Musings from the Miller: The 45 Colt vs 30-30.

[J Miller]

I didn't want to hijack the other thread so I thought I'd post this in a new one.

The comparison of the .45 Colt vs the 30-30 in a lever gun is something we can do today but would not have been possible a hundred years ago in 1910.

First the 30-30 of 1910 is basically what it is today. The cartridge specs have not changed. The basic velocity, bullet weights and pressure specs are so close as to be functionally the same. The cartridge cases are the same, the 30-30 was never loaded in balloon head cases. It started out in the stronger solid head cases. The rifles (we'll stick to lever actions for this thread) are basically the same. They started out using special steel barrels for smokeless powder in the stronger actions of the day. Over the years there has been some improvements in metallurgy, but the rifle designs have not changed significantly. So no real improvements to the 30-30 cartridge or the rifles chambered for it in the 116 years of it's existence.

In 1910 the .45 Colt was still basically loaded with black powder although the smokeless and semi-smokeless powder cartridges were becoming more readily available. It was loaded in the comparatively week balloon head cases, and only with the pointy conical bullet. The only really powerful load was the UMC Purple box ammo that was actually loaded with 40 grs of black powder. This was the factory load Elmer Keith carried and made positive comments about.

The rifles capable of handling the increased performance of the upgraded .45 Colt were however available in 1910. Both the Winchester 1892 and the Marlin 1894 with the special steel barrels were being made. Since both of them could handle the hotter 44-40 express rounds put out by Remington and Winchester, they would have little if any trouble with the upgraded .45 Colt. Unfortunately neither was chambered for it. The first lever gun chambered for the .45 Colt didn't come about until 1985.

Today we have a myriad of powders that can push the .45 Colt to performance levels never imagined by those in 1910. These powders used in good strong solid head cases, with bullets of better quality and design and improved primers give us an incredible range of options. When fired out of modern rifles made from modern steels the grand old .45 Colt can do things no one from the past could have ever dreamed of.

But ... does that make the .45 Colt a better hunting rifle cartridge?
I have to ask; better than what?
Better than what it would have been in 1910, absolutely.
Better than the 30-30; maybe, maybe not.

That's why I have both. I like both, I enjoy both, and someday I really want to hunt with both. Until then I'll keep practicing and working on finding the perfect load.

Joe

[dbateman]

+1

[AJMD429]

I've always found it interesting that the venerable .45 Colt wasn't chambered in a venerable lever-gun until the 1980's - kind of like not trying to mix peanut-butter and chocolate to make a Reece's Cup until centuries after both had been discovered and used individually.

[Griff]

+1 Joe. Very good synopsis. Each has its uses... pluses and minuses, depends on your use.

[Old Savage]

Well depends on what you are hunting and where. Mine (45) is a lightweight cannon with those SuperTutt loads.

[piller]

The reason I have a Puma in .480 and a Ruger SRH in .480 is that they can use the same ammunition. The idea of a .45 in both the pistol and rifle and both able to use loads hotter than the balloon head cases would have been great back then. Having to only worry about 1 type of ammunition helps when you have to carry or pack on a horse everything you need. Didn't the Winchester company refuse to make a rifle in .45 because of the competition from colt. I may be all wet on this one.

[Hobie]

You forgot to point out that the old .45 Colt cases had a negligible rim which worked against function in some of the rifles then. Modern cases have a more substantial rim. The old rim was such that you can't use the same shell holder as with the newer cases.

[J Miller]

You forgot to point out that the old .45 Colt cases had a negligible rim which worked against function in some of the rifles then. Modern cases have a more substantial rim. The old rim was such that you can't use the same shell holder as with the newer cases.

No, I didn't forget that. The old balloon head cases do have a slightly smaller rim than the solid head cases but from my experience it doesn't matter. I've used the balloon head cases in my Rossi Puma, Winchester 94AE, and Marlin 1894. All of them handled the older cases just fine.

I also use the same shell holder with both the balloon head cases and solid head cases. The only time the balloon heads don't work in the regular shell holders is if they have been fired with hotter load and expanded all the way to the rim.

Joe

[Poohgyrr]

I've already learned a lot from this thread and appreciate it - thanks.

For myself and what I do, the 45 Colt & 30-30 are a lot of fun, both on the range and in the field. The cast boolits forum also has great information that makes these rounds even more useful. I would hate to lose the ability to handload - that goes for all of the other cartridges too.

The history of these two rounds is interesting. It would be fun to go back in time and watch all this stuff happen. Buy a few guns while I'm back there and bring them home with me.

[Borregos]

This question sounds like a good reason for me to keep my eyes open for a levergun in 45 Colt

[J Miller]

This question sounds like a good reason for me to keep my eyes open for a levergun in 45 Colt

I actually need one more. I have a 16" Trapper, a 20" Short Rifle, so now to complete the set I need a 24" or 26" rifle.

Why do I need a rifle ...... well, three's a charm.

Joe

[Griff]

This question sounds like a good reason for me to keep my eyes open for a levergun in 45 Colt

Why I have three... an 1873, and 1860 and an 1892. Two for CAS and one fer hunting with those shoulder cannon loads Old Savage talks about!

[Lawyer Daggit]

Hi Mr Miller, thanks for your comments. I have often seen Colt 45 chamberings that also take .410 (ie Contender Carbine) and have thought "mmm very handy'.

Do you know what hot rodding the round do to its pressure curve? I have not seen any literature on this (not that you can go too hot in a contender).

[Buck Elliott]

Colt's was -- and still is -- very jealous of its trademarks. Think now about the wrangling of using ".45 COLT" as a caliber marking by other firearm manufacturers. We now have to put up with ".45 LC" in its place. The battle between Colt & Winchester was a long one, and hard-fought on both sides. Still not over, from what I hear.... Didn't stop Colt from chambering for Winchester-developed rounds though, did it...? They just didn't mark 'em as such

The conventional wisdom of the day was that the relatively weak -- and very tiny rim of the folded-head .45 Colt case my not extract reliably from leverguns, using black powder loads and possibly dirty or corroded ammunition.

I have winnowed out all my folded-head (balloon) .45 Colt cases, and put them together in a box, just for old times' sake.

[J Miller]

I'm not sure what loading them to the higher pressures does to the pressure curve. I don't have any of those fancy computer programs that plot things. However I do know that Elmer Keiths load of 18.5grs 2400 under a 260ish KSWC will crank out about 25,000 PSI. And many of the loads as listed in the Hodgdons #26 manual are 30,000 CUP loads. So the pressure is up there.

I don't know about stamping guns with the caliber: "45 Colt" vs .45 LC or anything else. My S&W 25-5 and every other S&W chambered for the 45 Colt I've seen is stamped .45 Colt. My Uberti Cattleman is stamped Cattleman - .45, my Marlin and Winchester lever guns are stamped .45 Colt, my OM Ruger BH is stamped .45 Cal. So I don't know if it's due to Colt's being anal retentive or just what ever the gun maker want's to stamp on the gun.

Back to the balloon head cases. I still load mine occasionally, mostly with black powder. ( Buck if you'd like to sell yours, let me know.) I have no trouble with feeding, extraction, or ejection with my Marlin and Winchester 94 AE. I did however have trouble with my Rossi Puma once the chambers got really filthy. However that may have been my fault more than the balloon head case rims. I used the wrong lube on the bullets.
From my experience I think the conventional wisdom about the .45 Colt and lever guns may not be totally correct. I think it was more that Colt held the proprietary rights to the cartridge for the first bunch of years it was produced, then when that expired the pistol caliber lever guns were really on the way out.
So why bother?

That's what I've seen and read about that. Could be wrong, and if anybody has some documents to show otherwise I'd love to read them. Seriously.

Joe

[Idiot]

I think the combination of a good rifle or carbine chambered in 30-30 Winchester, used as a primary arm, backed up by a good handgun chambered in 45 Colt is hard to beat. The 30-30 will take care of targets at a distance, sans any threat, that require something flat shooting and a long sight radius and the 45 Colt will handle everything up close, and possibly a threat, where ready, handy, and throwing a thick heavy weight bullet is favored.

I don't view these two cartridges vying for the same spot, but instead complementing each other to complete a package.

[Tumbleweeds II]

Idiot, you ain't near as dumb as your handle would suggest.

As far as the balloon head cases, my reading of military experience in the late 19th suggests they really got to be a problem when the barrel got hot, like after a couple of dozen BP rounds as quick as you could get them off. The barrel swelled, shrinking the chamber, and the cases stuck. Then, at least in a trapdoor .45-70, the extractor could pull the head off the case. So, picture the 7th cav prying stuck case halves out of the chambers with their knives. Those revolvers were pretty handy in that instance!

A .45 Colt would stick even worse, because it is a straight case, while the .45-70 tapers a little. Once the .45-70 case gets moving, it no longer has friction with the chamber walls, but the Colt case drags the whole way.

Lever carbines and revolvers were made in every round from .22 LR to .44 WCF. If the .45 was excluded, there was a reason, like some people tried it and it didn't work. They never chambered a lever in .45 Schofield, either, and it had a bit more of a rim.

But I wasn't there. This is just what I recall from history class

[Buck Elliott]

Don't want to hijack the thread, but a little side note....

.45-70 cases of the Indian Wars period were of the balloon-head style, and were still made of copper... Softer than brass, and not as elastic, they also had a tendency to get covered with verdigris very quickly -- all of which led to extraction difficulties when fired from the Springfield. Heat up the barrel -- which black powder does at a rapid rate -- and you have a perfect recipe for debacle.

Extractors pulled through the fragile rims and left the soldier holding a highly unwieldy CLUB.

Even after the experiences of the Plains campaigns, the Army did not adopt BRASS for .45 Government loads until the 1890s...

[J Miller]

Buck,

The early .45 Colt Govt cases were copper too, so your comment does apply.
Do you think the Army failed to or was slow to learn the lesson about copper cases, or did they have so many stockpiled they wanted to use them all up before changing to brass?

Joe

[Buck Elliott]

Remember that metallic cartridges were the new-fangled thing back then, especially to the minds of Ordnance Board officers who were mostly graduates of the Great Unpleantness, and who had soldiered through with muzzle-loaders.

That said, copper was much cheaper and easier to form than brass, precisely because of its lower elasticity. The frontier Army was largely made up of immigrants and dis-placed southerners, who still had some fight left in them, and were therefore considered expendable to a great degree, by the top brass in Washington. Even though reports from the field begged for something better than the copper-cased ammunition the government supplied, the pleas fell on mostly deaf ears. It took a while for the ammo makers (gov't arsenals included) to perfect the machinery needed to form brass cases in the huge numbers required. To the Army's great discredit, it was still slow to get on the brass bandwagon, and a lot of good boys lost their lives due to bureaucratic boondoggling.

[J Miller]

Buck,

That makes sense.

Joe

[piller]

Just one of the many reasons I like it here, we have folks who can answer a question with a lot of accurate information. Thanks for the information Buck.