44 Magnum vs. 45 Colt (Hot-Loading)

[OregonJohnny]

Please forgive me if this has been debated to death (which it seems to have been, by doing a general Google search). I tried searching THR and couldn't find anything specific.

On to my question:

My uncle and I were discussing reloading last night (he's been out of it for a long time, and I just started a year ago).

He was talking about his old Ruger Blackhawk .45 Colt he used to own, and the "monster" hot-loads that he used to put through it. I was telling him that I own a Ruger Super Blackhawk, and in the last few years, companies such as Buffalo Bore have been putting out hot-loaded, heavy .44 Magnum for Ruger revolvers that seem to surpass velocity/energy of similarly hot-loaded .45 Colt.

He shook his head and said he could beat the .44 Magnum with his old hot-loads for the 45. His stance is that because of the larger case, you can load .45 Colt to be more powerful than .44 Magnum, in similar guns (Ruger Blackhawk/Super Blackhawk), with the same barrel length. I tried explaining that because of the .44 Magnum's much higher pressure limits, you can probably push it harder than .45 Colt.

Let's just say you have a .45 Blackhawk, and a .44 Super Blackhawk with the same length barrel. You have brand-new, high-quality brass for each caliber. You are going to use 300-grain jacketed bullets for each. You have the very best, optimal powder for each. Can you get more velocity and energy out of the .45 Colt without catastrophic pressure issues? Even though the .45 Colt case has slightly more volume, I have read that the .44 Magnum can be loaded to much higher pressures, and therefore can outperform any .45 Colt load, when handloaded to it's limits.

The Buffalo Bore .44 +P+, 340-grain load, going 1,478 fps from a 7.5" barrel seems like it would put any hot-rodded .45 Colt load to shame.

Can the THR experts shed some light on this for me please?

 

[atlanticfire]

I've loaded both with H110 before using 300gr bullets and got about a 200 FPS difference in favor of the 44 mag. Not sure how that works out with math in pound feet.

Edit: I dont have my load data with me but I thing it was 22gr. I'll have to edit again when I get to my books.

 

[CraigC]

For all practical purposes, the two are nearly identical. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. A great many .45Colt fanciers will repeat the old "more performance, less pressure" from Linebaugh's "Dissolving the Myth..." article but this no longer holds true and hasn't for some time.

All else being equal, with identical guns, running top loads (40,000CUP for the .44Mag, 32,000CUP for the .45Colt) the .44Mag will maintain a 100fps advantage across all bullet weights. While the .45 always maintains its slight edge in frontal area.

The heaviest practical bullets for each, 355gr .44's and 360gr .45's, the .44 has a slight edge in sectional density.

Blued .45Colt Blackhawks are lighter than comparable Super Blackhawks due to their aluminum grip frame and ejector housing. That matters to some folks. Short barrelled .45Colt Blackhawks are very light in weight. Relatively speaking.

Most .45Colts on the market suffer from funky dimensional variations. While basically only USFA and Freedom Arms supply sixguns wtih properly sized chambers. Colt's and S&W's tend to be oversized, Rugers can be either way. Most .44Mag sixguns shoot well right out of the box.

Where that big .45 case really begins to shine is when loaded to 50-55,000psi for Redhawks, FA's and custom five-shot guns. But at this point, I'd rather have a .475 or .500 because all that velocity does is flatten trajectory.

 

[OregonJohnny]

So from what I'm hearing, the .45 Colt can NEVER quite reach the velocity of the .44 Magnum, when both cartridges are loaded to their absolute maximum limits, in identical barrel lengths, with identical bullet weights. More or less correct?

 

[atlanticfire]

See, Craig had the info so to answer your question more or less....yes

 

[MCMXI]

So from what I'm hearing, the .45 Colt can NEVER quite reach the velocity of the .44 Magnum, when both cartridges are loaded to their absolute maximum limits, in identical barrel lengths, with identical bullet weights. More or less correct?

I guess we hear what we want to hear. CraigC already made the point that the .45 Colt can be loaded to 50-55,000 psi for the Ruger Redhawk and Super Redhawk. So how about comparing the performance of the 4.2" Redhawk and 2.5" Super Redhawk to see whether the .44 Mag or .45 Colt can push the same bullet weight faster using max loads. I have both a Redhawk and Super Redhawk chambered in .45 Colt and will buy a .44 Mag Redhawk (4.2") as soon as my favorite online gun shop has one in stock. Maybe I'll do the comparison myself using Hornady's 300gr XTP bullet.

CraigC made a comment about over or undersized chambers with the .45 Colt. I have two USFA Rodeos, two Bisley Blackhawks, a Redhawk and Super Redhawk all chambered in .45 Colt and none have out of spec chambers, throats or barrels. They are all newer variants so maybe Ruger finally figured out how to get it right. I also have a Marlin 1894 chambered in .45 Colt but haven't measured the chamber or slugged the barrel.

 

[OregonJohnny]

I guess we hear what we want to hear.

This is pretty much what I took from CraigC's post the first time I read it:

All else being equal, with identical guns, running top loads (40,000CUP for the .44Mag, 32,000CUP for the .45Colt) the .44Mag will maintain a 100fps advantage across all bullet weights.

After I read his post a second time, I absorbed this:

Where that big .45 case really begins to shine is when loaded to 50-55,000psi for Redhawks

So if you can take the .45 from 14,000CUP to 55,000CUP in a Redhawk, can you take the .44 from 36,000CUP to say, 45,000 or 50,000CPU in a Redhawk? After all, the .44 Redhawk will have slightly thicker cylinder walls than the .45 Redhawk, right? (By the way, I own a stainless 4.2" Redhawk .44, and use it as my load tester. It's a heck of a lot of fun now that I put the stock rosewood Redhawk grips on it, and shoot 300-grain Buffalo Bore +P rounds )

I guess what I'm asking is can the .45 Colt do anything that the .44 Magnum cannot in the same bullet weight? Will 55,000CUP in a 300-grain .45 Colt round through a 4.2" Redhawk beat 45,000CUP in a 300-grain .44 Magnum round through a 4.2" Redhawk?

By the way, 1858 - How do you like the Hogue rubber finger-groove grips that come stock on the 4.2" Redhawk? I ditched mine as soon as I could. They spread my shooting hand out enough to put the backstrap square against my thumb joint. Plus the finger-grooves just didn't feel right. When I put the stock Ruger rosewood grips on, it allowed my shooting hand to fully wrap around the grip frame, putting the backstrap recoil into that meaty part between thumb joint and index finger joint.

 

[MCMXI]

I guess what I'm asking is can the .45 Colt do anything that the .44 Magnum cannot in the same bullet weight? Will 55,000CUP in a 300-grain .45 Colt round through a 4.2" Redhawk beat 45,000CUP in a 300-grain .44 Magnum round through a 4.2" Redhawk?

Very good question and I wonder if anyone here has the data to prove it either way. Consider these loads, barrel lengths and pressures from Hodgdon's website.

.45 Colt
22.2gr of H110
300gr SPR JFP
7.25" barrel
1,198 fps
30,100 CUP

.44 Mag
19.0gr of H110
300gr HDY XTP
8.275" barrel
1,325 fps
38,800 fps

The .45 Colt load is close to max pressure for the Blackhawk, but nowhere near max pressure for a Redhawk or Super Redhawk but I don't know if the same is true for the .44 Mag. CraigC ... any idea on this?

 

[Leadhead]

Either one is a handful fully loaded and will get the job done at both ends.

 

[Maj Dad]

Once upon a time I loaded 44-40 to 44 mag load levels for my M92 Half-Magazine carbine (240 gr JSP & 2400). Killed deer like Thor's Hammer, and cracked the upper tang after enough of them. If you are setting out to find a 44 mag level handgun, you have the Super Blackhawk, and it was designed to work at those pressure etc. levels. You can take a black powder cartridge and push it to 44 mag levels, but you're gonna break something. Maybe it will just make the brass unreloadable after 2 firings, or maybe it will just give you high pressure signs. Or it might let go...

If you want to shoot magnum loads, use a magnum handgun that was designed for a magnum cartridge. Otherwise, you're just cruising on the ice pack in your Sherman tank, in the spring...

 

[OregonJohnny]

Maj Dad,

Nope, I'm not in the hot-rodding cartridge game, I'm just trying to solve a debate. Can the .45 Colt really ever safely exceed the .44 Magnum in similar bullet weights out of similar guns and barrel lengths?

 

[CraigC]

The .45 Colt load is close to max pressure for the Blackhawk, but nowhere near max pressure for a Redhawk or Super Redhawk but I don't know if the same is true for the .44 Mag. CraigC ... any idea on this?

Far as I know, Brian Pearce is the only source for .44Mag data that is in the same range as the 50-55,000psi .45Colt data. Unfortunately, I don't have that issue of Handloader with me at present. At this pressure level, which is really maximum for either cartridge, the .45Colt starts to step away from the .44, strictly due to its cavernous case capacity. Once you get to a certain point, ahem .454Casull, you see large increases in pressure and recoil but little gain in velocity.

Otherwise, you're just cruising on the ice pack in your Sherman tank, in the spring...

Fortunately, this path is already well beaten down. We ain't blazin' new trails here and everything you need is already in print from various sources. The lines are clearly drawn, we know what the cartridges and guns are capable of. It's no more dangerous than handloading for any other cartridge.

 

[Sport45]

So if you can take the .45 from 14,000CUP to 55,000CUP in a Redhawk, can you take the .44 from 36,000CUP to say, 45,000 or 50,000CPU in a Redhawk?

I've only seen "Ruger Only" type loads listed for .45 Colt. I never tried to exceed standard loads in my .44 Blackhawk. As far as I'm concerned the S&W and Ruger offerings in .44mag are equal in terms of power.

 

[Lost Sheep]

Yes and No

Depending on your criteria.

First of all, lets dispense with the details about ill-fitting chamber throats and twist rates. Since either gun can be optimized by a competent gunsmith to wring the optimal performance out of either brass, I believe the questions of fit are beside the point of the debate, thus contribute little. Though they are extremely important when you are evaluating any specific gun.

(edited to remove "First of all, lets dispense with all the nonsense of ill-fitting chamber throats and twist rates and assume that either gun is optimized to wring the optimal performance out of either brass.")

If you want to compare cartridge to cartridge, you should just use a pressure barrel.

If you want to compare Blackhawk against Blackhawk, you have to take into account that the Super Blackhawk 44 Magnum is a different frame from the Blackhawk 45 Colt. And the tossing in of the differing weight of grip frame is nonsense if you want to compare the cartridges. Now, if you want to compare balance or carryability or shootability, the grip frame and the grips and even the hammer shape makes a difference, but not to the ballistics of the cartridge.

Now, to the criteria. You did not specify if you wanted to compare energy, momentum, flight ballistics or terminal ballistics.

The 44 Mag will shoot a 300 grain bullet faster when the load is optimized, and shoot flatter. The 45 Colt has more frontal area (and less lead in contact with the bore incidentally). Frontal area translates to superior energy transfer on impact to most targets, depending on what your target is.

The cylinder walls on a 44 mag are thicker than on the 45 Colt, can be loadind to slightly (I don't know how slightly) more pressure. The 45 Colt can get pretty much the same velocity with a same-weight bullet at 89.3% of the pressure required for 44 mag. (or the 44 mag requires 10.5% more pressure than the 45 to get the same velocity.

I opine that the larger case capacity of the 45 Colt is made moot by the fact that we can choose whatever powder we want for each. If we had to compare the cartridges, but using the same powder in each, the answers at the margins would change.

Now, by limiting the two cartridges to comparing the SAME WEIGHT BULLET, you are limiting the comparison. The 45 Colt is capable of throwing a bullet 16.2% more massive (that is the ratio of .451/.429 cubed. 18.5% if you use .454/.429). If you give away that advantage of the Colt, you are giving away a lot in terminal performance. If you don't want to stack the deck in favor of the 44 Mag, you have to allow the 45 Colt to use the heavier bullets.

When you allow the more massive bullets into the mix, then you bring in the debate of whether energy or momentum is more important..

The upshot of all this is that the two cartridges are pretty close when you load them in firearms of equal strength and sometimes the 45 Colt can outperform the 44 Mag and sometimes it's the other way around.

Choosing the 300 grain bullet comes pretty close to putting the cartridges on a level playing field, so I congratulate you on that choice. Allowing the comparators to optimize powder choices and loads is also fair play. Staying within SAAMI specification (or, at least Blackhawk specs) is just reasonable. Not specifying exactly what measurement criteria leaves us thrashing around without guidance.

So, I think, depending on your criteria, you will get 45 Colt on top some of the time and 44 Mag some of the time.

I suspect that the 44 Mag will come out on top on power/energy. I suspect the 45 Colt will come out on top with momentum. I suspect the 45 Colt will come out on top when taking game animals or people. I suspect the 44 Mag will come out on top when considering long-range shooting.

So, what's YOUR target?

Good question. Like many good questions, there is more than one right answer. The good is in seeking the "truth".

But, you wanted an answer. What cartridge is more powerful? Now, if you plopped a 45 Colt cartridge into a 460 S&W and loaded that cartridge case as hot as it could stand, I suspect it would blow a 44 Mag away no matter what the ranking criteria was, up until primer failure (and they both use the same primer, right?).

Thanks for asking,

Lost Sheep

P.S. Dick Casull developed his eponymous cartridge by loading 45 Colt solid head brass to higher levels. The main reason (I am told) the 454 Casull is a longer cartridge than the 45 Colt is to keep the 454 Casull-level 45 Colt cartridges from being able to be chambered in a regular 45 Colt's chambers.

 

[OregonJohnny]

Lost Sheep,

Excellent post! Thank you for all that info.

Not specifying exactly what measurement criteria leaves us thrashing around without guidance.

I guess in the debate over "which is more powerful", I think we're talking about energy ("we" being my uncle and myself). Not energy transferred to a living target, but energy numbers on paper when calculating strictly by velocity and bullet weight. In that case, it seems like the .44 has the advantage.

If you have 2 bullets of the same weight and design traveling at the same speed, does the one with the larger diameter transfer more energy to the target? If so, then the .45 has the advantage. If it's the bullet with more sectional density, than it's the .44, correct?

It sounds like there are so many variables involved, that the answer to, "which is more powerful, the .44 Magnum or the .45 Colt?", the answer is clearly..."It depends".

I'll concede that the .45 has advantages in the medium and large game hunting scenarios, due to ability to shoot heavier bullets of a larger diameter and frontal area. But I think my uncle needs to concede that the .44 has the energy (power) advantage when firing optimal, top-level loads from each gun, with identical bullet weights and barrel lengths.

I'll call it a draw.

This is a very informative thread, however. So by all means, continue...

 

[GaryL]

All I have to say is - I hope I never make the mistake of picking up a used 45 colt that any of you guys have been super hot-rodding.

 

[Harley Quinn]

All I have to say is - I hope I never make the mistake of picking up a used 45 colt that any of you guys have been super hot-rodding.

Aint that the truth

 

[mgkdrgn]

Either one is a handful fully loaded and will get the job done at both ends.

Agreed. I doubt that anything you hit with them is going to notice the difference!

 

[CraigC]

Hogwash! Platform is of critical importance. There are so many different strength levels of .45's (and .44's too) that you cannot compare cartridges with zero concern for platform. Besides, the OP was SPECIFIC as to platform. Those platforms specified have widely accepted strength levels and neither is at the top.

First of all, lets dispense with all the nonsense of ill-fitting chamber throats and twist rates and assume that either gun is optimized to wring the optimal performance out of either brass.

We don't live in a vaccuum and therefore cannot make that assumption because that is not consistent with reality.

...you have to take into account that the Super Blackhawk 44 Magnum is a different frame from the Blackhawk 45 Colt.

Wrong. They are the same.

And the tossing in of the differing weight of grip frame is nonsense if you want to compare the cartridges.

Nobody used weight as a factor in the performance of the cartridges. Only in a comparison of the SPECIFIED platforms.

The 45 Colt can get pretty much the same velocity with a same-weight bullet at 89.3% of the pressure required for 44 mag.

Wrong again. The .45Colt, in the platforms specified, are considered to be 80% as strong as comparable .44Mag's. Certainly not 90%.

I opine that the larger case capacity of the 45 Colt is made moot by the fact that we can choose whatever powder we want for each.

Wrong again. When we move up to platforms strong enough for 50-55,000psi loads, case capacity is the sole reason why we're even there. You simply cannot get enough slow burning powder into the .44Mag case to reach the velocities possible in the .45Colt.

The 45 Colt is capable of throwing a bullet 16.2% more massive (that is the ratio of .451/.429 cubed. 18.5% if you use .454/.429).

I don't think "mass" is the operative term. Optimum mass is nearly identical with the two cartridges. 355gr .44 and 360gr .45. The only measurable difference here is diameter and therefore, frontal area. However, we must measure the meplats of the bullets in question to determine how large or small that advantage is. In the real world, it's a wash.

I suspect that the 44 Mag will come out on top on power/energy.

This is true due to the .44's greater velocity and velocity is the largest determining factor in kinetic energy.

I suspect the 45 Colt will come out on top with momentum.

Momentum is a function of mass and speed so if you're comparing a 355gr .44 at 1250fps or a 360gr .45 at 1150fps, guess which one wins?

All I have to say is - I hope I never make the mistake of picking up a used 45 colt that any of you guys have been super hot-rodding.

There is no more danger posed to a .45Colt sixgun loaded to 32,000psi in a six-shot Blackhawk or 50,000psi in a Redhawk than there is running factory loads through a .44Mag.

 

[1911Tuner]

.45 Colt
300gr SPR JFP
7.25" barrel
1,198 fps

.44 Mag
300gr HDY XTP
8.275" barrel
1,325 fps
38,800 fps

Here we have 127 fps difference. With equal barrel lengths, we can probably figure on half that much difference...but let's say 65 fps just to be on the safe side.

Sixty five feet per second.

Mucho ado about nada mucho, IMO.

 

[CraigC]

I've verified Hodgdon's heavy bullet data in 7½" Rugers and it is very, very close. It also coincides nicely with Linebaugh's data. So we can take their data and apply it directly to real world results.

Mucho ado about nada mucho, IMO.

Yep!

 

[Seedtick]

All I have to say is - I hope I never make the mistake of picking up a used 45 colt that any of you guys have been super hot-rodding.

You probably wouldn't be interested in any of mine then.......but not to worry, I don't see me getting rid of any of em.

I have been having a blast ( blast hehe ) since I bought my first real 45 Colt (the Judge didn't count) in a Convertible Blackhawk. I picked up another Blackhawk, a stainless Bisley, in 45 Colt a few weeks ago but it's been so stinking hot I ain't even shot it yet. Man o man! I wish it would cool off some! I really like how the grip frame fits my big paws.

As far as to which is more powerful I agree it depends.

...I doubt that anything you hit with them is going to notice the difference!

Yep, spot on.

Mucho ado about nada mucho, IMO.

And this too.

My son-in-law got a Super Redhawk 44 a while back and when comparing it to my Blackhawk, with very similar loads, we think it's pretty much a wash with the very little bit of edge going to the 44. Jeremy's favorite bullet is MBC's .44 Elmer K 240 grain LSWC and mine is Brad's Cowboy #1 250 grain LRNFP and we each draw up a hefty charge of 2400 for em. The main difference to me is that the 44 is, uh...a bit obnoxious. It is way louder and it has more recoil than I like. The more recoil part doesn't seem right to me because of the weight difference between the 7 1/2" (53.00 oz.) Super and the aluminum grip frame 4 5/8" (39.00 oz.) Blackhawk. I would think the heavier Redhawk would have less felt recoil. It may just be due to the difference in grip frame geometry. I don't know?

I've quit shooting very many of the full mags in his 44. I've long gotten over my BIG BOY 44 days. (I sure do regret swapping off my Anaconda though :banghead: what a bone head move!) But he's got a bad case of it. The more it bucks and snorts the better he likes it. He does handle it well, I'll give him that and he consistently shoots tight groups.

I have developed an itch recently and if I don't change my mind I'm going to scratch it with a regular 4 1/4" Redhawk but I want nice wooden grips on it.

That's my thoughts on it anyway. As they say IMHO and YMMV.

Seedtick

 

[Lost Sheep]

Hogwash! Platform is of critical importance. There are so many different strength levels of .45's (and .44's too) that you cannot compare cartridges with zero concern for platform. Besides, the OP was SPECIFIC as to platform. Those platforms specified have widely accepted strength levels and neither is at the top.

We don't live in a vaccuum and therefore cannot make that assumption because that is not consistent with reality.

I beg your pardon. Some of us DO at least have access to a vacuum, or to a gunsmith who CAN optimize a revolver. Besides, the OP not only described the platform, but formed his question as specifically wanting to compare the cartridges.

Wrong. They are the same.

Thanks, I did not know that.

Nobody used weight as a factor in the performance of the cartridges. Only in a comparison of the SPECIFIED platforms.

I could have sworn the 300 grain bullet was part of the Original Post.

Wrong again. The .45Colt, in the platforms specified, are considered to be 80% as strong as comparable .44Mag's. Certainly not 90%.

Thanks again. I did not know that either. Where did the 90% figure come from? My 89.3% figure is the ratio of the bases of the two bullets and I don't think it is arguable. Pressure applies primarily to the base of the bullet to drive it up to whatever velocity it attains. Same pressure, greater area, more force, more acceleration.

Wrong again. When we move up to platforms strong enough for 50-55,000psi loads, case capacity is the sole reason why we're even there. You simply cannot get enough slow burning powder into the .44Mag case to reach the velocities possible in the .45Colt.

I did not assume that there is no slow burning powder manufactured anywhere in the world that is energy dense enough to fit in the 44 Mag case. But you are probably right. But that does not necessarily make me wrong.

I don't think "mass" is the operative term. Optimum mass is nearly identical with the two cartridges. 355gr .44 and 360gr .45. The only measurable difference here is diameter and therefore, frontal area. However, we must measure the meplats of the bullets in question to determine how large or small that advantage is. In the real world, it's a wash.

"Mass" IS the point. Between two bullets of the same bullet shape, the one with the larger diameter will have longer length, and larger radius. Since volume of any shape is proportional to its linear dimensions, cubed, and .451/.429 (1.0513) and 1.0513 cubed is 1.162, if you use the same density lead in the two bullets, the 45 will be 16.2% heavier than the 44. Frontal area will be 10.5% greater.

Now, I will give you the benefit of your experience in loading and ballistics on optimizing the 355 and 360 grain weights, but since I am the novice here, please explain how weights only 1.5% different are each optimal in calibers that are 5% apart. I am ready to learn. Has it to do with case capacity?

This is true due to the .44's greater velocity and velocity is the largest determining factor in kinetic energy.



Momentum is a function of mass and speed so if you're comparing a 355gr .44 at 1250fps or a 360gr .45 at 1150fps, guess which one wins?

I don't have to guess. Simple physics and arithmetic. The 44 wins by 7.2% in momentum and 16.5% in energy. Where'd you get the velocities from, and are they (as the OP asked) maximal?

There is no more danger posed to a .45Colt sixgun loaded to 32,000psi in a six-shot Blackhawk or 50,000psi in a Redhawk than there is running factory loads through a .44Mag.

Again I will bow to your greater experience in this area. But getting back to the OP's original question, it does make a difference if you limit yourself to the gun the cartridges are fired from, but I expanded the question a little (based on the OP's wording to compare the CARTRIDGES). Much of my thinking was formed considering only the cartridge. To really compare only the cartridges, I would use a pressure barrel and if the pressure exceeded the strength of either gun, scale back the experiments to adjust.)

If the OP simply wanted to know which gun was stronger, one could simply measure the thickness of the cylinder walls between the chambers and between chamber and outer wall. But this would hardly be any debate at all.

Of course, a 22 rimfire Redhawk would qualify as stronger than the 44 mag, so you DO have to take the cartridge into account.

What I did in my post (largely) was to separate the platform from the cartridge and point out the size factors involved and the disparate criteria that could be used to score the winner.

I thank you for the corrections you informed me of (Blackhawk frame, case capacity) but take exception to the term 'hogwash". I meant no offense, nor misinformation.

Lost Sheep

 

[Snowbandit]

The whole argument is nuts. Can you over load the 45 Colt so that it equals a 44 Magnum? Probably can but it's no longer a 45 Colt because the 45 Colt has a maximum safe operating pressure considerably less than a 44 Magnum. The next guy's going to want to know if you could over load the 44 Magnum to equal the 455 Casull? Probably could do that too but the pressure levels would be insane and I wouldn't want to hold the thing in my hand when it went off. I don't understand why we don't accept these things for what they are and, if we need something bigger and more powerful, get that too.

 

[OregonJohnny]

I have developed an itch recently and if I don't change my mind I'm going to scratch it with a regular 4 1/4" Redhawk but I want nice wooden grips on it.

You mean like this?