someguy2800
Member
My dream pistol caliber lever action would be to get an 1894 marlin and re-barrel it with a .429 diameter 1:20 twist barrel. The .431 bore 1:38 twist barrels is just absolutely stupid.
44 Mag vs. 45 Colt in Rifle
- Thread starter JDinFbg
- Start date
- Status
earlthegoat2
Member
I have a love/hate relationship with 44 Mag.
TLDR: 44 Mag in a rifle is complicated. Do more research.
The 44 rifles are all .431 bore diameter unless you get custom because that is SAAMI. Then on top of this, especially in Marlin and NEF/H&R rifles, there is fluctuation in actual bore diameter from .430-.434. That is a wildly large range for modern machinery and manufacturing technology. If you look at the SAAMI specs carefully it will note a +.004 acceptance variance to the .431 bore. So a .435 bore could still be within spec.
This opens up all kinds of problems and extra steps to find which ammo is best for your particular gun. Custom casting and sizing of bullets usually ensues after you have slugged your particular bore.
All this is compounded with the slow twist rates these rifles generally also have. It’s a big headache unless you really love the process. All of this also precludes the use of most factory ammunition which load bullets of .429-.430 diameter and range in weight from 185 gr and generally top out at 300 gr.
Realistically, This leaves little a fair number of options still. For instance, Hornady loads .430 diameter jacketed bullets in 200, 240 and 300 gr XTP, 225 gr Leverevolution FTX, 200 gr Monoflex, These are some of the only factory loaded jacketed bullets that are .430 diameter. There are many lead bullets that are .430 diameter. But really, .431 diameter bullets are the minimum size needed.
So, many folks with 44 Mag rifles are perfectly happy with power and accuracy and everything I have just said will bemuse the heck out of them. I get that but unfortunately my experience has been much worse with 44 Mag rifles.
Be prepared to only hand load and experiment with a number of bullets up to and including custom casting and sizing.
Where does the 45 Colt fit in to all of this. Well, the 45 Colt is in many ways, a hand loader only cartridge as well. When comparing the 44 Mag to the 45 Colt hand loading has to be part of the conversation otherwise the 44 Mag would win every time. The 45 Colt can duplicate 44 Mag pressures and power levels relatively easily with modern components.
If we were only talking about revolvers, I would vote 44 Mag and not think twice. In revolvers, 44 Mag does not demand hand loading to get relative maximal results though you can hot rod 44 Mag if you are so inclined and your revolver is up to it. Hand loading is required for 45 Colt to equal 44 Mag performance. You can get great performance with conventional factory ammunition in 44 Mag and you can get that with 45 Colt with boutique ammunition. 44 Mag revolvers have proper bore diameters and twist rates so not near so many factors have to considered. They are much more plug and play.
In rifles however, all the previously mentioned variables come into play with 44 Mag. 45 Colt rifles however, have no SAAMI standard and as such, are chambered similarly to their handgun brethren. The bore diameter is closer to actual projectile diameter. All of those variables need not be considered when doing load development for a 45 Colt rifle. These rifles also often have slow twist rifling. Most notably, surprise, surprise, in Marlin 1894s and, for me at least, NEF/H&R rifles of which 1-38 is normal.
All these things considered, I think the rifling is the more important variable between these two rifle cartridges. In factory rifles this leaves the Henry Big Boy series and the single shot of which only 44 is chambered in it. These have 1-20 rifling. There are probably a few other factory offerings out there but they are less common.
Every time I bring this topic up, I like to note the 444 Marlin. Ostensibly, a lengthened 44 Mag, the 444 has a SAAMI bore diameter of .430. This is interesting to me since Marlin’s own 44 Mag rifles are .431. More digging into the minutiae of the SAAMI spec for 44 Mag rifle reveals a note about the rifling being 12 grooves and 1-38 twist. This makes me believe that Marlin was the driver for the 44 Mag SAAMI spec since 12 grooves implies Microgroove rifling. This also appears in the 444 Marlin SAAMI drawing.
This brings up a question. Marlin introduced the 444 in 1964. Marlin started chambering 1894s in 44 Mag sometime in the early 60s. The 444 originally had a 1-38 twist. Many folks disparaged this rate of twist and in a fine example of wheels turning slowly, Marlin changed the twist rate of the 444 around the turn of the 20th century. They acknowledged that the higher speed round, the 444 compared to the 44 Mag, needed faster rifling. Faster rounds usually do better than slower rounds in slower rifling yet Marlin changed the 44, deviating from their own SAAMI drawing in the process, but did nothing for the 44 Mag.
Also, SAAMI specs are merely suggestion even if it doesn’t seem like it. They are not a rules exactly. If they were, no one would be able to make rifles in wildcat cartridges. SAAMI is a set of minimum standards that have been vetted. Adherence to these standards will protect a manufacturer from various liabilities of their products.
An example of this is that 7.62 NATO is a cartridge adhering to NATO specs. 308 Winchester adheres to SAAMI specs. These specs are subtly different.
TLDR: 44 Mag in a rifle is complicated. Do more research.
The 44 rifles are all .431 bore diameter unless you get custom because that is SAAMI. Then on top of this, especially in Marlin and NEF/H&R rifles, there is fluctuation in actual bore diameter from .430-.434. That is a wildly large range for modern machinery and manufacturing technology. If you look at the SAAMI specs carefully it will note a +.004 acceptance variance to the .431 bore. So a .435 bore could still be within spec.
This opens up all kinds of problems and extra steps to find which ammo is best for your particular gun. Custom casting and sizing of bullets usually ensues after you have slugged your particular bore.
All this is compounded with the slow twist rates these rifles generally also have. It’s a big headache unless you really love the process. All of this also precludes the use of most factory ammunition which load bullets of .429-.430 diameter and range in weight from 185 gr and generally top out at 300 gr.
Realistically, This leaves little a fair number of options still. For instance, Hornady loads .430 diameter jacketed bullets in 200, 240 and 300 gr XTP, 225 gr Leverevolution FTX, 200 gr Monoflex, These are some of the only factory loaded jacketed bullets that are .430 diameter. There are many lead bullets that are .430 diameter. But really, .431 diameter bullets are the minimum size needed.
So, many folks with 44 Mag rifles are perfectly happy with power and accuracy and everything I have just said will bemuse the heck out of them. I get that but unfortunately my experience has been much worse with 44 Mag rifles.
Be prepared to only hand load and experiment with a number of bullets up to and including custom casting and sizing.
Where does the 45 Colt fit in to all of this. Well, the 45 Colt is in many ways, a hand loader only cartridge as well. When comparing the 44 Mag to the 45 Colt hand loading has to be part of the conversation otherwise the 44 Mag would win every time. The 45 Colt can duplicate 44 Mag pressures and power levels relatively easily with modern components.
If we were only talking about revolvers, I would vote 44 Mag and not think twice. In revolvers, 44 Mag does not demand hand loading to get relative maximal results though you can hot rod 44 Mag if you are so inclined and your revolver is up to it. Hand loading is required for 45 Colt to equal 44 Mag performance. You can get great performance with conventional factory ammunition in 44 Mag and you can get that with 45 Colt with boutique ammunition. 44 Mag revolvers have proper bore diameters and twist rates so not near so many factors have to considered. They are much more plug and play.
In rifles however, all the previously mentioned variables come into play with 44 Mag. 45 Colt rifles however, have no SAAMI standard and as such, are chambered similarly to their handgun brethren. The bore diameter is closer to actual projectile diameter. All of those variables need not be considered when doing load development for a 45 Colt rifle. These rifles also often have slow twist rifling. Most notably, surprise, surprise, in Marlin 1894s and, for me at least, NEF/H&R rifles of which 1-38 is normal.
All these things considered, I think the rifling is the more important variable between these two rifle cartridges. In factory rifles this leaves the Henry Big Boy series and the single shot of which only 44 is chambered in it. These have 1-20 rifling. There are probably a few other factory offerings out there but they are less common.
Every time I bring this topic up, I like to note the 444 Marlin. Ostensibly, a lengthened 44 Mag, the 444 has a SAAMI bore diameter of .430. This is interesting to me since Marlin’s own 44 Mag rifles are .431. More digging into the minutiae of the SAAMI spec for 44 Mag rifle reveals a note about the rifling being 12 grooves and 1-38 twist. This makes me believe that Marlin was the driver for the 44 Mag SAAMI spec since 12 grooves implies Microgroove rifling. This also appears in the 444 Marlin SAAMI drawing.
This brings up a question. Marlin introduced the 444 in 1964. Marlin started chambering 1894s in 44 Mag sometime in the early 60s. The 444 originally had a 1-38 twist. Many folks disparaged this rate of twist and in a fine example of wheels turning slowly, Marlin changed the twist rate of the 444 around the turn of the 20th century. They acknowledged that the higher speed round, the 444 compared to the 44 Mag, needed faster rifling. Faster rounds usually do better than slower rounds in slower rifling yet Marlin changed the 44, deviating from their own SAAMI drawing in the process, but did nothing for the 44 Mag.
Also, SAAMI specs are merely suggestion even if it doesn’t seem like it. They are not a rules exactly. If they were, no one would be able to make rifles in wildcat cartridges. SAAMI is a set of minimum standards that have been vetted. Adherence to these standards will protect a manufacturer from various liabilities of their products.
An example of this is that 7.62 NATO is a cartridge adhering to NATO specs. 308 Winchester adheres to SAAMI specs. These specs are subtly different.
Last edited:
mcb
Member
Measure yout particular gun and pick bullets appropriately. SAAMI specs have some very generous tolerances. Most manufactures will run much tighter to nominal tolerance when they make their own internal prints. Most manufactures are holding nominal +.001 instead of the +.004 of SAAMI.
I cast both of my 44 Mag barrels, a S&W M29 and my Rossi M92 and they were very close to the same, given the differences between the SAAMI rifle spec and pistol/revolver spec. The S&W M29 was .421 bore and .429 groove. The Rossi M92 was .423 bore and .431 groove. Interestingly the M29 is right on nominal for grove diameter but at the far end of the tolerance for the bore diameter. But this is consistent with most modern guns were the groves are typically .0035 to .0040 inch deep. Likewise the the M92 it is right on nominal for groove diameter but technically out of spec for bore diameter being .001 under spec but maintaining that typical groove depth. This seems like about as well as we can hope given the two different bore/groove specs pistol vs rifle for this cartridge. I believe this is the only cartridge with such differences between the pistol/revolver and rifle SAAMI spec. I have never had and issue running the same ammo, lead or jacketed, in these two guns.
I cast both of my 44 Mag barrels, a S&W M29 and my Rossi M92 and they were very close to the same, given the differences between the SAAMI rifle spec and pistol/revolver spec. The S&W M29 was .421 bore and .429 groove. The Rossi M92 was .423 bore and .431 groove. Interestingly the M29 is right on nominal for grove diameter but at the far end of the tolerance for the bore diameter. But this is consistent with most modern guns were the groves are typically .0035 to .0040 inch deep. Likewise the the M92 it is right on nominal for groove diameter but technically out of spec for bore diameter being .001 under spec but maintaining that typical groove depth. This seems like about as well as we can hope given the two different bore/groove specs pistol vs rifle for this cartridge. I believe this is the only cartridge with such differences between the pistol/revolver and rifle SAAMI spec. I have never had and issue running the same ammo, lead or jacketed, in these two guns.
Last edited:
dieselchief
Member
i have personally owned a competition 94 marlin in 45. some notes> chamber was huge. always blackened never sealed it and case life was non existent. upon examination i found the threaded area of the barrel area in the receiver to be very thin. contrary to every thing i know about high pressure loads in a firearm.
.....actually experience not repeated it ought to be...
.....actually experience not repeated it ought to be...
Risky buisness
Member
Im interested to see someone else has had this problem as well.i thought for years that my 94 trapper had a Friday at quitting time barrel on it
It was a pretty sloppy chamber and with regular .45 colt ammo pressures would have some gas leakage too.
After several years of that, and pitching bulged cases i decided to rebbl the rifle. If my memory serves me, it came back at 18" with a 1/ 20 twist.
It sure does work much better with the 300 grain stuff than it used to.
theotherwaldo
Member
I've got a '94 Marlin carbine in .44 mag because I found one cheap.
I reload with very hard oversized lead bullets, but accuracy is only so-so.
I've never had anything functional in .45 LC.
I reload with very hard oversized lead bullets, but accuracy is only so-so.
I've never had anything functional in .45 LC.
Charlie98
Member
Who did you send it to for the rebarrel?
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
And yet levergun specialists like Mic McPherson who convert these rifles to even bigger chamberings, consider the .45Colt Marlin 1894 to be good for 10,000psi over "Ruger only" data. Jack Huntington builds them in .500JRH.
.45Coltguy
Member
I voted .45 Colt because I have a Henry and two Italian replicas in that cartridge. I no longer hunt, so don't need the power of .44 mag. Desert plinking is what I do now.
It's just an easier round for me.
It's just an easier round for me.
Risky buisness
Member
Brixton
Member
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2021
- Messages
- 3
>45 Colt every time. Ballard rifling.
The Happy Kaboomer
Member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2012
- Messages
- 386
NOPE. Not the same unless you want pull outs and stuck cases.
NorthBorder
Member
Never had stuck cases.
Hokkmike
Member
I have shot all 3, the .444, .44mag, and .45LC out of Marlins and Winchesters (the .44)
The .44 was the least accurate, the .444 had the most punch and recoil (obviously), and the .45LC is my sentimental favorite.
My gut says to go with the .44 mag. But I am not as knowledgeable as several posters above. I am VERY interested in the .454.
The .44 was the least accurate, the .444 had the most punch and recoil (obviously), and the .45LC is my sentimental favorite.
My gut says to go with the .44 mag. But I am not as knowledgeable as several posters above. I am VERY interested in the .454.
Often the decision comes down to personal preference. Things like pairing it to a hand gun you already own is a wise choice.
Performance wise for hunting, a larger caliber will ALWAYS outperform a smaller caliber. You can take that to the bank. 357 < 41 Mag < 44 Mag < 45 Colt < 480 Ruger < 500 S&W
For target shooting, a smaller caliber will usually outperform a larger caliber. There are reasons 38 special did so well in bullseye competition, for example.
Performance wise for hunting, a larger caliber will ALWAYS outperform a smaller caliber. You can take that to the bank. 357 < 41 Mag < 44 Mag < 45 Colt < 480 Ruger < 500 S&W
For target shooting, a smaller caliber will usually outperform a larger caliber. There are reasons 38 special did so well in bullseye competition, for example.
Last edited:
- Status
