***This is dangerous misinformation that can get somebody hurt. It is not safe in the large frame Blackhawk, as it is 45,000psi. Which is way over the 30,000psi limit for the Blackhawk.***
This person should stop posting.
44 special or 45 Colt
- Thread starter Fox Mike
- Start date
- Status
This person should stop posting.
The Oxford dictionary defines pistol as a gun that is designed to be shot with one hand. Other dictionaries have some what different definitions.
I tend to go with what dictionaries say as it makes communicating more efficient in general i find Experts in some areas have different meanings for words then joe blow on the street. How ever a person uses the term pistol i tend to know what they are talking about and that is all that matters to me.
That said my preference is the .44 SP. Although in the right gun i am sure the .45 can deliver more power. Whether the manufacturer approves or not.
I tend to go with what dictionaries say as it makes communicating more efficient in general i find Experts in some areas have different meanings for words then joe blow on the street. How ever a person uses the term pistol i tend to know what they are talking about and that is all that matters to me.
That said my preference is the .44 SP. Although in the right gun i am sure the .45 can deliver more power. Whether the manufacturer approves or not.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2012
- Messages
- 10,870
Legally a taco is a sandwich, but we all know the difference.
Dictionary’s are not great at trade specific terms.
If a word is misused enough and it’s definition evolves and changes. The common use and concensus give the word a new definition. The dictionary will reflect that new meaning.
If enough people call magazines clips,
eventually colloquially they will be clips. But we all know they aren’t.
Technically revolvers are not pistols.
Colloquially revolvers are pistols.
If you want to be the guy who calls a taco a sandwich feel free to. We will all know what you are talking about, you will get your point across. But we will look at you funny.
Here is Websters definition
It gives the technical definition
Note that it also acknowledges a broad definition of “handgun.”
When you discuss your hobby, do you want to use specific technical definitionss? Or broad definition?
Dictionary’s are not great at trade specific terms.
If a word is misused enough and it’s definition evolves and changes. The common use and concensus give the word a new definition. The dictionary will reflect that new meaning.
If enough people call magazines clips,
eventually colloquially they will be clips. But we all know they aren’t.
Technically revolvers are not pistols.
Colloquially revolvers are pistols.
If you want to be the guy who calls a taco a sandwich feel free to. We will all know what you are talking about, you will get your point across. But we will look at you funny.
Here is Websters definition
It gives the technical definition
Note that it also acknowledges a broad definition of “handgun.”
When you discuss your hobby, do you want to use specific technical definitionss? Or broad definition?
Last edited:
vlavalle
Blackhawk
Great story and history of the .44 SPEC AND ITS RELATION TO THE .45 COLT. I loved it. i just learnd today from this site about the ''1917 revolver' made towards the end of WW I to shoot the 4.5ACP ROUND SPECIFICALLY, BECAUSE THEY COULD NOT MAKE ENOUGH 1911 .45 PISTOLS! But today's AMMO AND GUNS ARE VERY DIFFERENT. The .44 Spec ammo doesn't hold a candle to the .45 Colt ammo and guns of today, UNLESS YOU ARE LOOKING AT or comparing with .45 COLT COWBOY LOADS, at least as far as manufactured guns and ammo goes. In my ballistics file, the .44 SPEC MAX'S OUT AT 558 ft. lb. ( UNDERWOOD), 645 (Grizzly), 555 (Garrett), and 529 (Buffalo BORE). THESE ARE ALL A FAR CRY FROM THE .45 COLT AMMO OF 1,405 FT LBS. (Garett), and 1,344 (Buffalo Bore). In addition, the .45 colt cylinders re extremely robust and can handle these very high powered ammo. even Buffao BORE POINTS OUT that the Ruger BLACKHAWKS (ON THE FULL SIZED FRAMES) and Redhawks are the only guns to use and shoot their vey high powered .45 Colt ammo. So, the days of what you call weaker/thinner .45 Colt cylinders are long gone.
In addition, I own a Ruger .5.5" BLackhawk Flattop Convertible, and these Ruger .45 COLT GUNS WERE BULT ON THE .357 FRAME, SO THEY ARE NOT THE FULL SIZED .45 Colt, and BUFFALO Bore has a vey specific waning about using this version of the RUGER .45 COLT GUNS AND TO NOT SHOOT THEIR VERY POWERFUL .45 Colt LOADS. Note the this concern is ABOUT THE FRAME, AND NOT THE CYLINDER. BUFFALO BORE MAKES THREE VERY POWERFUL .45 COLT loads, AND I have shot the lower of these three with my BLACKHAWK, with no issues at all, excpt that it kicks like mad, but it has done zeo damage to the gun, or to me. Specifically, this ammo is the one that generates 1,124 ft lbs. ( at 1,450 fps) of ME. I normally shoot my guns with one hand only, with my arm extended all the way out. But when I shoot this load, I put on a glove and use two hands! I can't imgine what thd other two loads would be like! But I recently PUT A BID ON A RUGER .45 Colt REDHAWK, so I may find out soon.
iFf you or anyone else would like a copy of my balliatic file (PDF), just messsage me here, and I will send you one. Since you reload all your own ammo, you my not be interested in my file, which has over 4,000 entries (covers 35 handgun caliber and 26 rifle ones) where each entry is a link to a website that sells that particular ammo. The ammo's ballistics are given in each entry for that ammo, as well as its current pricing and availability and the bullet type, and if the retailer supplies any ammo rating I list that too.
The 1917 is a 6 shot revolver. Depending on manufacturer they were made in both 45 Colt & 45 ACP (needing moonclips). Mine is a Colt.
![Pampers Sensitive Baby Wipes, Clinically Proven, Fragrance Free, Unscented, Water Based, Hypoallergenic, Multi-Use, Hand Wipes 336 Wipes Total (6X Flip-Top Packs) [Packaging May Vary]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41KLBHu9CAL._SL500_.jpg)
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2012
- Messages
- 10,870
Does it also shoot .45acp with moon clips?
All S&W 1917 cylinders had .45acp chambers. Meaning you can shoot .45acp without moonclips but will have to poke out the empties by hand. .45 Colt won’t chamber. The later Colt 1917 were the same. Early Colt 1917’s needed the moon clips or the cartridges would not headspace. I figured those would shoot .45 Colt.
If your Colt is marked 1917 on the butt, and is cut for moon clips. It is either an early one or has been modified to shoot .45 Colt
If it is not cut for moon clips to shoot .45acp. Then it either isn’t a1917 or was modified.
I typed all of this because if your gun is actually a US PROPERTY .45Colt it could be a 1909 which is considerably rarer than the 1917.
So depending on the details it is either a rare 1909, a neat early 1917, a commercial model or modified. Not that it matters to me other than curiosity. You should know what it is if you ever sell it.
I wondered when someone would bring up revolving long arms.
***More dangerous misinformation and off topic rhetoric. I'm not trying to be argumentative or derail the thread but I cannot in good conscience allow such dangerous and misguided posts go without retort.***
The days of weaker/thinner cylinder walls are not "long gone". Not until we reach the Tier IV (+50,000psi) level are they a non-issue. The large frame .45Colt Blackhawk is 80% as strong as the .44Mag counterpart because the chamber walls are thinner. If we're comparing the .45Colt to the .44Special, then the guns with the weaker/thinner cylinder walls are EXACTLY what we're talking about. We're talking about guns the size/strength of the Colt SAA, New Frontier and mid-frame Blackhawk. So all this nonsense about "Ruger only" loads and above is off topic.
The cylinder is the pressure vessel and the weakest link, specifically the bolt notch, not the frame.
Buffalo Bore has four standard pressure loads and those are all that is safe in the mid-frame Blackhawk. Their 255gr at 1000fps is exactly what I'm talking about, where the .44Special has a 100-200fps advantage over the .45Colt in the same guns. Buffalo Bore does not offer a .44 Special load that is equivalent to the Keith load. As I've said multiple times, you can only get there with handloading. Same for the .45Colt and so-called Tier II loads (23,000psi).
Paul B
Hunter
One more bit of .44 Spl. trivia. The .44 Spl. Is just the .44 Russian with a slightly longer cartridge case. The Russian was more a target load used in the accurate S&W revolver. Current .44 Spl. is still loaded to that same weak target ammo of the day so the ammo makers kept the power level the same as the Russian. I think most people that consider the .44 factory level load and reload data as determined by SAAMI wimpy need to realize that that decision was made my the ammo makers, not SAAMI. The .44 Spl. was not the ly cartridge emasculated by their desingers, there's a few more. The .280 Rem. and .35 Whelen factory loads are limited to the same maximum allowable pressure as the 30-06 in eference to problems with the Remigton pump and seniauto rifle. That was set by Remington's request yet the rifles in question are also chambered to the .270 Win and something like 1200 PSI higher pressure than the three mentioned.
I'll contend that to this day, the .44 Spl. could have and would have surpassed the Colt .45 easily had not the designers decide to leave the pressures and the ridiculously low level allowed.
Paul B.
vlavalle
Blackhawk
I take from all of this that the 'weaker .45 Colt cylinder walls are due to the .45 COLT Being A FULL .45 caliber at .452-.454 versus the .44 MAG AND .44 Spec just being just .429 is what makes the .45 COLT Cylinder weaker? If this is the case, then my comment about the weaker cylinder being long gone, is flawed. I was thinking that it was a design 'flaw' and perhaps corrected over time. But if it is due to the very nature of the bore difference, I see why you say that it is still here. With the Buffalo Bore 3 highest powered .45 Colt ammo, they say to not shoot these in the Ruger 'small frame' .45 Colt guns, like the one I own (the flattop), and that it is just fine to shoot these high powered ammo rounds in the full framed Ruger .45 Colt guns. This is clearly not due to the 'weaker' cylinder. While, you my be correct in the amount of strength difference in the cylinder itself, it does no seem to be an issue with Buffalo Bore at all, and it is clearly stated by them, that this restriction it is due to the smaller, weaker frame.
I do not believe that Bufflo Bore publihes their pressure value for their ammo, and only gives the standard ballistics numbers of speed (fps) and power (ft, lbs.), which I document in my ballitics file. So, I cannot talk about pressure differences, but perhaps RUGER GIVES STATS ON THE MAX PRESSURE ALLOWED IN THEIR .45 Colt guns, but I HAVE NOT FOUND THIS. Do you have that data? And, of course Bufflo Bore's standard pressue ammo is OK to shoot in just about all other .45 Colt gun. I have shot Buffalo Bore's 3rd most powerful .45 colt ammo in my Ruger Flattop, with no observable ramifications, but of course, I did not sit there and shoot a a whole box. My hand would not have been able to do handle this since the kick is huge. My gun is just a 5.5" barrel. Perhaps a longer barrel would reduce the kick significantly. I also have a a RUGER .357 MAG Blackhawk, BUT IT HAS A 6.5" BARREL, SO IT DOES NOT KICK LIKE THE .45 COLT DOES WHEN I SHOOT THE MAX .357 LOADS (/899 FT. LBS BY BUFFALO BORE and 907 by PPU).
I do not believe that Bufflo Bore publihes their pressure value for their ammo, and only gives the standard ballistics numbers of speed (fps) and power (ft, lbs.), which I document in my ballitics file. So, I cannot talk about pressure differences, but perhaps RUGER GIVES STATS ON THE MAX PRESSURE ALLOWED IN THEIR .45 Colt guns, but I HAVE NOT FOUND THIS. Do you have that data? And, of course Bufflo Bore's standard pressue ammo is OK to shoot in just about all other .45 Colt gun. I have shot Buffalo Bore's 3rd most powerful .45 colt ammo in my Ruger Flattop, with no observable ramifications, but of course, I did not sit there and shoot a a whole box. My hand would not have been able to do handle this since the kick is huge. My gun is just a 5.5" barrel. Perhaps a longer barrel would reduce the kick significantly. I also have a a RUGER .357 MAG Blackhawk, BUT IT HAS A 6.5" BARREL, SO IT DOES NOT KICK LIKE THE .45 COLT DOES WHEN I SHOOT THE MAX .357 LOADS (/899 FT. LBS BY BUFFALO BORE and 907 by PPU).
The smaller frame indicates a smaller cylinder. The cylinder is the weakest link. As I said, specifically the bolt notch. Some of us have been at this a long time and actually do know what we're talking about and don't have to Google for answers. The frames are plenty strong and have been converted into five-shots in the 48,000psi .480Ruger. It's the cylinder, not the frame. We simply distinguish them as "medium or mid" frames and large frames. Equivalent to the Colt SAA in size and strength.
BB does not have to release pressure data. Every 'should' know what "Ruger only" means. There are four Tiers of .45Colt loads.
Tier I - standard pressures of 14,000psi = safe for pre-war Colt SAA's, New Services and other early guns
Tier II - 23,000psi or equivalent to .45ACP +P = pretty much any post-war Colt SAA, New Frontier, quality replica, S&W N-frame or mid-frame Blackhawk. Elmer Keith and Dave Scovill touched on this but Brian Pearce provided a whole table of loading data in this range in Handloader magazine.
Tier III - The so-called "Ruger only" realm of 30,000psi (originally 32,000CUP). Safe for large frame Blackhawks, Vaqueros, Colt Anaconda, Dan Wesson, Seville, Abilene, Freedom Arms 97
Tier IV - Up to and over 50,000psi, originally intended for custom five-shot guns, Freedom Arms 83's and Redhawks. Also safe in modern 1892 rifles
Ruger ALWAYS takes the liability-conscious approach and will never endorse anything but standard pressure factory loads not exceeding 14,000psi.
BB does not have to release pressure data. Every 'should' know what "Ruger only" means. There are four Tiers of .45Colt loads.
Tier I - standard pressures of 14,000psi = safe for pre-war Colt SAA's, New Services and other early guns
Tier II - 23,000psi or equivalent to .45ACP +P = pretty much any post-war Colt SAA, New Frontier, quality replica, S&W N-frame or mid-frame Blackhawk. Elmer Keith and Dave Scovill touched on this but Brian Pearce provided a whole table of loading data in this range in Handloader magazine.
Tier III - The so-called "Ruger only" realm of 30,000psi (originally 32,000CUP). Safe for large frame Blackhawks, Vaqueros, Colt Anaconda, Dan Wesson, Seville, Abilene, Freedom Arms 97
Tier IV - Up to and over 50,000psi, originally intended for custom five-shot guns, Freedom Arms 83's and Redhawks. Also safe in modern 1892 rifles
Ruger ALWAYS takes the liability-conscious approach and will never endorse anything but standard pressure factory loads not exceeding 14,000psi.
Paul B
Hunter
"***More dangerous misinformation and off topic rhetoric. I'm not trying to be argumentative or derail the thread but I cannot in good conscience allow such dangerous and misguided posts go without retort.***"
We for one who says he doesn't want to be argumentative, you're sure doing a lot of arguing.
"The large frame .45Colt Blackhawk is 80% as strong as the .44Mag counterpart because the chamber walls are thinner. If we're comparing the .45Colt to the .44Special, then the guns with the weaker/thinner cylinder walls are EXACTLY what we're talking about. We're talking about guns the size/strength of the Colt SAA, New Frontier and mid-frame Blackhawk. So all this nonsense about "Ruger only" loads and above is off topic."
I don't necessarily agree with your last sentence. Ok, let's use the old Colt sized frame gun One, both the Colt .45 and .44 Russian were black powder cartridges and for while, so was the .44 Spl. Later a smokeless powder load was developed to give EXACTLY or as close as possible to the orginal ballisitics thus handicapping a very good cartridge.
It's interesting to compare cylinder walls on colt style .45s. The black powder gun (circa 1908) looks almost paper thin next to a current model. I don't have a second generation Colt to compare but the three current models I have appear to be about three to four times thicker. The current Colt SAA I have in .44 Spl. has even thicker walls. When you take one of the original Colt SAA sized Ruger .45 Blackhawks, the cylinder walls are even thicker than on the Colt .44 Spl.
When that Ruger Blackhawk in Colt .45 was given to me along with a flattop in .44 mag. by a good friend, I noticed that the cylinder walls on both revolvers were practically the same, at least visually. To me, that means any top loads I worked up for the Colt .45 would be used in that particular Ruger ONLY. That translates to a Ruger ONLY load and really isn't off topic. When my friend gave me those guns he included ammo for both and those .45s were hotter'n hell. I shot a few, then broke the rest down to get the components. I did the same with the .44s he gave me. Bullets in both guns were cast so I melted them down and recast them as they were a bit mangled during removal from the cartridge case.
Anyway, I guess we'll just have agree to disagree on certain points. Such is life in the far west.
Paul B.
We for one who says he doesn't want to be argumentative, you're sure doing a lot of arguing.
"The large frame .45Colt Blackhawk is 80% as strong as the .44Mag counterpart because the chamber walls are thinner. If we're comparing the .45Colt to the .44Special, then the guns with the weaker/thinner cylinder walls are EXACTLY what we're talking about. We're talking about guns the size/strength of the Colt SAA, New Frontier and mid-frame Blackhawk. So all this nonsense about "Ruger only" loads and above is off topic."
I don't necessarily agree with your last sentence. Ok, let's use the old Colt sized frame gun One, both the Colt .45 and .44 Russian were black powder cartridges and for while, so was the .44 Spl. Later a smokeless powder load was developed to give EXACTLY or as close as possible to the orginal ballisitics thus handicapping a very good cartridge.
It's interesting to compare cylinder walls on colt style .45s. The black powder gun (circa 1908) looks almost paper thin next to a current model. I don't have a second generation Colt to compare but the three current models I have appear to be about three to four times thicker. The current Colt SAA I have in .44 Spl. has even thicker walls. When you take one of the original Colt SAA sized Ruger .45 Blackhawks, the cylinder walls are even thicker than on the Colt .44 Spl.
When that Ruger Blackhawk in Colt .45 was given to me along with a flattop in .44 mag. by a good friend, I noticed that the cylinder walls on both revolvers were practically the same, at least visually. To me, that means any top loads I worked up for the Colt .45 would be used in that particular Ruger ONLY. That translates to a Ruger ONLY load and really isn't off topic. When my friend gave me those guns he included ammo for both and those .45s were hotter'n hell. I shot a few, then broke the rest down to get the components. I did the same with the .44s he gave me. Bullets in both guns were cast so I melted them down and recast them as they were a bit mangled during removal from the cartridge case.
Anyway, I guess we'll just have agree to disagree on certain points. Such is life in the far west.
Paul B.
Paul B
Hunter
"Tier I - standard pressures of 14,000psi = safe for pre-war Colt SAA's, New Services and other early guns...."
Which war, WW-1 or WW-2? Most people consider Colt SAA to be black powder when the cylinder pin is held in place by a screw and to be smokeless powder guns when the gun has the current system in use. NOT TRUE. Many Colt revolvers had frames cast from iron, I'm trying to recall the date when they switched to a steel frame and I think it was 1906. Only the steel frame Colts are true smokeless powder guns. I only have one pre-war Colt that's lettered to 1908 and I treat it as if it were a black powder firearm and load accordingly. The latest issue guns I load a bit on the warmish side but not in any load that would be too much for the design.
Paul B.
Which war, WW-1 or WW-2? Most people consider Colt SAA to be black powder when the cylinder pin is held in place by a screw and to be smokeless powder guns when the gun has the current system in use. NOT TRUE. Many Colt revolvers had frames cast from iron, I'm trying to recall the date when they switched to a steel frame and I think it was 1906. Only the steel frame Colts are true smokeless powder guns. I only have one pre-war Colt that's lettered to 1908 and I treat it as if it were a black powder firearm and load accordingly. The latest issue guns I load a bit on the warmish side but not in any load that would be too much for the design.
Paul B.
Here we go again.......
vlavalle
Blackhawk
Great detail and information. part of it explains why SAAMI has not 'approved' the hotter .45 Colt ammo, what we now call Ruger loads. At least SAAMI should acknowledge these hotter rounds with the standard notation of +P for these hot .45 Colt loads.
NO. But, it's definitely long past due to move on from this train wreck.
How about we just put a couple of bullets in this thread, a standard velocity 44 Special and a standard velocity 45 Colt. Whichever kills it the deadest is the winner LOL
Bang Bang...
Bang Bang...
- Status
