.45 Colt Pressure Data

Jim Taylor
[subject]
Monday, July 21, 2025, 08:20 (103 days ago)

Back in the 1970's John Taffin and I were experimenting with heavy .45 Colt loads using Ruger single actions. I had talked with Elmer Keith about his 300 gr. loads in the old Colt single actions and using the SWAG method (scientific wild ass guess) came up with some loads that seemed to work OK and didn't tear the gun apart.

John Taffin got me in touch with John Linebaugh who was doing stuff 'way beyond what we were doing and he helped me a lot! He had built a .45 Colt Pressure Barrel for Hodgdon's and because he built it for them, he had access to it any time it was not being used.

I sent him a bunch of loads to test which turned out to be pretty revealing. Remember. At this time the "accepted" wisdom was the .45 Colt brass was "too weak" to be used in heavy loads.

Here is a copy of the Pressure Data .. thanks to Ray who dug it out of old copies of JD Jones "The Sixgunner" ...

[image]

Very interesting

ORG
[subject]
Monday, July 21, 2025, 11:31 (103 days ago) @ Jim Taylor

I note that SAAMI lists max loads for the .45 Colt at 14,000/15,000 C.U.P.

I'm not offering this as a criticism, just a matter of information. We all know this is in view of all the old SAA's out there and any other gun of questionable strength. :-|

Yes. But the 18.5 gr. 2400 load

Jim Taylor
[subject]
Monday, July 21, 2025, 12:36 (103 days ago) @ ORG

was listed for years in Lyman's Manuals and has been shot for years by many of us who owned Colt's with no issues. Ain't saying there could not be problems ............. just never had any .. other than beating the cylinder pin retaining latch to death. :-)

Your gun, your call.

ORG
[subject]
Monday, July 21, 2025, 12:56 (103 days ago) @ Jim Taylor

Doesn't affect me at all. :-D

These days loads are self limiting.

WB
[subject]
Monday, July 21, 2025, 17:35 (103 days ago) @ ORG

It’s no fun anymore to get stomped with recoil. I was always surprised at the weight difference between a Ruger .45 and say, a .41 mag. The .45 has such big hollow holes! I like the lively feel. Thankfully O’l Bill decided to upsize the Blackhawk for managing the .45 Colt. I find the smaller chassis .44 however a similar delight. Ruger never made one until lately. The “new” Vaquero in .45 Colt was cool (with a hammer change, just for aesthetics). It just seemed off to me.

The lighter .45’s get rough fast as performance is pushed. The bigger chassis guns are designed for heavier duty, SAAMI and lawyers be damned. But it’s true, a lot less folks have troubles going by the book. Fetch the FA83 and let’s see how much trouble we can really conjure!

Anymore I like shooting 850 / 900 fps loads

Jim Taylor
[subject]
Monday, July 21, 2025, 17:48 (103 days ago) @ WB

in the .44 Special and the .45 Colt.

But I do miss being young enough to think that the fire-breathing loads were fun. :-)

I have good 265 gr./300 gr. .44 & .45 loads

WB
[subject]
Monday, July 21, 2025, 18:46 (103 days ago) @ Jim Taylor

A bit under 1000 fps. Truly there is not very much that will stop those solid cast slugs. Even the .510 GNR is most formidable with my 410 gr. At 1050 fps. It will (confirmed) shoot clean through a Bison, shoulder bones and all. At least a smaller one. How much more do you need?!

Pretty sure the Old Model (3-screw) . . .

ORG
[subject]
Monday, July 21, 2025, 18:28 (103 days ago) @ WB

. . . Blackhawks (1970-1973) are on the same frame as the same period's Super Blackhawks. No upsizing required. ;-)

I was thinking the same thinking the “Colt” size

WB
[subject]
Monday, July 21, 2025, 18:42 (103 days ago) @ ORG

Three screw was the .357 and the .30 Carbine, .41, .45 were larger. I read Ruger did make some .44 Magnums on the “.357 Chassis” and they were stressed. So he went bigger. It’s just my recollection, and a challenge for someone to fresh research it, so I don’t have to. lol

I think my .30 Carbine (.300 GNR) is on the OM .”44” chassis. I had a .44 and .38-40 built also, but for sure on the .357 chassis.

I once had a Great Western .44 Magnum (circa 1961) on the SAA foundation. It was horrifically brutal!

Yep. :-)

ORG
[subject]
Monday, July 21, 2025, 19:10 (103 days ago) @ WB

- No text -

powered by my little forum