.44 rem mag vs. .45 LC

[JohnBlaze]

I'm trying to settle a bet. A friend of mine has his heart set on a .44 mag Ruger Vaquero. When I ask why he wants that caliber he says he just wants it. I found a used Vaquero in a .45 LC for only $300, which i think is a complete steal, but he won't take it.

IF Anyone here who has both caliber rounds can post a picture of them side by side for comparison that would be awesome, and it can help settle this argument. If you also throw in a .357 mag round it will help too, because he says he'll settle for a .357 mag but not a .45 lc.

Other than that, what are some opinions on the difference of these calibers? Which do you prefer? I'm adding a poll.

 

[.38 Special]

The .45 is a physically larger cartridge than the .44, but that's pretty meaningless. With few exceptions, the .44 is much more powerful and much more versatile. In some handguns, the roles are reversed, as the handloader can do wonderful things with the .45 LC in the strongest revolvers. In the Vaquero, though, the practical nod has to go to the .44. It can fire Magnums -- which will exceed anything usable in a traditional style .45 -- and can also fire .44 Specials, which are roughly equivalent to the standard Colt load.

Big picture, though, is that buying a traditional single action is almost always more of an emotional decision than a practical one, and if your buddy "just wants" the .44 that seems like the strongest possible argument.

HTH!

 

[JohnBlaze]

thank you.

My other friend is a gunsmith, and I called him after making this thread. he told me that if you load the .45 colt with 250 grain jhp it's comparable in stopping power to the 240 grain .44 rem mag.

honestly, I might know a bit about long guns but when it comes to revolvers I don't, and I'll admit it. I want the picture of the rounds side by side because my friend puts a lot of importance on the size of the bullet. My guess is he saw a round of .45 acp and compared it to a .44 rem mag and that's why he is fixed on that.

 

[JesseL]

Here's a side by side picture of both rounds:

45 on the left, 44 on the right

In a Vaquero (not the smaller framed 'New Vaquero' which isn't chambered for the .44), you might as well flip a coin between .44 Magnum and .45 Colt, if your sole criteria is ballistic performance. I don't think there's anything I'd be willing to tackle with one but not the other.

The high performance +P .45 Colt loadings aren't likely to be easy to find at your local gun shops, so that could be a consideration for some folks.

If I was getting a Vaquero, I'd go for the .45 Colt as it's the more traditional round for a single action revolver and if you're not interested in being traditional, why get a Vaquero?

John Linebaugh has a fascinating article on high pressure .45 Colt loads:
http://www.customsixguns.com/writings/dissolving_the_myth.htm

 

[JohnBlaze]

Thanks alot, Jesse L, that's exactly what I needed, and the point I was trying to make.

If I was getting a Vaquero, I'd go for the .45 Colt as it's the more traditional round for a single action revolver and if you're not interested in being traditional, why get a Vaquero?

 

[Slamfire]

He needs to shoot a 44 Magnum to see just how much "fun" it is.

Now the old Vaquero was a fairly heavy single action, but it is still lighter than a Super Blackhawk. I have one of these, and shooting 44 Magnums in the thing is about as much fun as I want to handle.

However I had at one time a FIE Hombre in 44 Mag. This single action pistol was close in weight to a Colt SAA. And it was absolutely unpleasant to shoot. Unpleasant muzzle blast and painful recoil.

So I traded it,...... for a 45LC!

And I still have the 45 LC. Great cartridge.

 

[Jim K]

If you load a .45 Colt to anywhere near the pressure of a .44 Magnum, please don't fire it a traditional design SA until I get a long way away.

Jim

 

[JesseL]

If you load a .45 Colt to anywhere near the pressure of a .44 Magnum, please don't fire it a traditional design SA until I get a long way away.

Agreed.

The beautiful thing about the .45 Colt in modern guns is that it doesn't need to be loaded to .44 Mag pressures to achieve similar performance.

 

[tipoc]

For any practical purposes, the 45 Colt can do what the .44 magnum can and with a bit less felt recoil. For very long range shooting (out past 100 yards) the 44 has the edge as it has a better ballistic coefficient and a slightly flatter trajectory. But for most shooters and handgun hunters it is a matter of preference.

Some one will come along and argue that the 44 mag is more powerful and you can get the most it has to offer from an N frame S&W while to get the most from the 45 Colt ya need a bigger gun than the N frame S&W. This is true but like I said it's shooters preference. If you want to send a 300 gr. pill down range at 1300 fps either round will do it with a little less snap from the 45 IMHO.

tipoc

 

[bakert]

I love and prefer the .45 Colt rd for my own self but think that for many people the .44 mag or especially the .357 is probably a better choice. When buying factory ammo, one finds it a helluva lot easier find it for the .44 mag or .357 than for the .45 colt. For a reloader the .44 can be down loaded to some easy shooting but still pretty powerful rds. Of course in a Vaquero(not new Vaquero) or Blackhawk the ol' .45 Colt can also be loaded up to some right impressive levels if you're into that sort of of thing. Let the man make his own choice

 

[StrawHat]

I would buy the 45 Long Colt.

I would let him buy the 44.

Then go to the range and have a good day of shooting. After which you will probably be able to buy a 44.

 

[slabsides]

It's a toss-up if reloads in Blackhawk-SBHawk are considered. But in most guns, the .44 will show more versatility, factory loads from both ends of the power spectrum are more easily found in shops. I have both, and wouldn't like to give either of them up, but if push came to shove, the good ole' .45 would go.

 

[tipoc]

I love and prefer the .45 Colt rd for my own self but think that for many people the .44 mag or especially the .357 is probably a better choice.

The ammo question is an important one. There are many more good commercial loads available for the .44 than the .45 Colt. But good ones for the Colt are there.

I don't believe that the .357 is in the same class of rounds as the .44 or .45 Colt it is a mid bore caliber with a good deal less punch. Useful in some guns for some things but not as as a good 44 or .45 in a sa IMHO. Except for CAS shooting where one can fill it with .38 Spls as many do. In the Vaquero or New Vaquero or Black Hawk it weighs more in .357 than I personally care for.

tipoc

 

[phoglund]

I must admit I'd do .45 Colt for basically the same reasons...more reasons of the heart than intellect. A single action .45 Colt is something you might have found when single action revolvers were the king if handguns... .44 Magnum didn't even exist at the time.

Traditional handgun = traditional cartridge.

 

[kount_zer0]

I did the same debate last year and ended up getting the RBH 45 Colt.
.452" hole vs. .429"? not much difference.
Velocity? practically equal
Pressure ? lower in 45 for same performance
Ammo? 44 has the edge in factory fodder price and availability, But I already handload....

I already reloaded 45 ACP at the time, so I picked the 45C.

Then I got a Marlin 1894 45C to go with it.

If he dosen't reload : 44 mag. Buy the Vaquero yourself as long as it's not the new Vaquero. The older large frame Vaqs are just a Blackhawk with fixed sights.