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

Not all..

25-5 6"

Yes, you said the difference would be negligible.

I simply calculated the circumference of the .45 cal bullet compared to circumference of the 44 mag (.429 cal). Comparing the circumferences shows the .45 cal bullet's circumference is 15% greater than the .429 cal bullet. Given the same length bullets, or say the same length of contact in the bore, the .45 cal bullet will have 15% more bullet exterior contacting the bore than the .429 cal 44 mag.

What you just posted above shows my ignorance regarding the length of 45 colt bullets vs. the lengths of various 44 magnum bullets. I have learned something and stand corrected.

Once again you have educated me. Thank you.

Indeed it does not.

I was a deputy in Texas for 17 years. The issue of stopping power of various cartridges was always a lively debate.

One theory, not mine, but I happen to agree with, is you can only count on damage being done to your assailant by the tissues the bullet actually hits. Temporary cavitation, hydrostatic shock, etc...could not be counted on to stop an adversary. The only damage one could count on to stop a bad guy was damage done to the tissue the bullet actually hit. Ergo, a bigger diameter bullet (45 ACP) driven at a decent velocity, was more likely to stop an attacker than a smaller bullet (9mm) driven at a faster velocity. I agree with that 100%.

Great observation.

The reason the 45ACP was adopted.

17 page debate lol. Normally goes on much longer and this one probably will. My caliber of choice is the 45 colt. Great game hammer when loaded and has the added benefit of punchin a larger hole. Bigger hole is a good thing. 44 mag will do well if thats what you choose as well.

Me too. I load a cast 270grain rcbs saa to about 280 grains, in several styles of hollow points. Fro a human standpoint, it is a freight train.

Yeah, so scientific testing with as few variables as possible, using a medium made from animal protein that's designed to replicate muscle tissue, with two guns that are as identical as possible and loads that are as comparable as possible, is less useful than starry-eyed, puerile bullshit about "history and character"??? Good to know I'm sparring with such an intellectual titan.......or something.



What an impressive sense of superiority you have! Winning an argument usually involves actually having one. You seem to have skipped the argument portion of this conflict and gone directly to personal insults. The question is, do you actually have anything meaningful to add to this discussion??? Or is "history and character" and "shove it up your ass" about the sum of it?

In fine Campfire style and a language you can easily understand, GFY.

Me too. I load a cast 270grain rcbs saa to about 280 grains, in several styles of hollow points. Fro a human standpoint, it is a freight train. [/quote]

I am working on casting some 320 gr now. A five cavity 320 gr mould empties my lead pot pretty darned fast!

Someone was emailing me some questions, and this thread (once you cut through the arguing) has some good information.


I still tend to roll with the .44 for the reasons stated above.



I have yet to shoot a critter where substituting a heavy .44 load for a heavy .45 load (or vice/versa) would have made the slightest bit of difference.

The above is one of if not the best in the whole thread. I like the 45 Colt and my Blackhawk seems to be one of the ones Ruger did right but the difference between the 45 Cold and a 44 Mag is to small to loose ant sleep over.

i have two three screw blackhawks in the right caliber, 41magnum.
for those that have a little more refined taste than 44 or 45
and to really get it going i was loading for a buckeye special yesterday in 38wcf. A litle bit of lube on the casings was preventing the rounds from entering the cylinder, and while seated to the stated o.a.l., they were just a little sticky with the cylinder inverted. And ruger cylinders are sloppy?
Of interest is reading an article yesterday by a guy making his own cylinders in 38wcf for the buckeye special, and getting 1500fps out of his loads.

My Colt 32-20 is a bigger hammer than either!!!

you know i do have a double action colt in 32.20, turn of the century gun. Kaywoody would be interested.

My first handgun was an H&R 949 .22 bought for me by my Dad at a local hardware store. I killed a lot of possums and such with it when they were worth something for their fur. I was talking with a local gunsmith who was a strong Ruger advocate. The Super Single Six is probably far superior, but I was happy with the H&R. The gunsmith wouldn't work on an H&R. His quote was something like, "I wouldn't have an H&R shoved up my ass,". My friends and I often wondered what make of handgun he would have shoved up his ass. A Ruger, I reckon. I personally am not anxious to have any handgun shoved up my own ass. Others' mileage may vary.

Ron, bring it to Quemado - I'll bring my Bisley, if we can make it. We'll have Kaywoodie slobberin' !

I read a news article about a prison inmate who smuggled a K-frame in his ass. We all have our standards.

And varying capacities, evidently.

I dated a girl for a while who often used the 6 inch barrel of a 686 as a dihldoh

I'd take 44 because I already have 45 colt, plus I have a rifle in 44 and no revolver to pair up with it.