Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters JB; came across your article on the 45 Colt

As I pointed out.

The big problem, however, is that CraigC apparently has little knowledge of the basics of interior ballistics. Combined with an obsessive need to "prove" the .44 Magnum is the only suitable heavy revolver cartridge on earth, this results in some interesting mental gymnastics.

You two are missing each other on this point. The pressure data John Barsness posted features revolvers with different barrel lengths.

Explain.

I have no need to prove anything, one way or another. The facts are what they are. I own 6 .45Colt's and 7 .44Mag's. I'm not arguing one over the other. Quite the contrary.

Explain.

I have no need to prove anything, one way or another. The facts are what they are. I own 6 .45Colt's and 7 .44Mag's. I'm not arguing one over the other. Quite the contrary.

Now but you are being extremely obtuse. I have 2 S&W M29-2's bother with 6 1/2" barrel and on the same day with the same Ammo one is 50 to 80 FPS (depending on load) is faster than the other one

Simular E are alike, but not identical especially when they are not the same caliber plus the fact your data pales in comparison to hogdons because you have zero pressure data. You have not discovered any new truths, you just show a lack of understanding

The guns are as close as you can make them and still resemble real guns that people buy over the counter. They're from the same maker, of the same vintage, have factory barrels and chambers. They are as close as two factory guns could be. Yeah, azzhole, I know that there are variations between individual guns but unless one of mine can be proven to be widely deviated from the norm, the test was valid.

My loads are slower than Hodgdon's because they were fired from real guns, not pressure barrels. What do you mean I have no pressure data? All of Hodgdon's data has pressure levels.

Now you're just arguing to argue. Admit it, it doesn't matter how the testing was conducted, you're going to argue with it because you don't like the results. YOU are the one with the agenda.

The guns are as close as you can make them and still resemble real guns that people buy over the counter. They're from the same maker, of the same vintage, have factory barrels and chambers. They are as close as two factory guns could be. Yeah, azzhole, I know that there are variations between individual guns but unless one of mine can be proven to be widely deviated from the norm, the test was valid.

My loads are slower than Hodgdon's because they were fired from real guns, not pressure barrels. What do you mean I have no pressure data? All of Hodgdon's data has pressure levels.

Now you're just arguing to argue. Admit it, it doesn't matter how the testing was conducted, you're going to argue with it because you don't like the results. YOU are the one with the agenda.

I care too. Which is why I have to refute misinformation when I see it. Do you really think you're talking to a moron here?

Number one I am not the azz hole here. Fact is you are now admitting what I said from the beginning. We're is the pressure data with your posted chrono'ed loads? Not there is where. Two different guns may or may not pressure up the same and that is the point. Mule Deers data has more merit since it is from Hogdon with pressure for each load and velocity.

I'll take rhetorical for $400, Alex.....

Now you're just arguing to argue.

Not from where I'm sitting.

You make an irrelevant point, as usual. As usual, you twist the argument to fit your answers. So now I have to test them in a pressure barrel for the test to be valid? Nonsense. How is that relevant to the world of real guns? What difference would it make anyway? The parameters you suggest would not be relevant to real world, real gun use. What happens in pressure barrels doesn't make a damned bit of difference to real world use. You're going in circles just to avoid the truth. How many different ways are you going to attack my efforts, just because you can't concede on a point? You're all hot air.

Not from where I'm sitting.


You're all hot air.

Or three Oregonians.

I haven't said one thing about your test, nothing right wrong or indifferent.

Now you're arguing just for the sake of arguing.