would make one heck of a pair to draw to.

You could really thump a lot of things very quickly with a combo like that.

.41



This is the fastest to the first shot gun I own...






As to the matching handgun....if it had to do everything from concealed carry to hunting then the only real choice for me would be a S&W 657 Mountain Gun.....or a pair...




Only wish that Marlin would make a run of stainless guns like the 1894S with 20" barrel in stainless. The little 16.5" LTR is a nice "little" gun but doesn't have the balance that the 20" does...18.5 might even be better...

The same combo in .44 Magnum would be just about perfect also... My .44 Combo is a Mountain Gun with a Ruger 77/44...

Bob

I'm not a big fan of single actions and whenever I get to the point of giving them up altogether something John Taffin wrote pulls me back into the fold.

Single actions have their place, at least the good ones do, but I tend to prefer DA revolvers. That being said, my last 3 or 4 handgun purchases have been SA revolvers.

Now that would be a prety cool combination. Make the pistol a 1006, Delta, or Kimber SS though.

I did not know they made 10mm MP-5's. That is a lot of firepower in a hurry!!

With you on that one. I am currently trying to save for a custom SS Blackhawk in .45, although the aforementioned SS S&W Moutain gun would make more sense. Something about the balance and feel of a quality single action that is quite alluring. I have owned half a dozen S&W's. They are fun to shoot but I get bored with them, they don't "talk to me", so they have all found their way down the road.

Hey Makay,

What about NINJA TURD !!

Applies the same thing, but DEADLIER

Okay - now you guys got me thinkin'....

Not a big fan of single-action revolvers myself - but I have this Ruger Old Army (I know - not authentic) that I enjoy fooling with. What companion rifle would go with it and use the same balls or conicals?

How about dis one?
1858 Remington

I guess I am not understanding the need for a second post of the same topic but I'll give the same answer a second time. My 4 5/8" Flattop Ruger 44 Mag and Ruger Carbine 44 mag. And I do shoot handguns, a [bleep] of a lot more than anything else actually. From 22 RF's to the 500 Linebaugh and about everything in between. My latest being this tweaked Old Model Super Blackhawk.

That's about the only one I can think of.

BTW, these rifles spit fire and burning grease out the cylinder gap all over your supporting forearm, which necessitates wearing a long leather cuff on that arm if you want to avoid permanent scarring.

Nobody doubts for a second that you're a handgun guy to the core Tony---------and with superb taste.

"Tweaked", you say... as in a new base pin, Bisley grip frame with custom grips, and no doubt a bit of an action job?

Pretty nice rig, Tony.

My 3" 629-4 and Winchester 94 Trapper that I had to sell. Still have the 629 and hope one day to get another .44 lever gun.

Uhyup - leather gauntlet might be a good idea.

Aren't there any single shots that would be appropriate? Maybe this is a question for the Muzzleloaders forum...

A light flintlock with a full length curly maple stock would be very nice.

Depending on what the "Plan" was:
SP101 22LR & Model 90
Vaquero 38-40 & Cimmaron 1873
Vaquero 45LC & Marlin 1894CB or 94 trapper carbine
Contender 223 & Colt AR 15
Contender 25-35 & SRC 1894
Heritage 22M & 9422M
Heritage 17HMR & Marlin 9317
Police Positive 22WRF & Remington model 12
Contender 222 & Savage model 40

You sir, have very good taste in guns!

This thread made me realize that I already do have several long gun/hand gun same centerfire caliber combos:

.38 Special:



.40 S&W:



.45 ACP:



9mm:



Another 9mm:



And to answer the OP's original question, the one that I think is most useful, .357 Magnum:

Your .357 combo is the winner. Fo' shizz.


Travis

Lyman sells single shot Great Plains pistols as companions to their Hawken-style rifles. I think they have both .50 & .54 cal pistols, so you could presumably run the same balls as in the rifle. Track of the Wolf I think also sold pistol kits at one time, although I don't find them, now.

They do a .45 also, I have built a couple of them years ago and long since sold or traded them.

..those S&W 76s were great guns.....

Bob

whl.... day-um, dude, you have some nice guns there!!!

For me, the choice is not hypothetical- it is the .45 Colt, in both my Winchester Trails End and in two Ruger Bisley Vaquero old model revolvers. I handload for both, and shoot Cowboy ammo in both. Extremely versatile combo, for just about everything you might want to hunt or shoot at, at closer to moderate ranges.

Thanks, Doc! Since I am repulsive to women (which I am starting to think may be the luckiest thing that has ever happened to me...) I can spend all the money I save from not having a social life on nice shootin' irons.

Oh, I edited my post to include another 9mm pair I forgot:

A 10mm MP5 would be sweet. That with a Glock, as you say, would make a nice deadly combo. indeed.

WHB, Is that a S&W 76 or a MK 760?

S&W 76

As in full-auto S&W 76? Excuse my ignorance, but I don't recall a semi-auto version.

Yes, it's a full auto (or more accurately, selective fire) version, registered on a Form 4.

If a guy chose the 45 Colt for a combination why wouldn't he choose the 454 as a combo?Load the 454(454 brass) with about 23 grains of 2400 and you get right at 1300 fps(6.5" barrel) with a 300 grain XTP and more with the levergun then if hunting really big guys or shooting longer range and more smack,throw some H-110/296 or lil'Gun in 454 brass and it's right up there with the heavy hitters.

I load my 454 to 45 Colt velocities with 454 brass and 2400.Forget 45 brass in the 454 if you can!

Jayco

Honest question here.
Are there any .454 Lever guns available other than the Legacy/Rossi Puma copy of the '92?

That is the only one I know off hand.

Browning Single shots - but repeaters? None that I can think of.

There was Wild West Guns and another I can't remember..Talk is once the Buffalo guys get the big .500 S&W fixed right in there levergun,they will make the 454 Casull in a levergun.

Here is one prototype..I think it was Wild West guns..Don't quote me but it is the action that fails in a levergun with a SAAMI of 65,000 PSI.



Jayco

Me either.
I wish there was because I could dig one without much convincing. The Rossi .454 that I handled last year left me a bit underwhelmed.

I was going to get one for another rifle/pistol combo but passed keeping my 45-70 combo...

By the way..I use 46 grains of RL-7 in Starline brass with a CCI-Military #34 primer(Mag) for 1867 fps out of my Guide Gun and 1600 out of my 7.5" BFR.

Jayco

I would like one of the Bighorn Armory .500 S&W 89s, but they are awful proud of them. For the price they are asking I'd rather have the .475 leverguns from Turnbull.



but that is me getting topic as that is since the Turnbull isn't a handgun round...

That load is VERY close to my load using Rem brass, and the Cast Precision LBT 420gr WLNGC

I would wait a while on the Bighorn Armory .500..Seems they are having a few issues or atleast,last I heard.

If you take the .500 Smith and Wesson and shoot it in an Handi Rifle with a 22" barrel..This is what you get by John Taffin!

The 45-70 meets or beats all this data in a modern rifle.



Jayco

In all truth like I said above for the price Bighorn wants for their gun and even if the bugs were all worked out of it - I would rather buy Turnbull's '86 .475 Turnbull levergun.
I know thats not a pistol cartridge obviously so its not exactly what intent of the thread is, I just mean for the kind of money I would spend I would rather have the Turnbull.


Its tough to beat the .45-70 rifle pistol combo in my opinion. Its just not everybodys cup of tea.

Rossi/Puma made a few 92's in .480 Ruger, which would be a nice combo to my Super Redhawk .480, but I was not real impressed with the examples I handled. Ruger, of course did some #1's in .475 Linebaugh, which will chamber & fire .480's, but is probably not the optimum chamber for it.

Now that Miroku is making Model 92's in .45 Colt, it should be fairly straightforward to ream one to .454, or rebore for .480. I am not sure what OAL cartridge length they could handle, however. The quality of the guns should be excellent, though one wishes they were made here and not Japan.

I sure would like to see someone like a Shiloh - or even Ruger step up and make quality leverguns here, be they replicas of the Marlins, or the 1892/1886's.

I have one of the Miroku M1886's. Aside from the bogus tang safety (which I buried under a Marbles tang sight) it is a very, very nice rifle. Nothing wrong with the Japanese workmanship.

Of course it would be nicer to have them made here in the USA, but I think I'll probably have to spring for one of the Miroku M1892's soon. The Rossi guns are really variable in a lot of respects.

Wow.
That thing looks like it's built like a bank vault.
Impressive.

Dang, WHB - you win!

The problem was with Wild West Guns 454 Casull if memory serves me...It would not take the pressure of the 454 Casull(65,000 PSI) as beefed up as it is.....

Think about the Sammi "Proof" on a 65,000 PSI cartridge.

Jayco

Doc,

I'd hate to be so limited but were it to occur, there are many variables to consider. A handgun, to my way of looking at this topic, would primarily be for self-defense. So I'd look at the utility of rifle first. I'd want a rifle that can harvest most North American game. I'd go with a .454 Casull. I'd use very stout rounds in it. For my handgun, I'd use .45LC ammo, not necessarily anything other than standard factory stuff. In self-defense applications, sight picture retention and quick follow-up shots are mandatory.

A very good argument could support either a .44 Rem Mag or .41 Rem Mag. I wouldn't consider a .357 Mag. But that's merely my opinion.

In any case, one would have to become a damned good hunter were one limited to using a rifle chambered for a handgun round.


Take care,

R

All you would have to do is learn to hunt like a bowhunter. Getting inside of 100 yards on most critters is not as difficult as some would make it seem. The right large caliber handgun is effective at that range and you do not have to go through the motion of drawing it like a bow.

The rifle would just be "guilding the lilly" to an already potent
handgun cartridge, and adding range. Remember Elmer was able to call his shots at 600 yards with a 4" barrel M29. Took game at unbeleivable range with the same. Pay your dues, practice, practice, practice and you will be amazed at what an accurate LC handgun can accomplish.

If we're hunting for sport, being "damned good" is what it's all about - and failure to harvest game is inconsequential.

If we're hunting to survive, different rules apply - and success is more likely (especially if you can follow rule #1 - "have a gun"...which is mostly the point of a "single cartridge combo, IMO).

I put an entire magazine ( 20 rnds ) into a standard combat man silohette ( #27 ? ) at 75 feet offhand with the FN5.7 Saturday.
then rested across my range bag and held them in a 4-5 " band across the same target, same range.

I can't imagine what a PS 90 can do.

Dang it Bob, you have done it again. I am drooling all over the keyboard.

Is that SS laminate really a 41? Where ever did you find it?

I admit that I could never claim to be a "Real Pistol Guy" as I only own one. But I did, several years ago, receive some great advice from the Campfire Compadres. I still owe a debt of gratitude to Bob and some others who are no longer among us for their help in picking my first handgun, as shown below.

Yes, another pair of 41's.



I do love the Marlin 1894, as do my kids and Grandkids. I shoot either one of them with 210 gr bullets loaded over 6 gr of Universal at a reduced COAL for plinking or 23.4 gr of H110 for serious target practice.

My eight year old grandaughter is posing here to demonstrate that she had recently been shooting the SBH with no ill effect.



I wish I could wholeheartedly recommend the 1894, but as much as I love shooting it, I can not.

Mine spent most of its first two years in the gunshop. It took three tries by a VERY experienced and reputable gunsmith to make it run correctly. The 1894 has a reputation for feeding two at a time and jamming until certain retrofits are done. Mine worked for a couple hundred rounds before it completely failed the first time. After the first attempt to make it like factory new I got two mags full through it before it went back to the shop. The third time back, it was there for a while, but it has not failed me since.

Davidson's had Marlin do a run of SS/lam rifles many years ago. 357, then 41mag, then 44mag. Then years later 30/30 and 45/70. I scored the last three.

One of those SS/laminates would sure look nice beside my SS SBH.

I will have to keep an eye out for one.

I get the interest, and the concept... but, if i'm carrying a rifle, i got no use for a handgun... if i'm carrying a handgun, it's because i'm somewhere that a rifle would be unhandy or out of place...

If i just gotta pick a pair to shoot the same ammo, they'll be .22 LRs...

but if i were limited to owning one rifle and one handgun of my choice, the rifle would be my remington 581 .22... make the handgun my 1911 .45...

I get what you're saying, but you never need something till ya do. It's all in the context of the question I guess.

Both threads didn't really specify the circumstances of WHY you're only going to have two guns in the same caliber and HOW you're going to use them. I think that's why there's so many different responses. Besides just personal preference anyway.