The reloading manuals say "Ruger only" for a reason. I don't think I would take a chance with something else.
Personally, I never understood the need to try to make a .45 Colt perform like a .44 Magnum.
I wondered because EAA makes a 44 mag and i am under the impression that it is the same frame as the 45 colt.Define hot. I shoot 250 gr. 1000 fps out of my conversions as a normal load. That's not a slouch load. I don't hunt anymore but would use any of mine if I decided to.
I don't think you can shoot "Ruger " loads out of the EAA.
Yes, we've all heard that before. Due to liability reasons, Ruger is always going to say standard factory loads. They have never condoned the use of anything else, including handloads of any kind.This is good advice. FWIW, I had emailed Ruger about shooting "hot" factory 45 Colt ammo from their large frame revolvers, specifically Buffalo Bore. Their response: All of our Firearms are designed to handle all US Industry Standard Ammunition made to SAAMI Spec (including +P). We cannot recommend using the 45 Colt +P in our guns as it is not a SAAMI cartridge.
The SAAMI spec for 45 Colt is MAP 14,000 PSI. There is no SAAMI 45 Colt +P specification. Meaning anything above 14K is beyond SAAMI recommendation. The revolver and brass are designed to handle MAP plus a safety margin. The Ruger is a strong revolver but you need to know when you are exceeding its proof test limits. Now the spec for the 454 Casull (and 460 Smith) is MAP 65,000 PSI and they will handle 45 Colt rounds so that may be something to consider if you want to shoot hot loads. YMMV
Thanks craig. Almost all manufacturers will advise you not to shoot ANY reloads. It is called CYA, nothing more.Yes, we've all heard that before. Due to liability reasons, Ruger is always going to say standard factory loads. They have never condoned the use of anything else, including handloads of any kind.
That said, this path has been well-beaten before us. We know the guns are strong enough, we know the brass is strong enough, we have pressure tested data, there's nothing out of the ordinary about it.
This article is a little outdated in reference to the .44Mag but everything else rings true.
http://www.customsixguns.com/writings/dissolving_the_myth.htm
Like I said, an oft-repeated warning but destructive tests and decades of experience have taught us that the fears are unfounded. Of course, that doesn't keep people from believing and repeating them. If it was an issue, do you think Speer would be printing "Ruger only" data? What about Hodgdon?While maybe firearms can be loaded with rounds above SAAMI limits, that doesn't mean it is a good idea. Years ago in the 60s a hunting buddy of my Dad's thought his .308 Win was safe to shoot 150 grainers around 3000 FPS. He always would say, "It is safe in my gun." To my knowledge the gun never blew up but to me, it made more sense to just get a common 30-06 or better a 30 cal mag if that was the goal.
I have a Ruger in 45 Colt. It is a fine revolver but comparing the amount of metal between chambers in the cylinder to my Super Blackhawk 44 mag (MAP 36,000 PSI) or the Blackhawk in 327 mag (MAP 45,000 PSI), and certainly the 460 mag (65K); the cylinder walls on the 45 Colt are thinner and not built to take big pressure. All I am saying if the need is to shoot bullets over 225 grain over 1000 fps, why not look at revolver designed and built to do that--a 454 for example? Good luck in your endeavors.
...Just another example of those that do being told they cannot do something by those who have never even tried....
My thoughts are pretty clear when I wrote, "While maybe firearms can be loaded with rounds above SAAMI limits, that doesn't mean it is a good idea."
No, I'm talking about you....Just another example of those that do being told they cannot do something by those who have never even tried....
No, I'm talking about you.
I suggest you start lobbying Speer/Alliant, Hodgdon's, Lyman, etc. to stop publishing their "Ruger only" data, since you seem to think you know better than everyone else. Since you seem to know better than those who tested the guns to destruction, did the testing, did the load development, had the loads pressure tested and then all the rest who have been using these loads in these guns for decades.
Your warning has been stated and as I said, it's been said before......an infinite number of times. The safety police has been heard. Now let it rest instead of continuing to derail the thread.