Any difference in barrel length vs velocity or is all the pistol powder all burnt up by 16?

I would be looking to load it up to around 1700FPS and what is safe for hunting.
I am sure 16" would be fine it just looks short to me, extra sight radius probably wouldn't hurt either

You don’t mention bullet weight...200? 250? 300? 340? Cast or jacketed?

My Trapper has a 16.5” barrel and +P loads give fine velocity. No problem getting 250/255s up to 1700 fps or 300s to 1500 or 340s to over 1400. But I find that I don’t really need those speeds, dropping them by 200 fps gives similar terminal performance and trajectory with less recoil, blast and stress on the action. Ballistics by the Inch doesn’t show a great difference between 16” and 18”, certainly not enough to matter in the real world. If you are obsessed by the last few fps then the 18” barrel will give higher velocities. Depending on the load expect at most 50 fps more velocity depending on the bullet weight and the powder used.

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/45colt.html


.

I used to hot rod various old cartridges like 44-40 and 45-70. I no longer load any cartridge hotter than is safe in any rifle or handgun of that caliber. Hot loads are setting a trap and inviting tragedy. Somebody, or you, may fire the "booby trap" cartridges in an weaker firearm and be injured or killed. If you believe you need more power, get a more powerful firearm.

The Rossi 92 will easily handle Ruger Only loads. To knowledge it’s the strongest action made for pistol cartridges.

For reference I get 1600fps with a 300g WFN from a 20” barrel. That’s a gas checked hard cast. That load is from book Ruger Only specs.

The Rossi will reliably chamber up to 360g WFN in my experience. That is also the limit I found for the 45 Colt case being efficient with H110.

This load is overkill for anything I use it for. It went front shoulder to rear end on a #300 boar with a good exit.

I will have a 16” in time and retire the 20” for the most part. I say the extra velocity is not worth it for me. Both are short range guns and no amount of barrel length is going to change that. I keep mine under 100 yards.

Real guns has a neer article on +p .45 Colt loads in a 92 Winchester. Take a look.

Do you have the opportunity to handle both barrel lengths prior to buying one? I found I liked the 16" version better, it just felt and balanced better to me.

1700 fps is doable with 250's, pushing it with 300 and up in the 16 inch. Accuracy and consistency was much better under 1500 fps. Recoil might be a limiting factor as you go higher in these little rifles.

I carry this rifle every day Im home. I replaced the saftey lever on top of the bolt with a Skinner from Steves Gunz, and a taller front sight. My most accurate loads are between 1400 and 1500 fps with 300 to 335 grain bullets. 300 grain Speer Deep Curls over a Ruger only level of w296 or h110 is my preferred load.

The 16" barrel really wakes up the 45 Colt. Jacketed 250 grain hp that goes 950 fps in my Smith Model 25 Mountain Gun, gets 1240 fps in the Rossi 16".

Good luck with your choice.


https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/gallery/80/full/158812.jpg

I use 21 grains of H110, Winchester primers 300 cast or jacketed accurate and fun.

I can't speak for the 16 and 20 Barrels. I owned two of the older rifles with 24 inch octagon barrels and I ran some .300 gr gas checked hardcast bullets through one of them. Velocity was around 1500 FPS and accuracy was ok. I had worked up these loads using H110 and planned on using them on hogs.