Could that just be because ... it isn't a revolver cartridge to begin with.
. Now if you are speaking of the .45 Auto Rim, that is a different story. But an auto cartridge in a revolver ... that's errr, criminal 
.
44 special or 45 Colt
- Thread starter Fox Mike
- Start date
- Status
. Now if you are speaking of the .45 Auto Rim, that is a different story. But an auto cartridge in a revolver ... that's errr, criminal .vlavalle
Blackhawk
You re correct! The .45 ACP (Automatic Colt Pistol) is not a revolver ammo at all, but many .45 Colt revolvers do and can shoot the .45 ACP ammo. I have one of these! Also, for many of you out there, revolvers are NOT pitols, no matter how many old cowboy movies and shows use the term 'pitsol' in their shows. A 'pistol' fires the bullet (the projectile) from the barrel, and revolvers shoot ONLY from the cylinder. The term 'pistol' goes all the way back to when the first handguns were invented, and they were all muzzle loading guns, just like the muskets of that era. All of today's semi-auto handguns actually do load the cartridge up into the barrel from the handle, and then the bullet is fired while sitting in the barrel. Thus, they are in deed pistols!
Last edited:
vlavalle
Blackhawk
Once again, you are so full of it, and all my ballistics numbers are indeed correct, and if you didn't have your head in the 'dark' so much, go look at the Buffalo Bore page that you said that I had wrong ammo speed, and see what it says for the specific gun:
> 1526 fps -- Ruger Vaquero LARGE FRAME PRE 2005, 5.5 inch
This gun is very similar to mine, which is a blackhawk 5.5" revolver. and I do shoot it a lot, with both types of calibers since it is also a convertible, if you know what that means. So, I don't just look at numbers, and if you had actully read my posts completely you, woul see where I describr shooting the .45 Colt ammo, and the diffeence in their power. You just speak too much BS, and do not like someone catching you at it. BB url: https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=335
> 1526 fps -- Ruger Vaquero LARGE FRAME PRE 2005, 5.5 inch
This gun is very similar to mine, which is a blackhawk 5.5" revolver. and I do shoot it a lot, with both types of calibers since it is also a convertible, if you know what that means. So, I don't just look at numbers, and if you had actully read my posts completely you, woul see where I describr shooting the .45 Colt ammo, and the diffeence in their power. You just speak too much BS, and do not like someone catching you at it. BB url: https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=335
Dude, relax. I was on forums with Tim Sundles in the late `90's. That "BS" you're referring to is knowledge and experience that's over your pay grade.
Did you miss something? I was comparing two jacketed loads, because there isn't a .44 cast bullet load in the same weight range. Why don't you throttle back on the hostility and insults and try to actually learn something? The two jacketed loads are comparable and their advertised velocity is telling. Even with Tim Sundles running balls to the wall on pressure with carefully blended non-canister powders (do you know what that is?), the .44 matches the .45's velocity with a slightly heavier but significantly higher sectional density bullet. Same SD as a 300gr .45 bullet, which Sundles gets to 1325fps, 125fps behind the 270gr .44 load.
I really don't care about boutique factory ammo. Anyone who does any appreciable amount of shooting is handloading. Since you have no handloaded in 40yrs (I would've thought you were in your 20's by the tone of your rhetoric), I would assume you don't really shoot much. I've been shooting "Ruger only" .45Colt loads for at least 25yrs. It's handloading where one can level the playing field and compare the two cartridges, properly. On that level playing field, utilizing Hodgdon and Linebaugh heavy bullet data, the .44 maintains a 50-100fps velocity advantage across all bullet weights. That's fact, proven in testing and chronographing. Here's something else to hurt your feelings, the .44 proved to be a better penetrator. Both in test media and on live tissue. Reality is in fact below.
Did you miss something? I was comparing two jacketed loads, because there isn't a .44 cast bullet load in the same weight range. Why don't you throttle back on the hostility and insults and try to actually learn something? The two jacketed loads are comparable and their advertised velocity is telling. Even with Tim Sundles running balls to the wall on pressure with carefully blended non-canister powders (do you know what that is?), the .44 matches the .45's velocity with a slightly heavier but significantly higher sectional density bullet. Same SD as a 300gr .45 bullet, which Sundles gets to 1325fps, 125fps behind the 270gr .44 load.
I really don't care about boutique factory ammo. Anyone who does any appreciable amount of shooting is handloading. Since you have no handloaded in 40yrs (I would've thought you were in your 20's by the tone of your rhetoric), I would assume you don't really shoot much. I've been shooting "Ruger only" .45Colt loads for at least 25yrs. It's handloading where one can level the playing field and compare the two cartridges, properly. On that level playing field, utilizing Hodgdon and Linebaugh heavy bullet data, the .44 maintains a 50-100fps velocity advantage across all bullet weights. That's fact, proven in testing and chronographing. Here's something else to hurt your feelings, the .44 proved to be a better penetrator. Both in test media and on live tissue. Reality is in fact below.
LDB
Blackhawk
Is a revolver a pistol? Yes, technically a revolver is a type of pistol (a handgun with a revolving cylinder), but colloquially, people often use "pistol" to mean a semi-automatic handgun with a fixed chamber and magazine, distinguishing it from a revolver. So, all revolvers are pistols (handguns), but not all pistols are revolvers; a semi-automatic is a pistol, but not a revolver.
Above from googling using Opera browser.
Above from googling using Opera browser.
It's not? I thought it had been chambered in revolvers since 1917, only a few years into its existence.Could that just be because ... it isn't a revolver cartridge to begin with.
As I said, it's a criminally underrated sixgun cartridge. It's wonderful in a Blackhawk or especially a Colt SAA-sized sixgun. It essentially duplicates what everybody likes about standard pressure .45Colt without all the wasted powder space or funky chamber dimensions.
You're on a roll now!
Revolvers have been around almost as long as single shots. So I'm not sure your historical reference has any value. Like I said before, I think you need to read more and post more questions than answers.
vlavalle
Blackhawk
A revolver is NOT a pistol and both are handguns, but revolvers re NOT pistols, no matter how many cowboy shows or movies you have heard that term used in those shows. I had explained it quite clearly as to what a what a pistol is - a handgun that fires the projectile (bullet) from the barrel. revolvers all shot the bullet from the cylinder. All of today's semiauto handguns are pistols because they all load the cartridge into the barerl, and the bullet is fired from there. Your later comment is just sayimg that mot pdople ue th tdfm in corrdtly, ns intrrchNG THM, BUT THAT IS INCORRDC, and the both termds have vey specifric mreanings, and just because so many people do not know thi, and use the terms incorrectly (applied to both revolvers and pisrtols interchngeably), it does not make using the terms incorretly as OK or 'correct'. Just about ll gun manufacturers use these terms correctly, but not all ammo manufacturers do.
In fact, I had this very converstion with Tim Suddles (the owner of Buffalo Bore about 1 years go), and I emailed him about about the use o th terms ( I emailed thru his website), and told him that on his web site he isusing the tem 'pisitol' incorrectly, and tha all he had to do to change it was to use the term'handgun insted of'pistols' in order to be 'corect' , and i then explained to him what the term 'pistol' really meant. and he then replied tsayinghat he already knew that, but his marketing poeple said that he needed ro use the term 'pistol' on his site, so he was not going to change it. But all gun manufacturers clearly distinct betweedn pisitol and revolvers. And you woudl think that ammo manufcturers would also since there issdo much difference betweeen these types of handgun mmo is so different, where most pistol ammo cannot be fired in most revolvers, and visa vers (but not in all cases).
LDB
Blackhawk
Not an issue to me either way. Just sharing what googled up in a query. 
jgt
Buckeye
I just don't care if someone wants to shoot a 454 so they can claim it is the most powerful. The 44 magnum at its top loading is the apex of my tolerance level. Too many and I start to get tennis elbow. So for me, thats my limit. I carry a 44 special for everyday and can shoot 44 russian cartridges without changing to another cylinder. I can shoot 44 russian, 44 special, and 44 magnum out of the magnum guns without changing the cylinder. I designed a 290grn 44 bullet that is 265 grns in hollow point form and can be loaded in cases for 44 russian, special, and magnum. Its bonus is the 444 marlin cartridge likes it also. So my 44 marlin rifles and 444 marlin rifles all like the bullet.
You can take any 45 caliber handgun and with enough money and a good gunsmith you can coax it into shooting with a stock out of the box 44 caliber gun.
The thing that stands out the most about this debate/poll is it is always started by someone that shoots a 45 caliber firearm. Be it a handgun or 45-70 rifle comparing it to the 444. I have never seen it the other way around. It is never a 44 shooter asking the question. It is always ask just to stir up people. I do not care if those people want to shoot their 45 caliber whatevers. They can even claim it is superior to the lowly useless 44. If their goal is to convince me to switch they came too late to the party.
You can take any 45 caliber handgun and with enough money and a good gunsmith you can coax it into shooting with a stock out of the box 44 caliber gun.
The thing that stands out the most about this debate/poll is it is always started by someone that shoots a 45 caliber firearm. Be it a handgun or 45-70 rifle comparing it to the 444. I have never seen it the other way around. It is never a 44 shooter asking the question. It is always ask just to stir up people. I do not care if those people want to shoot their 45 caliber whatevers. They can even claim it is superior to the lowly useless 44. If their goal is to convince me to switch they came too late to the party.
Maybe you should talk with Tim Sundles instead.....
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2012
- Messages
- 10,877
Could that just be because ... it isn't a revolver cartridge to begin with.
In a single action no need for a rim, no need for moon clips. In my opnion .45acp is the ideal big bore, single action medium power cartridge.
No, no it is not. Technically.
Last edited:
Sam Colt called them revolving or repeating PISTOLS. That's good enough for me. The very first Colt Paterson guns were rifles and shotguns. Are they revolvers or rifles or both? Does the fact that they're revolvers preclude them from being rifles or shotguns? No. In fact "revolving pistol" is more precise than anything in your incoherent blather. Because a "revolver" can also be a rifle or shotgun.
Behold, a modern day revolving shotgun. Revolver? Shotgun? Both? Both.
IMHO, this is one of the dumbest arguments to get lost in the weeds on. How it's related to the OP, along with all the "Ruger only" .45Colt nonsense, is beyond me. The fact that yo had the audacity to correct Tim Sundles may be the funniest thing I've read all week.
That seems to be the case. My theory has always been that people are in love with that big, fat .45Colt case. The fact that it's mostly empty is irrelevant to them.
Personally, I've had .45's as long as I've had .44's, nearing on 40yrs. Today I have dozens of both. I have more .45's than a lot of .45 fans. It always seems to be the diehard .45 fans who are also .44 haters that scream the loudest. The fact that the .44Special is actually a better chambering for some guns is one that they either deny or ignore. The fact that all the heavy bullet data in the Hodgdon manual refutes a lot of what they believe is another that they deny or ignore.
It comes down to personal preference and years of colloquial usage. Just like 45 Long Colt and 45 Colt.
But I'm sure you will be able to tell me exactly how wrong I am since I am just an unknown person on a forum and not even a professional or corporation.
Grt a grip.
I'd prefer to continue this discussion without his foolishness and veiled insults.
What I meant was I wanted to continue the original discussion, without his tangents and off topic comments.
Okay, now I'm totally confused. We're not allowed to discuss the topic of the original post?
LDB
Blackhawk
THIS: I was reading the post about the 44 special and wondered (this has probably been talked about many times before) just what can the 44 special do that at 45 Colt can't?
No confusion. That is the topic. Discuss that. Anything else do not discuss it or take it to an appropriate area.
The 44 special divides evenly by 2. The 45 Colt does not. That may be their biggest difference as otherwise both are excellent and capable rounds.
No confusion. That is the topic. Discuss that. Anything else do not discuss it or take it to an appropriate area.
The 44 special divides evenly by 2. The 45 Colt does not. That may be their biggest difference as otherwise both are excellent and capable rounds.
vlavalle
Blackhawk
That is very interesting about your 44Mag gun. Similarly with the .45 Colt guns you can shoot a lot of the .45 varients (three are quite a few here as well), With single action guns you can shoot many of the shorter cartridges with a cylinder swap. But in the double action ones you will need moon clips to keep the cartridges from falling into the cylinder. but moon clips do not always work either. and when attmping to do so may result in the cylinder not rotting because there is not enough room simply duet o the moon clips thickness and the cylnder is not made to accpt the extra space due to the moon clip itself. So, you always have to inquire with each gun. For intance, I do not think that you can shoot 45 ACP ammo (or any of the shorter .45 smmo) (with moon clips) on the 454 guns, but the .454 guns do allow you to intechange .45 colt ammo with the much more powerful. 454 ammo.
Well, you may be right about people looking inTo shooinh .44 MAG AMMO IN A 345 COLT GUN, BUT I WOULD ASK WHY WOULD ANYONE EVER WANT TO DO THA1! tHE .45 COLT (1,405 ft. lbs by Garrett) COMES PRETTY CLOSE IN POWER TO THE .44 MAG (1,533 FT LBS. max by Bufflo Bore.). The other thing is that with many .45 colt guns you can shoot the much less expensive .45 ACP ammo for practice. Thew 454 may also hve another issue with shootung the shorter cartridge, lik the .45 ACP becsue thefe may be probelm with ther shorte bullets spending too much time in the longer cylinder whih msy cue ccurscy or even splatter. In addition, the .454 Casual is not the most powerful any longer. There are FOUR more powerul calibers (.460 S&W, .500 S&W, THE 45-70, and the 500 BUSHWACKER) All of these produce powerful rifle power
Message me here and ask for my ballistics file that covers 35 handgun calibers and 26 rifle calibers, and I will send you a copy. (PDF file).
vlavalle
Blackhawk
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2012
- Messages
- 10,877
In wwI there were not enough 1911’s, the government asked for revolvers chambered in .45acp as a stop gap measure. S&W figured out half moon clips that made it more feasible.
The 1917 was the model number given to the new revolver based on the S&W N frame and Colt New service revolvers.
The term Cowboy loads does not apply to .45acp. That I am aware of. The model 1917 was not chambered in .45Colt (that I know of, possibly the early Colts could?)
Last edited:
vlavalle
Blackhawk
vlavalle
Blackhawk
WOW! I NEVER HEARD OF
SUCH A GUN, AND I AM INTO WW I AND WW II AS WELL!S this was amazing info!
SUCH A GUN, AND I AM INTO WW I AND WW II AS WELL!S this was amazing info!
vlavalle
Blackhawk
Well taken.
vlavalle
Blackhawk
vlavalle
Blackhawk
As we have already discussed, Buffalo Bore makes .45 Colt ammo very similar to the Garrett one, only with a smaller bullet and they give the speed rating based on 3-4 different guns, with varying barrel lengths, which is quite nice. The Garrett ammo says that it hould be used only on th Ruger Redhawk gun, but it should also be saf on the full sized Ruger .45 Blackhawk, and .454 gun.
Paul B
Hunter
Well this certainly has developed into a contentious urinating match.
Well known gun writer Elmer Kieth went to the .44 Spl. because of the thicker cylinder walls on the Colt revolvers he preferred. For any years after, the .44 Spl. was THE handgun for more powerful handloads. I can easily compare the cylinder walls of the current Colt single action revolvers and even in current third generation Colt's, the .44 Spl. has the thicker cylinder walls. Check out the cylinder walls of a first generation colt some time and the walls are even thinner that the current .45s. I'm basing that one a .45 cal. 5.5" Colt serialed to 1908. Compared to a 1980 something ,45 the wall of the 1908 seem paper thin.
The point being the .44 Spl. had the advantage for a potentially much more powerful loading to the .45 Colt. Fast foreward to modern day revolvers and the .44 Spl. vs the .45 Colt still gives the advantage to the .44.
Current new production handguns probably started with Ruger who in fact hada working .44 Magnum in the flat top version before S&W could even have out their door for sale.
From about 1970 on I was more desert rat than anything else and spent many hours wandering the high desert of Nevada and later due to a job transfer the Sonoran Desert of southern Arizona. I was alway armed with a handgun, mostly a .44 Magnum Ruger but later a neat S&W 629 . mag. and later an S&W 624 .44 Spl. In .45 Colt there were a few Colt SAA in various barrel lengths plus a few Ruger Blackhawks and Bisleys in .44 Mag. and Colt .45. I always had one or the other of the guns along for protection from Black Bears and Mountain Lions that would pass from one mountain range to another None ever bothered me but I was still glad I had my handgun at easy reach. Most of the time I guess it was the .44 Mag. but sometimes a 5.5" Ruger Bisley in Colt .45 with a John Linebaugh level load.
Peopl mention Skeeter Skelton's pet load a lot and I'll admit it's my favorite in the .44 Spl. but no one has mentioned Elmer Keith's load which was a goodly amount of H2400 amd his 245 gr. cast bullet. I forget what he used but I think it was something like 17.0 gr of the Hercules version of 2400. I'd have to try and look that up to be sure so don't use it. Current 2400 is Alliant 2400 and it seems to be somewhat faster burning than the original H version. Recoil was rather sharp in that early Ruger .44 Mag. I still have that flat top and a three screw dual cylinder .45 Blackhawk.
I've always handloaded my handgun ammo with my own homemade cast bullets. After shooting deer a few times with factory jacketed and my handloads I'll take my handloads every time. FWIW, I think Skeeter's .44 Spl. load is more than enough to handle a black Bear. Well at least the ones I've seen around here.
Paul B.
Well known gun writer Elmer Kieth went to the .44 Spl. because of the thicker cylinder walls on the Colt revolvers he preferred. For any years after, the .44 Spl. was THE handgun for more powerful handloads. I can easily compare the cylinder walls of the current Colt single action revolvers and even in current third generation Colt's, the .44 Spl. has the thicker cylinder walls. Check out the cylinder walls of a first generation colt some time and the walls are even thinner that the current .45s. I'm basing that one a .45 cal. 5.5" Colt serialed to 1908. Compared to a 1980 something ,45 the wall of the 1908 seem paper thin.
The point being the .44 Spl. had the advantage for a potentially much more powerful loading to the .45 Colt. Fast foreward to modern day revolvers and the .44 Spl. vs the .45 Colt still gives the advantage to the .44.
Current new production handguns probably started with Ruger who in fact hada working .44 Magnum in the flat top version before S&W could even have out their door for sale.
From about 1970 on I was more desert rat than anything else and spent many hours wandering the high desert of Nevada and later due to a job transfer the Sonoran Desert of southern Arizona. I was alway armed with a handgun, mostly a .44 Magnum Ruger but later a neat S&W 629 . mag. and later an S&W 624 .44 Spl. In .45 Colt there were a few Colt SAA in various barrel lengths plus a few Ruger Blackhawks and Bisleys in .44 Mag. and Colt .45. I always had one or the other of the guns along for protection from Black Bears and Mountain Lions that would pass from one mountain range to another None ever bothered me but I was still glad I had my handgun at easy reach. Most of the time I guess it was the .44 Mag. but sometimes a 5.5" Ruger Bisley in Colt .45 with a John Linebaugh level load.
Peopl mention Skeeter Skelton's pet load a lot and I'll admit it's my favorite in the .44 Spl. but no one has mentioned Elmer Keith's load which was a goodly amount of H2400 amd his 245 gr. cast bullet. I forget what he used but I think it was something like 17.0 gr of the Hercules version of 2400. I'd have to try and look that up to be sure so don't use it. Current 2400 is Alliant 2400 and it seems to be somewhat faster burning than the original H version. Recoil was rather sharp in that early Ruger .44 Mag. I still have that flat top and a three screw dual cylinder .45 Blackhawk.
I've always handloaded my handgun ammo with my own homemade cast bullets. After shooting deer a few times with factory jacketed and my handloads I'll take my handloads every time. FWIW, I think Skeeter's .44 Spl. load is more than enough to handle a black Bear. Well at least the ones I've seen around here.
Paul B.
- Status
