Why The Claim That 45 LC is More Versatile Than 44 Mag

[Sarge]

Everyone here seems to agree that the 45 LC is a more versatile caliber than the 44mag....
What am I missing?

http://www.customsixguns.com/writings/d ... e_myth.htm

I'll agree that the .44 is good (and I ran it hard enough, over ten years, to rattle a 29-2 loose twice) but the .45 Colt simply handles heavier bullets easier, at lower pressures. Besides, it's cooler- reason enough all by itself.

[marlinman93]

My only reason for liking the .45 Colt more over the .44 Mag is bullet selection. Lots more variety of bullet weight and shape for the .45 than the .44. In identical guns the .44 will usually have a small amount of extra steel around the chambers, so it can handle a bit more pressure, but since I never load either to anywhere near max. pressures, that doesn't maen anything to me.

[Grizz]

Huh.... the 44 mag shoots from roundball to 405g and anything in-between. What is the weight range for the 45? What is the moderate pressure heaviest bullet loading for the 45 colt?

Regards,
Grizz

[AJMD429]

Huh.... the 44 mag shoots from roundball to 405g and anything in-between.

Sounds like we need some enterprizing reloader to post a "Heavy bullets in the .44 Mag" thread - "where to get them, what ones cycle in leverguns, and recommended load data"...

[JohndeFresno]

Huh.... the 44 mag shoots from roundball to 405g and anything in-between.

Sounds like we need some enterprizing reloader to post a "Heavy bullets in the .44 Mag" thread - "where to get them, what ones cycle in leverguns, and recommended load data"...

Here ya go - you can move this to another thread, if we want to go further:
John Taffin;s "Heavy Weight Bullets In The .44 Magnum", Guns Magazine, at:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... ntent;col1

You may want to copy or print it out before it falls off the 'net, as have a few of the "findarticles.com" pieces in the past!

EDIT: The article is too good to lose, so I reformatted it, with copyrights intact, into a PDF file that is easier to print in full and to view. I bypassed the sidebars, "Next" buttons, and the like. For the time being, I have stored it online (for your download) here:
http://www.box.net/shared/mf052v6vop

[bobbyjack]

Much is made about the pressures generated by these loads, the long disproved legend that the .45 Colt case was weak, and the big chambers. I don't find those things to be a problem at all. The one thing I do acknowledge is that with heavy loads approaching 30K CUP, brass life will be shorter, and the wear and tear on the gun ~AND~ your wrists and elbows will be greater.

Yep. Lots of the 'problem' is simply that so many .45 Colt firearms have oversized chambers, so the brass is 'worked' quite a bit more.

What it comes down to is that the .45 Colt and the .44 Mag are both very versatile. But in opposite directions. To get added high performance loads from the .45 Colt, you have to load it "UP". To get milder loads from the .44 Mag, you have to load it "DOWN". I'm of the opinion it's a wash, they're equal.

Yep; same 'debate' as:

• .45-70 vs. .444 Marlin
  .30-06 vs. .308
  .223 Rem vs. .222 Rem
  ...and many others...

With a velocity difference of +/- 10% or a bullet weight difference of +/- 20%, you're splitting hairs anyway.

The REAL issues are typically shot placement and bullet construction, anyway.

A .222 Rem steel-core bullet at 1,000 fps placed into the eye-socket and to the brain, would probably do more to stop a charging elephant, than a .460 Weatherby soft-nose a few inches in either direction. (disclaimer - I'm not an experienced African hunter... ).

On the other hand...

It is so much FUN to debate things like ".45 Colt vs. .44 Mag" that I can never resist...

The brain of an Elephant is way above the eye line! You would be ground into dust!

Bob

[Grizz]

I love this topic! Thanks for letting me play.

Here's my .44 mag load:

0331110932-00.jpg

Here's Marshall's data:
13g 2400
1000 fps
28,000 CUP

Not a high-pressure load by any measure.

this goes in a real SIX shooter, not a 5-shot, which matters to me when the bear is behind the next alder and I still can't see him.....

what I want to see from the .45 afficianados is a 28K CUP load from their revolver that produces the SAME ME and the same down range MOMENTUM, with the same proven penetration. I'm a curious guy, and I'd like to see it happen because I am also a big 45 fan. It's just that I use the ACP version of that diameter.

I am not disparaging the 45 Colt. It's got great history and it does great stuff. But most of the claims I read about it don't measure up to this load, that's all I'm saying.

Saying that you don't need that heavy of a bullet isn't on topic. What does "need" have to do with it? The topic is about the versatility of the two calibers. The roundball is lighter and the heavy is heavier when you're talking about the standard chamberings. If someone actually USES a load this heavy or heavier in 45 Colt revolvers I'm interested in learning about it. This 44 round is my only 44 mag load. I've quit using all the rest of them.

For the point of information, what is the 28000 CUP 45 Colt equivilent of this 44 load?

Best

Grizz

[JohndeFresno]

Grizz,

It goes back to more power, less pressure with a bigger slug when you compare .44 with .45 loads.

This CUP vs. PSI thing is a bit confusing, and I must go with PSI because that is what most of my software (including QuickLoad) can relate to.

Your load appears to be quite similar in depth and configuration to the .429 RCBS GC 44-300-SWC, so that is what I used from the QuickLoad tables.

OK -
44 Mag, .429 - 308, RCBS GC 44300-SWC (weight varies with lead content, of course)
6" barrel, 1.610 COAL, Alliant 2400 13.0 gr. = 18071 Max PSI, 931 fps
* 592.933 ft. lbs. ME

45 Colt, .453 - 300 Oregon Train TrueShot FP
6" barrel, 1.580 COAL, Accurate No. 9 13.7 gr. = 18041 Max PSI, 943 fps
* 592.518 ft. lbs. ME - and a bigger hole!
And that is giving the .44 Mag 8 more grains of bullet weight.

No, I'm not overly impressed with the 44 Mag versus the 45 Colt; even though I own, love, and shoot two great SA .44 Mags (A 6.5 incher and a 10 inch silhouette shooter).

In fact, the bigger hole wins, and these pressures are quite mild for any new Ruger Single Action. The maximums are :
36k PSI (SAAMI) for .44 Magnum,
35k PSI for .45 Colt,
(as accepted by the industry for a newer Blackhawk or strongly built new model .45)

Incidentally, using a bit more PSI, but still within the realistic 35k limit for the new Blackhawks and guns of similar strength, look at this .45 Colt load (again, projected by QuickLoad, as I ran some experimental figures). It is safely below 35k:

45 Colt, .453 - 300 Oregon Train TrueShot FP
6" barrel, 1.580 COAL, Accurate No. 9 16.8 gr. = 29734 Max PSI, 1153 fps
* 885.800 ft. lbs. ME - and still a bigger hole!

Besides the "cool" factor as mentioned by Sarge, I like what you can do with the .45 Colt within safe pressures. I believe that it just does more, and with a little less fuss (pressure, noise, flash, etc.) AND, that convertible of mine shoots the cheaper and more readily found .45 ACP's as well - what a great survival benefit!

[Grizz]

The question is whether one is more versatile than the other. I don't see it yet. They both look pretty cotton picking versatile to me.

What does quickload project for ME with the 405g load I shoot?

I am not disputing the usefulness of 45 Colt.

BTW, isn't the 44-40 an older cartridge than 45 Colt?

Grizz

[bj94]

I find it hard to prove that one is more versatile than the other. In many ways they can be pretty close.

If you handload, you can produce similar loads in either caliber, except you can go a little heavier in .45Colt. I've personally loaded 300 gain bullets in .44mag and 340's in .45Colt. I've also loaded 180's in both calibers.

If you don't handload, there is a wider range of ammo easily available in .44mag. I say easily because there are specialty companies loading ammo in both calibers that basically cover the same range of ammo that you can cover with handloading.

As for the guns themselves- there are some gun models available in .45Colt but not in .44mag, such as the SAA and the newer small frame rugers. OTOH there are a lot of modern designs that are more available in .44mag than .45Colt.

In leverguns you can get both calibers but I've noticed that the rifling twist in some .44mag rifles will hamper their use with heavier bullets.

If I was going to take all of this evidence in consideration, I would give a slight edge to the .45Colt for the reasons above.

[w30wcf]

Grizz,
Both are great cartridges. Personally, I'm a 45 Colt fan. I bought my first one back in 1973.
At the time the main reason that I purchased the 45 Colt was that everybody I knew owned 44 mags so I wanted to be a bit different. I have never regreted that decision.

Several years later I became interested in IHMSA and at the time, the 200 meter steel ram was a challange. Not only did the bullet have to make contact, but the ram had to go down to count. Well, on the range that I competed, the 44 Mags at the time were about 70% positive. The heaviest bullet available for the 44 at that time was 265 grs.

To bring down those pesky rams with 100% reliability, enter the 45 Colt. More momentum was needed and I had a 45-70 and several bullet molds that I used for it. Among them was a 350 gr (457192) and a 420 gr (457193). Those weights were in w.w.+2% tin alloy.
I tried both of those bullets in the Colt sized .454" using 296 powder.

The 420 gr bullet exited the barrel at 1,070 f.p.s. but the problem was that even with the sights all the way down using a 6 o'clock hold, the bullets would sail over the ram's back.
Don't know about the pressure but the cases just about fell out of the chambers. (I see that in the LoadSwap section of the Beartooth site there is a load listed using Lil Gun under a 405 gr bullet giving 1,050 fps in the 45 Colt. No pressure is shown though)

The 350 gr. bullet on the other hand using a 6 o'clock hold and the sights 3 clicks up from the bottom, would impact on the ram and down it would go with 100% reliability. I use to kid the 44 Mag boys that I was shooting a century old cartridges and wasn't having any trouble.

J.D. Jones attended those matches and became interested in my 45 Colt heavy bullet loads and I gave him some bullets to try. I said that they were the only bullets that would take down his steel mastadon reduced target. Within a year or two after he came out with the first heavyweight .44 bullets in NEI molds.

In the early 1980's IHMSA made a rule that the rams needed to be offset closer to their topple point so that even the 357's with 180 gr bullets were pretty much 100% reliable. That took some of the fun out of it for me.

These days I'm appreciating more and more as a vintage cartridge and shooting it moreso with black powder and in a rifle as well. Nothing quite like stepping back in time.......

Both the 44-40 and 45 Colt were introduced in 1873 along with the 45-70.

w30wcf

[Grizz]

I see this as dancing with the one that 'brung ya.

I happened to progress to 44 mag when I lived in Alaska. There was no internet. There weren't even any real telephones. But Dirty Harry popularized the caliber. I never considered 45 Colt. But if Harry had a Colt in hand when he said "make my day" I might be an afficionado.

I found out something about cast bullets the same way. A guy I knew from Juneau came out to deer hunt with me. He had a bunch of plain base cast 325g bullets that he claimed were dynamite. I started experimenting with loads for a 10" superblackhawk. At the time I had eyesight and eye-hand coordination and hitting deer head size targets consistently at Tongass ranges was a piece of cake. I made a LOT of venison with that gun. And that load IS dynamite on any deer size animal. But....... I still worried about the bears that were thicker than flys sometimes. I just never learned to trust them.

Testing that 325g 44 load against my 7mm mag and 338 mag and 12ga for terminal effects proved it up and showed its limitations. That set me in the direction of the 45/70 and heavy-for-caliber loads, and the discovery that heavy bullets do not have to fly fast to penetrate deep... it's the weight that does the work that velocity needs to do with light weight and sometimes frangible bullets. And it slowly dawned on me that my loaded to max 338 that I hunted deer with, for bear protection, was not so smart. Those bullets, at that time, were not made to impact heavy bone and muscle mass at muzzle velocity.

That info mixed in with the bear-shooting experiences of the people I met over the years, including the guy the bear ate, made me suspect that my revolver load was a better bet as a stopper than my 338. The rest is history.

Like everyone here, my history mixed with our common history produces its own track. I am very leery of high pressure hand gun loads. They are not necessary when the throw weight escalates.

I think I mentioned that I like the more modern .45, the 1911 version.

My wheel gun is a 5-1/2" redhawk for two reasons. It is double action, and if the bear is eating me I don't want a single action 5-shot gun for self defense. And it is stronger than most other production guns, including all the Colts I have seen. And it holds six rounds... that's three reasons.

I'd love to have the same model gun in 45 Colt cal. Get all the stuff. Do all the side-by-side comparisons that come to mind. I doubt I would be able to prove one way or the other that one gun was absolutely more versatile than the other..... but I will say that the original 45 Colt that most guys love, the comparitively weak five shooter SAA is NO MATCH to the versatility of the of the original .44 magnum, and if it were superior there would be no 44 mag. All the accolades for the 45 Colt's superior versatility involve loads that would blow up the original guns.

All things considered, when I'm standing in the deep dark woods with my revolver carried so it can be accessed by whichever arm isn't being munched by 'brer bear, I'm not gonna be wishing I had gone with a 'more versatile' caliber. I'm only going to hope the first 405g bullet finds the brain pan so I can get the rotten thing off of me.

I hope nobody thinks I'm putting down 45 Colt. I'm not. I even shoot one every once in a while. It just wasn't a viable choice back in the day...

Best to All
Grizz

PS: I still don't see a 405g+ bullet departing a 45 Colt at 1000+ fps, or a penetration test that compares it to the 44's penetration. Hoping to tho.

[bj94]

Several years later I became interested in IHMSA and at the time, the 200 meter steel ram was a challange. Not only did the bullet have to make contact, but the ram had to go down to count. Well, on the range that I competed, the 44 Mags at the time were about 70% positive. The heaviest bullet available for the 44 at that time was 265 grs.

I played with IHMSA for awhile. I tried revolver once and only once. I wasn't able to invest in a proper revolver for it so I worked up a load in .357 mag using the Sierra 170 FMJ. I hit all of the first 5 rams, supposedly already set according to the new rules, and didn't knock any of them down. All in all I hit 31 targets and scored 25.

My 175 grain bullets in 7mm took down every ram I hit.

[SFRanger7GP]

If you reload, they are both about the same in equal firearms. If you do not reload, the 44 mag is more versatile. I have numerous examples of both, I reload for both and have killed game with both. Were it not for my love for Colt's SAA, I would not own a 45 colt. With my 44 mag I carry and use 2 loads: 250KT with 2400 in a 44 mag case or the same bullet with Unique in a 44 special case. They shoot very close to the same point of aim in all of my 44 mags. I have a plinking/small game load and a heavier load that are very easy to identify. Try that with your 45 colt. If I really need to hot rod a 45 colt, I will use my FA 454.

[JohndeFresno]

The question is whether one is more versatile than the other. I don't see it yet. They both look pretty cotton picking versatile to me...What does QuickLoad project for ME with the 405g load I shoot?...I am not disputing the usefulness of 45 Colt....BTW, isn't the 44-40 an older cartridge than 45 Colt?

[AND]
I'd love to have the same model gun in 45 Colt cal. Get all the stuff. Do all the side-by-side comparisons that come to mind. I doubt I would be able to prove one way or the other that one gun was absolutely more versatile than the other..... but I will say that the original 45 Colt that most guys love, the comparatively weak five shooter SAA is NO MATCH to the versatility of the of the original .44 magnum, and if it were superior there would be no 44 mag. All the accolades for the 45 Colt's superior versatility involve loads that would blow up the original guns.

Grizz

Grizz,

As a matter of friendly sparring, even though I don't get as emotionally worked up over a "favorite caliber" as some might be:
1) QuickLoad shows no 405 grain bullets for the .45 Colt. The bullet size is a bit larger, for the .45-70 family of calibers, and I wouldn't want to try to manipulate all of the tables for length, caliber, and so on without specific data. So I'll leave that one alone. I suspect that your first question was about pressure, since (as you know) muzzle energy is just a product of the Velocity squared, divided by 450240, and then multiplied by the bullet in grains.

Since the .45 Colt in modern guns can handle more velocity per the pressure, one can bump up the velocity to get the same muzzle energy of a huge .44 Mag bullet at that pressure.

2) Granted, the "original" .45 Colt revolver is indeed out of its league with a modern .44 Magnum revolver. But then again, that is apples and oranges, because we are talking about modern cast or jacketed .44 and .45 bullets - different metallurgy and conformations from the old .45 lead loads of a century ago. And smokeless powders definitely change the pressure parameters, way beyond what was intended for the old six shooter.

So in all fairness, it is only appropriate to compare "modern" .45 firearms with .44 Mag's - not the "orignal" .45 Colt. Similarly, it would not be fair to compare black powder .30-30 loads with the smokeless .35 Remington or the .30-30 LeverEvolution.

3) Given the above, I submit that the .45 Colt is more versatile.
a) We have seen that there are similar loads, for the most part, with lower pressures in the .45 Colt.
b) Deep penetration of the .44 can be duplicated by hard cast .45's at higher velocities - no?
c) .4525" vs. .429" - bigger hole and frontal area!
d) .44 mag shoots .44 Specials, .44 Mags.
e) .45 shoots old .45 Colt loads, modern .45's, relatively high pressure .45's in modern guns
f) .45 shoots .45 ACP military, handload, whatever loads in the convertible chamber handguns -
no .44 Mag revolver can shoot semi-auto ammo.
g) Store bought and surplus .45 ACP is cheaper than .44 Special or Mag, ain't it?
whatever letter is after "g") The .45 is cooler!

(Edit) By the way, item "f" covers the "plinking load" requirement for non-handloaders as raised by SFRanger.

[edwardyoung]

Why is .45 Colt more versatile?

I would say it's because you can either call it 45 Colt or 45 Long Colt.

Best answer

[Grizz]

b) Deep penetration of the .44 can be duplicated by hard cast .45's at higher velocities - no?

Not if I understand the question. I can't give a direct comparison between the two, but I can for 45/70. A 425g BTB at 1963 fps from a guide gun DOES NOT PENETRATE AS FAR as a 525g BTB at 1460 fps from the same gun. Both bullets have identical crimp to nose length, nose profile, and meplat size. The only difference is weight and velocity. I have video of these tests, and eye witnesses, they are not flukes. The 425g went thru 8 jugs, the 525g went thru 12. For a proof of concept I also shot a Garrett 420g (I think) at his published velocity and it went the same distance as the 425g BTB.

So if you're trying to say that a lighter bullet than my 405g from the redhawk, moving faster, will penetrate farther, I have not seen that yet. I think it's a challenge that the 45 Colt shooters should love to take. I concede that it sounds plausible. But I have yet to see it done.

However I do have a picture of a shot on water jugs of a 405g load from a redhawk that did penetrate 13 jugs with a MV of 1020 fps. As nearly as I can tell from my own investigations, the overriding factor in penetration of the BTB version of LBT bullets that I use is WEIGHT. I will take momentum over any other combination of factors for my own uses as I noted above.

Penetration tests of this type are notoriously counter-intuitive. It's possible you might get the results you propose, but it's also possible that you won't. One factor is meplat size, and how sharp the edge of it is. Another factor is that the 0.02" smaller 44 slug could penetrate better when comparing identical weights due to other factors.

As far as apples to oranges goes, for the topic of versatility, I reject the notion that lower pressure is making a gun more versatile. I think you could standardize barrels and load to saami pressures and still find out that throw weight makes better penetration than velocity if you limit the investigation to one type of bullet.

Anyway I like your responses and think we could have a lot of fun in the woods trying to out-versatile one another. Thanks for the dialog.

Regards,
Grizz

[JohndeFresno]

...QuickLoad shows no 405 grain bullets for the .45 Colt. The bullet size is a bit larger, for the .45-70 family of calibers, and I wouldn't want to try to manipulate all of the tables for length, caliber, and so on without specific data...

Grizz, your arguments hold water.

I have rethought the reply above. If you can supply certain measurements and data, we can punch them into the program and verify the velocity and pressure of your 405 grain .45 Colt load:
1) Barrel length
2) Correct bullet weight - is it exactly 405 grains?
3) Exact length of bullet to three decimals
4) Exact caliber (three decimals)
5) Powder and grains
6) COAL to three decimals

[Grizz]

John

I'm so sorry, but my 405g load is for a 44 mag. I was hoping you would have the functional equivilant for the 45. Or did you mean to ask about the 44?

The reason I mentioned the rifle was for an example where the counter-intuitive thing happened. The lighter bullet at higher velocities cannot duplicate the heavier bullet at lower velocity. At least not in water-jug testing.

And I wanted to apply that to the template of

b) Deep penetration of the .44 can be duplicated by hard cast .45's at higher velocities - no?

, your quote, as a possible direction for side-by-side comparisons.

Based on my current experience with both 44 mag and 45/70, the answer to your question could be 'no'.

But that doesn't make the case for a similar test in 45 Colt. Wish everyone with an interest in this stuff could find a venue to try out all the permutations. One of the easiest ways to make a quick comparison is to shoot a round from a carbine into water jugs, and then the same load from a revolver. Just to see what happens.

Regards
Grizz

[Ji in Hawaii]

Why is .45 Colt more versatile?

I would say it's because you can either call it 45 Colt or 45 Long Colt.

Best answer

Can we call it the 454 Casull Short too?

Hey Grizz, where can I get that bullet you're using? I'm not selling my 44 mag any time soon.

[Griff]

Grizz,

I shoulda thunk this answered your question:

...Several years later I became interested in IHMSA {International Handgun Metallica Silhouettas Assoc.}* and at the time, the 200 meter steel ram was a challange. Not only did the bullet have to make contact, but the ram had to go down to count. Well, on the range that I competed, the 44 Mags at the time were about 70% positive. The heaviest bullet available for the 44 at that time was 265 grs.
To bring down those pesky rams with 100% reliability, enter the 45 Colt. More momentum was needed and I had a 45-70 and several bullet molds that I used for it. Among them was a 350 gr (457192) and a 420 gr (457193). Those weights were in w.w.+2% tin alloy.
I tried both of those bullets in the Colt sized .454" using 296 powder.
The 420 gr bullet exited the barrel at 1,070 f.p.s. but the problem was that even with the sights all the way down using a 6 o'clock hold, the bullets would sail over the ram's back.
Don't know about the pressure but the cases just about fell out of the chambers. (I see that in the LoadSwap section of the Beartooth site there is a load listed using Lil Gun under a 405 gr bullet giving 1,050 fps in the 45 Colt. No pressure is shown though)
The 350 gr. bullet on the other hand using a 6 o'clock hold and the sights 3 clicks up from the bottom, would impact on the ram and down it would go with 100% reliability. I use to kid the 44 Mag boys that I was shooting a century old cartridges and wasn't having any trouble.
...
w30wcf

John didn't mention which handgun he used or what barrel length; but it wouldn't surprise to learn it was a Ruger or Seville. Both of which have interested me from time to time... in that 10-½" length!

Given that both SEEM to have much the same bullets available, in practice I don't find that to be the case. When I do buy bullets (jacketed or lead that're offered @ below my casting costs or styles I don't use often), my store offers a much larger variety in .452 than in .429.

I'm ABSOLUTELY cerrtain that's solely a reflection of his past sales; but, isn't availability part of that versatility equation? Yes, that is likely to change based on locale; I have no doubt whatsover that in dangerous game areas, 44Mag is much more popular than 45Colt or 45ACP. And, the bullets available to the reloader would reflect that.

Look also, not just at bullet weights, but also construction. Whereas .429 commercial jacketed bullets are all centered around velocities common to that singular cartridge, for my .45 Colt I can find bullets designed foor velocities common to the 45ACP, 45Colt, 454Casull and 45Mag. In my Colt SAAs, clones thereof and toggle link leverguns, that doesn't mean a thing. But in my Rossi levergun (or that Ruger/Seville when I find it at the right price), that's a biggie.

As my final comment on this thread; I'll say this, if you don't have a .44 Mag but have a .45 Colt, you really don't NEED to add the .429, and vice versa. However, you may need to add an appropriate firearm to take advantage of it's versatility!

* Emphasis & explanation given my this smart-aleck author...

[JohndeFresno]

John...I was hoping you would have the functional equivalent for the 45....
Grizz

My problem is: I have a Lyman 45-70 405 grainer showing up in the tables, for instance. But squeezing it down to .453 for a .45 Colt chambering would lengthen the bullet, which reduces the space in the cartridge and throws off the pressure and velocity settings. I can't do any computations unless I have all of the figures as mentioned. My wording was misleading in the earlier post; I turned things around.

Does anybody have a .45 Colt caliber 405 grain slug on his/her counter that could be measured?

[Grizz]

Griff, thanks for that reminder. I had read that and then totally lost track of it. My Dad assured me that my memory would be the second thing to go.

As to your conclusion, I totally agree. I don't have a single argument about that. If I had traveled a different path I might have started with 45 Colt. I expect my curiosity would have led me to the same conclusions about it.

All the stuff that applies to 45 works for 44 also. It can be rung out in a carbine or in a 444, the functional equivilant of a 454 I'd say. So yeah, all the good things about the one are also good things about the other. I'm there.

I won't be giving up my 44, no gain for me, and others won't be giving up their 45s for the same reason. And others will gladly have both. It's the journey that's fun and trusting my last-ditch outfit in the bear's woods is my payoff.

Blessings to All

Grizz

[Catshooter]

Grizz,

Can you tell us where one can get a 405 grain mould for the 44 please?


Cat

[Grizz]

Hey Grizz, where can I get that bullet you're using? I'm not selling my 44 mag any time soon.

Hey Ji

So good to see you on here.

This only fits in redhawk length cylinders when seated "out" in the bottom cannelure. It could be seated "short" but at additional cost in chamber capacity. I'm sure there's a way to make it work, but I don't have that skillset.

I discovered the penetration ability of this bullet accidently when I tried to capture a couple of bullets in a firewood round that had previously stopped a 405g 45/70 bullet. Two rounds shot clean thru, about 24" in the direction of the grain. That bullet was only traveling 907 fps.

Considering what a 230g 45 ACP bullet will do at 750 fps, I think there is a lot of room to develop the shorter type round if someone wants to go there.

Seated out gives enough powder capacity to get good useful volume at less than full-house pressures.

http://www.beartoothbullets.com/bullets ... .php?id=58

My current velocity is 947, but the throats are tight and the bore needs polishing. That will give me right at 1000+ fps. Perfect for me.

A buddy is loading this in his modified 444 marlin and safely getting 2171 fps from it; over 4000 fpe. There's a lot of versatility when you go there with it, kind of in answer to the 454 Casull I suppose. LOL

Ji, I can send some to you if you want to play with them so you don't have to buy a whole box, just pm me an address.

Best
Grizz

PS: I tried to post this morning and it wouldn't go. Sorry it took me this long to answer.

Catshooter, I buy these from beartoothbullets.com. I don't know that there is a mold available. But there should be.

[BigSky56]

If anyone is looking for 400 gr 45 bullets DT ammo sell them. danny

400 gr WFN .452 bullets for sale
http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalo ... cts_id=294

[Catshooter]

Thanks Grizz.

Probably too long for a Super Blackhawk, I suppose.


Cat

[Ji in Hawaii]

Hey Grizz, where can I get that bullet you're using? I'm not selling my 44 mag any time soon.

Hey Ji

So good to see you on here.

This only fits in redhawk length cylinders when seated "out" in the bottom cannelure. It could be seated "short" but at additional cost in chamber capacity. I'm sure there's a way to make it work, but I don't have that skillset.

My current velocity is 947, but the throats are tight and the bore needs polishing. That will give me right at 1000+ fps. Perfect for me.

Ji, I can send some to you if you want to play with them so you don't have to buy a whole box, just pm me an address.

Best
Grizz

I'm shooting a Taurus model 44 which is a tad beefier version of a S&W 629 but I'm guessing the cylinder length matches the 629 so a tad short for the 402s but maybe the 355 grain bullets would be a good choice for similar results. I want the best load available for this gun for a future dream fishing trip to Alaska. I know no sidearm is ideal but would rather have my 44 on my hip than a 12 gauge loaded with slugs left on the bank.
http://www.beartoothbullets.com/bullets ... .php?id=57

[Grizz]

I'll hold off on sending some Ji unless you want to develop a short version.

Marshall's 355g bullet hast the exact same nose length as the 405g when it's seated it out. More room for powder when seated short tho. I loaded some and they shoot fine. I just got to the point where I only want to fool with one load for my redhawk. I keep 200g silvertips in it around the house.

Marshall has some great articles on load development for that round and some others. Good idea to read everything he has written, it's good stuff.

Cat, that round will lock up a superblackhawk. Don't ask.


Regards
Grizz

[Ji in Hawaii]

Aloha Grizz,
Yes, hold off on sending them as I think they would be too long, and sounds like the 355 grain would be too. I remembered I do have a bunch of 310 grain to play with I got from 86er back in Texas, will play with these using H-110. Thanks again for the generous offer though.

[piller]

I have both a .45 and a .44 Mag. Which is more versatile? Well, I haven't used them enough to determine that. My favorite of the 2, the .45 because of the extra cylinder for .45ACP rounds. Do I feel undergunned or overgunned with either, NO! Is there anything within reason that they couldn't do? Maybe, but that depends on what reasonable means to me. I would feel safe with either in Alaska.

[J Miller]

It's a wash guys. Neither is more versatile, they're equal. YOU'RE beating a dead horse. Time to let this thread die.

Joe

[COSteve]

Thanks to everyone who waded in with an opinion. I thought I'd get a few but 5 pages! It was just a fun question to see what everyone thought.