Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns ROSS SEYFRIED QUESTION

You have to have some sort of ground rules. A baseline. If you're comparing two cartridges or guns, as the articles in question do, you have to start somewhere. Linebaugh determined that the large frame .45 Blackhawk experienced catastrophic failure at ~60,000psi. The .44 Super Blackhawk at ~80,000psi. SAAMI maximums for the .44 are half that, which yields a 100% safety margin. Therefore he concluded that the .45's were about 80% as strong as the .44's and could be safely run at 80% the pressure with a 100% safety margin. Does t hat mean the guns can take more pressure than the accepted maximums? Sure but the safety margin is there for a reason. It's there for those unseen variables like crimp strength, varying chamber dimensions, dirty chambers, tight throats, case length, powder variations, etc., that are not present in a test barrel but can effect chamber pressure in an actual firearm. Sure, you could run a standard six shot Blackhawk at 50,000psi but how long would it last? What happens when those unseen variables add up to create a revolving hand grenade? This is why it is only proper and fair to compare the .45Colt at "Ruger only" levels to the .44Mag at standard pressure. That is part of the Linebaugh/Seyfried articles that is unwavering. It's only in guns that are stronger than the aforementioned six-shot Rugers that they can be operated at the same pressure, which is pretty much the limit at 100% load density.



Nor I. If I'm going to the expense of a five-shot, it's going to be a .475 or .500.



I agree and to me, there is the biggest advantage of the .454. The lofty pressure ceiling coupled with tough bullets make it a significant step up in capability.

Thats why i just use a 454, why not take advantage of even more powder capacity and speed? I kinda laugh at the “i wish fa and ruger and bfr just made it in a 45 colt.” With the 454 you have a cartridge that has the ability to be done with bore size arguments because it will readily push aframes and the like thru a cape buffalo to the offside as it will a barnes xbp and they expand to a minimum of .7”. This kills better than any of the larger solids and the 475 and 480 dont have the velocity to push those expandables to the velocity necessary to make that work, nor do they have the same bullet choices. That said i think the difference is more into what bullets you use. ANY of these choices, and ill add 41 mag in there, can easily be better than a larger faster one depending on which bullet you choose. Ill take a 41 mag with a monometal solid or swift aframe over any of the biggies with a cast bullet.

And with the .454 you can forget about all the crap that is usually wrong with .45's. Over or undersized throats. Oversized chambers, etc..

Which was always one of my gripes about the .45Colt. You can buy a properly built .44Mag right off the shelf but a .45 has to be built out of something else. The best .45's Ruger has ever built are .454's.

If one wants. To use 45 Colt brass in a BFR or FA they can be loaded to the same level

BFR’s and FA haven’t had that problem.

I posted hogdon data and the 44 barrel was indeed 1” and the CUP was slightly higher, that is a fct according to Hogdon

Trademark is correct.

They can be loaded near the same level but not to the same level but a maxed 454 will outrun a maxed 45 colt by more than a 45 colt will outrun a 44 mag and the whole point is why then shoot a 45 colt in an already stronger 454 gun then get it knocked down to a 45 colt. Makes not one lick of sense. I know guys that think they load to equivalent 454 levels, but they arent.

In fact the 454 has a great case capacity difference between it and the 45 colt than the 45 colt dose over the 44 mag (depending on the exact brass used). Plus the guns are stronger so if we want to continue with this 45 colt advantage vs the 44 mag then we cant ignore it the other way either.

The 480 Ruger rendered this whole conversation irrelevant , except for the sake of argument.

Well except depending on what bullets one wants to use but it is a step up from the 44mag and 45 colt.

What if one has a cast bullet designed to seat out in the 45 Colt case to the same or very close to the same OAL as the same bullet seated in the 454 case at normal 454 Casull length? Could one come close to the 454 Casull like that?
I could use enough Bullseye under, not over said bullet to get recoil like a 22 RF so I wouldn't be afraid of it. And then I could work up to maybe full power in maybe 10 to 12 years if I live long enough.

The conversation predates BFR's and FA's are $3000. It's cheaper to build a tight .45 out of a .44 than it is to buy an FA.



Which is why the .44's advantage in their data was 100fps. In identical guns, it's 50fps.



Some bullets can only be loaded in .45Colt cases due to overall length limitations. I had a thought about reaming a .44Mag to take a 1.4" case but with the bullets I'm using, there's no point as I'm already using the entire cylinder length.

Some i guess but no probs with any of the monometals or punch bullets, nor the premium expandables. The only time this is an issues is when some crazies adhering to the obsession with bullet weight and somehow think a 385gr is somehow gonna make a difference vs a 355 or whatever. It has never been an issue for me in anyway and i think ive used it on enough stuff to render that point moot.

It's only really an issue with very heavy cast bullets. Which, as we're finding out, is yesterday's news.

IMHO, the 360gr from CPBC or Oregon Trail is the top cast bullet for the .454 and it fits just fine in .454 brass.

When loaded to the same COL the powdered capacity is equal. Ross Seyfried loaded 60,000 + psi loads in 45 colt brass

Bullet weight is not the prime factor that effects penetration. The material and nose shape are more important.

Exactly so weight is way way down the list. Behind construction type and materialtype and nose profile.

what pistols did he shoot those in, Rugers??

Sevilles.

Proving that SD is a meaningless number.