.45 Colt and W296/H110 Max

[Bucks Owin]

If you have the same Hornady manual as I do, then you'll notice their velocities are taken from their loads fired in a 10" T/C Contender. So 1300 fps with 21.7 grains ww296 is a little bit optimistic in my experience.

That sounds a little optimistic alright. 22.5 grs W296 under a 457191 cast ( close to 300 grs) got me 1260 fps...
I "could" go 1300+ but can't think of a good reason to, will shoot through a good sized oak tree. Empties fall out of cyl at 1260 fps so gun and I both are happy enough as is. :wink:

 

[63November]

I've done the 21,22,23 grain deal with 300s, and load, thanks to the recommendations of Taffin and others, the heavier end of things with many hundreds of 320 cast bullets in my BH and RH revolvers. I'm not sure what is gained however by an extra grain or two which isn't managed with a bit milder loads. It seems that 296/110 like to be run at fairly brisk conditions, so finding a spot they like in terms of powder quantity, neck tension, and crimp is good enough, and then run with it. Ruger pressures are higher than older Colt loads, but they are nowhere near as high as more modern magnum loads.

As far as bullets go though, in testing as well as limited practical use, I find the Mag 300 XTP to be too tough even for heavier than Hornady recommended loads, while the standard seems too soft for bony encounters. The Speer (Uni-Cor) SP is better for expansion, integrity, and penetration, while the Sierra JSP is more like a jacketed hard cast in terms of integrity (at Colt revolver speeds) and pure penetrating power.

 

[BigJ71]

Those XTP Mags look PERFECT for my application, They should provide excellent penetration with minimal deformation and the ability to go through heavy hide, muscle and bone... Thanks for the pictures!

 

[63November]

Those bullets were all fired into the heavy joint ends of moose leg bones at close range out of a 45 Colt Redhawk. Muzzle Vel was 1200-1250 fps.

The 300 XTP-Mag in this pic was fired from a Colt Winchester Trapper 16" Carbine (1400-1500 fps) at close range into the heavy muscle of a moose neck. It was fired in near darkness and never made it to the brain. A subsequent shot from the same gun using a 300 Speer SP entered the base of the skull and penetrated through the lower jaw, breaking it, before exiting.

This is a typical bone end used for testing. This one happens to be one which rejected a standard 300 XTP. (They are rather soft.) All other samples pictured above were able to break and penetrate bone like this. It's a tough test, one which will make most tough bullets expand significantly. (The 300 Sierra is one which usually doesn't show much expansion in softer materials. It has a high antimony core and is consequently very hard.)

The 300 Mag XTP is a good, tough bullet. It would be high on my list of Casull bullets if I was going after Cape Buffalo with a Casull handgun - not a likely endeavor! I would not use it if I hoped for soft tissue expansion however, unless you can really crank some serious speed with it.

 

[aciera]

Many people, usually inexperienced shooters seem to think that you can load a grain or even 2 grs over max & because their gun didn't blow up they will look you in the eye & say its SAFE in their gun....well, they are playing with fire.
Guns are "proofed" beyond what the books show as maxium because there are so many variables in reloading. When you exceed that 32,000 psi threshold that most manufacturers list as safe in guns like full size Rugers then you are into that danger zone where you exceed even a proof load & damage the gun or hurt yourself.
The real question is, why! Does it make any sense to exceed factory recommended loads for an extra 50-100 fps so you can tell your buddies that your gun is faster & the recoil is way up there but you like it. An iron sighted sixgun isn't meant to be a 270, its a sixgun & they all have limits, mess with that limit & you can get educated real fast.
Ruger 44 maggies are proofed at about 80,000 psi so top loads should stop at 40,000 for a 100% safety margin, Ruger 45's are proofed at about 60,000 or slightly higher so top end loads should stop at about 32,000 psi, again for a 100% safety margin.
If you are playing with these maximum loads & change any single component, primer, brass, powder, brand of bullet, temperature, etc. you've now entered that gray area where you can get hurt, beware!

Dick

Old thread I was reading.......so wrong!!!!!!
The 44 Mag lets go at 80,000!!!

The 45 at 60,000 or so!!!

They are proofed at 130% of regular loads...........

You are telling people that the gun held together at double the listed pressure so they have LOTS of head room.

This is not opinion........I've seen the blown up guns

 

[Paul B]

You might find looking up John Linebaugh's site if interested in top loads with the heavier bullets. He has loads properly pressure tested that are IIRC, above most lost manuals. Plenty of interesting reading on the subject there.
Paul B.

 

[Rclark]

Site URL -> Dissolving the Myth .45 Colt - John Linebaugh

 

[aciera]

You might find looking up John Linebaugh's site if interested in top loads with the heavier bullets. He has loads properly pressure tested that are IIRC, above most lost manuals. Plenty of interesting reading on the subject there.
Paul B.

I was working for John and that is why I was pretty sure of my info......lol

 

[Rick Courtright]

God Bless you sixshot. An excellent explaniation of why things are the way they are. I guess a lot of folks MUST have the pressure testing equipment to be shooting stuff above posted safe limits.

Hi,

Every time I see these "fill it up 'til it overflows and set a giant bullet on top of it" discussions, I begin to think I must belong to a very tiny group of reloaders who DON'T have a million dollar lab in the garage and 30-40 years experience using all the equipment in there. [/sarc] Add another "thank you" to sixshot for his discussion.

An aside on proofing, from across the pond:

As I understand it, every gun sold in Britain must be proofed at least once in the government proofing house before it can be sold new. Then, it must be reproofed before it can be sold or transferred as a used gun (protection against getting a gun from the "It ain't broke yet" crowd?) And, if a major modification is made, another reproof may be required. For example, there are still a lot of Damascus shotgun barrels in Britain, and to be absolutely certain they're still safe to use with current ammo, one solution is to "sleeve" the older Damascus 12 gauge guns to a smaller gauge, like a 28, with a modern steel insert. It's pricey, but we should remember the owners of such guns are generally well heeled enough that a few thousand dollars or so isn't isn't going make them balk at the price. Back to the proof house again, where the barrel will be marked "Sleeved" before the smith (or factory) can let you have your gun back to use.

I can hear the screams already if some sort of a similar scheme was instituted in the US, but it's a long way from the worst idea anybody in the gun world has come up with.

Rick C

 

[aciera]

Yeah......but six shots post is still completely wrong......give bad headroom ideas

 

[contender]

"Yeah......but six shots post is still completely wrong......"

I have to respectfully disagree.

One thing NOT mentioned is the fact that there are a LOT of newer gun owners,, as well as some makes of guns that aren't up to the strength of "Ruger or T/C only" loads. throw in the "Bubba" reloader who ignores manuals. Or the simple facts that reloading manuals & published data sold to the public carries "liability" issues,, ALL contribute to much of what sixshot is trying to convey.

I'm NOT discounting the excellent work John Linebaugh has done in ANY form what-so-ever. But the practical side of a large majority of average reloaders will NOT spend the time, the money & such to do things like what John has done. In fact,, quite often,, I can mention John's name to other shooters & they have never heard of him.

In short,, I disagree with what you say about sixshot's post because there are way too many variables outside specialty stuff done by TRUE handgunners who understand a lot more than the average Bubba. By his post,, he's trying to help a lot of the Bubbas out there NOT get into trouble.

And to quantify myself,, I too have seen more than my share of blown up firearms,, have a Ruger 44 mag that's blown up that I use when teaching, AND I had the very first Ruger Redhawk that had a barrel separate from the frame. (That was later discovered to be a problem with the lubricant used in assy. And my handload data was a milder load that the gun preferred.) I'm also a NRA instructor,, a Hunter Safety instructor & have been handgun hunting, handloading etc for over 40 years now. And I'll freely admit I don't know NEARLY enough to be comfortable in many aspects of handloading.

 

[Ale-8(1)]

The point is, if you exceed the accepted loads from the published reloading manuals you don't know what you have for pressure. Linebaugh designs and builds his guns after considerable testing with his heavy loads and I guess we have to take his word for their safety . . . when using these loads in his guns. Other than that we should accept the published loads in the manuals. The published so-called "Ruger only" loads are assumed to have been tested for safe use in the Ruger guns, and we really do not know for sure what pressures are generated by them, but I feel safe in assuming that the manual writers are not wishing to be hit with lawsuits resulting from ka-booms. There are loads out there that claim to be .45 Colt +P when there is no such SAAMI spec for such a load. Not something I'd personally subject my guns to.

We're all free to do what we like, but rationalizations are personal decisions and don't necessarily carry weight . . . even mine. :lol: :wink: :lol:

 

[Dan in MI]

Just another addition to the manufacturer liability file. There is still old balloon head brass out there. Manufacturers have to consider all of this before they publish.

 

[Ale-8(1)]

Just another addition to the manufacturer liability file. There is still old balloon head brass out there. Manufacturers have to consider all of this before they publish.

Yep. And yet when we see what's available on the market we cannot help but wonder if they actually do care. :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

[Luckyducker]

I was loading 23.5 grains H110 in my 45LC Vaquero under a 335 grain gas check cast bullet without issue. I realize this isn't a Hornady XTP but it does show that the Rugers are capable of heavier charges.

 

[thor's daddy]

Linebaugh designs and builds his guns after considerable testing with his heavy loads and I guess we have to take his word for their safety . . . The published so-called "Ruger only" loads are assumed to have been tested for safe use in the Ruger guns, and we really do not know for sure what pressures are generated by them...

I'm not sure why you would feel you shouldn't trust John. He had his loads pressure tested and has listed pressures with recommended loads. Considering the fact that the 475 and 500 are his cartridges and he was the first to build the big 5-shot 45s, it only makes sense.
So too,. Ruger has stated safe pressures for their 45 Colt guns and companies that print hand loading manuals have pressure testing equipment, use it, and quite often publish pressures as part of the load data listed in their manuals.
Why pretend we're all putting our life in someone else's hands every time we pull the trigger? This isn't voodoo.

 

[Rick Courtright]

Yeah......but six shots post is still completely wrong......give bad headroom ideas

Hi,

Here are a few numbers from the guys who set the standards:

http://www.lasc.us/SAAMIMaxPressure.htm (Note: these are NOT proof pressures)

Not that it will put anything to rest, but I'd be willing to bet if you got Ruger to sell you two consecutive BHs in .45 Colt, and someone offered you unlimited SAAMI spec ammo to shoot in one until it failed, and unlimited "Ruger Only" ammo to shoot in the other one until it, too, failed, that the one using factory spec ammo will last far, far longer than the "Ruger Only" gun. The question is, what is that "far, far longer" number? 1000 rds? 10,000 rds? Maybe 25,000 rds? Or even far more?

One problem with shooting non-standard pressure ammo is the damage to the gun is usually cumulative, so it may seem safe cuz "It ain't broke yet" but it could easily come unglued with the very next shot, and we can't predict when that next one will be... I had a showcase full of broken steel at the range "back when" and it was a sure bet the guy who'd just blown something up would say something like "It was ok until then!"

Rick C

 

[Ale-8(1)]

Linebaugh designs and builds his guns after considerable testing with his heavy loads and I guess we have to take his word for their safety . . . The published so-called "Ruger only" loads are assumed to have been tested for safe use in the Ruger guns, and we really do not know for sure what pressures are generated by them...

I'm not sure why you would feel you shouldn't trust John. He had his loads pressure tested and has listed pressures with recommended loads. Considering the fact that the 475 and 500 are his cartridges and he was the first to build the big 5-shot 45s, it only makes sense.
So too,. Ruger has stated safe pressures for their 45 Colt guns and companies that print hand loading manuals have pressure testing equipment, use it, and quite often publish pressures as part of the load data listed in their manuals.
Why pretend we're all putting our life in someone else's hands every time we pull the trigger? This isn't voodoo.

I said we have to take his word for the safety of the loads he recommends, and I assume he has done the necessary testing for the benefit of his guns with his loads . . . they are not Rugers. I'd have no problem using John's ammo in his guns. Ruger disclaims any responsibility for the use of "nonstandard" ammunition in any of their guns and this has been accepted as meaning SAAMI-spec ammo. I further maintain that "Ruger only" loads published in loading manuals are probably safe from the standpoint of avoiding liability issues, but we usually do not know what pressures are generated by them. Up to the individual how he feels about that. I don't use "Ruger only" loads simply because I don't need the extra performance they should provide. I only mention all this because it's quite often the case that some folks feel comfortable handloading stuff that obviously exceeds published load data because they believe it's OK to infringe on the built-in safety factor of a gun's design. Those are the folks who stand to suffer the consequences of their actions. You're right, it's not voodoo, just common sense. JMHO

 

[Biggfoot44]

Disregarding John L for the moment , we Do know the pressures of * Published* Ruger Only/ Ruger and T/C loads , at minimum such powder/ bullet mfgs specifiy the maximum not exceeded Pressure ,usually 30K , sometimes 32K. ( Original Accurate Arms data used 25K , as did a few smaller sources .

 

[contender]

Respectfully,, thor's daddy,, you posted a PARTIAL quote from Ale-8(1).

You left out;

"when using these loads in his guns. Other than that we should accept the published loads in the manuals. The published so-called "Ruger only" loads are assumed to have been tested for safe use in the Ruger guns, and we really do not know for sure what pressures are generated by them, but I feel safe in assuming that the manual writers are not wishing to be hit with lawsuits resulting from ka-booms. There are loads out there that claim to be .45 Colt +P when there is no such SAAMI spec for such a load. Not something I'd personally subject my guns to.

We're all free to do what we like, but rationalizations are personal decisions and don't necessarily carry weight . . . even mine."

Re-read this; "when using these loads in his guns."

We often complain about how badly the media twists a story around by selecting quotes & stuff,, to make it fit their narrative. You have done the same thing here.
I FULLY trust John's info,, knowing he stands to be liable for such things,, in print,, if something ever happens. But he's talking about HIS guns,, HE built,, and HE tested. Not the normal production Rugers.

Next,, look at this post;
"Not that it will put anything to rest, but I'd be willing to bet if you got Ruger to sell you two consecutive BHs in .45 Colt, and someone offered you unlimited SAAMI spec ammo to shoot in one until it failed, and unlimited "Ruger Only" ammo to shoot in the other one until it, too, failed, that the one using factory spec ammo will last far, far longer than the "Ruger Only" gun. The question is, what is that "far, far longer" number? 1000 rds? 10,000 rds? Maybe 25,000 rds? Or even far more?"

A firearm is just a man made machine. It has moving parts. It is subjected to use & abuse on these parts. The points of failure on each part is very relevant to the amount of,, and type of abuse. Just like a car. Buy (2) identical cars. Drive one like a little old lady only going to church on sundays,, and it'll outlast her. Take the other one & start drag racing it & it will fail a lot quicker.

So,, with all respect,, we do try & promote good SAFE gun handling around here. Sadly,, there are too many guns damaged or blown up all too often by people exceeding safe handloading practices. It may not happen the first time,, nor the 10th time,, or even the 1000th time,,, but if you overwork or overstress any machine,, it will fail.

Those are the main points most of us here are trying to get across.

I'm a NRA instructor. One of my very first statements to any & all students is; "SAFETY FIRST!" It is not confined to gun handling,, but to all aspects of shooting. Handloading included.