Status
Not open for further replies.
Let me again clarify that I am not referring to a literal metal blade, more of an outward projecting jet that cuts.
 
John Linebaugh has a lot to say about overloaded .45 Colt, too.
https://www.johnlinebaughcustomsixguns.com/writings
I have had that bookmarked for many years. Great stuff for those wanting to safely load .45 Colt to its potential, which I used to do.

I agree with those who preach heavy bullets for the big dogs (Calibers) for hunting. They need weight to bore a long way through tough things.
 
What are you trying to “fix” about what’s out there already? Have you had unsatisfactory experiences shooting game with 45 colt or conventional pistol bullets? What type of game have you taken with handguns which have given you problems - and what bullets did you use and where did you place them?
 
I'm not trying to fix anything. I am not implying that anything is broken, except the clean lines of the SRH frame/barrel that Mr. Bowen has fixed.

Why you have been so defensive is either beyond me or my social skills.
I am interested in this new technology, and I would like to see what all it is capable of in the context of a big bore handgun that could propel one of those bullets to a velocity that could magnify its effect. It's really not a crazy idea. Underwood does .45 colt loadings that are similar, I just want to see what can be done for knowledge sake. Whatever is discovered does nothing to diminish the effectiveness of things we already know about.

On the subject of regular loadings, I appreciate the suggestions everyone has made and I will definitely try some of those heavy and slow loads. Honestly, the thought of a 360+ grain LBT going 950fps or so sounds dandy for most things and makes the SRH Alaskan even more attractive.
 
Basically, your “new idea” is akin to someone wanting to run a Honda Civic at the Daytona 500. You’re not doing anything new, just doing a bunch of silly things together in one place and calling it “new and improved.”

Running under weight bullets at high-for-handgun speeds is a great way to cripple the round. Many of us have been there, done that, and realized why so many folks end up at the same conclusion.

When I wasn’t happy with TRAJECTORY of handguns, looking for a long-range-for-handgun hunting option, starting 25yrs ago, I went down the road you’re now walking. The best option I have found throws 180grn rifle bullets out of a 7.5” revolver at 1900fps, which gives me deer killing power out to about 300yards, with a legitimately manageable trajectory. Not a new idea, not a new round even, give or take 60 years old when I got ahold of it. It does, however, give up a LOT of stopping power, by using smaller diameter bullets.

What you’re talking about isn’t new, isn’t novel, isn’t unique - hence our EXPERIENCED advice to look elsewhere.
 
What were you using?

I haven't even begun to think about longer range capabilities of what I have proposed. Truthfully, I have proposed several things in this thread and I admit it is not very organized.
 
What were you using?

You’ll likely regret pulling at that particular thread...

I started hunting deer as a kid with my uncle’s 357mag S&W 27. Very quickly I realized, even at that age, how weak the 357mag was for the application, so I wanted more. I loaded hitter and hotter rounds trying to get more out of the 357, approaching what I now know to be near 353 Casull levels. When I finally got my hands on a 44mag, life was a lot better for putting deer down faster, but the trajectory wasn’t any better. So I bought a Ruger 357 Maximum, which was really close, but a specialty frame revolver with limited brass supply. Then a 257 win mag Hawkeye, a 414 and 445super mag, 357/44 Bobcat, 454 Casull, 41 mag, 45-70 & 30-30 BFR’s and a handful of others. I tried light bullet loads, heavy bullet loads, you name it... Admittedly, I bought a lot more revolvers for other purposes along the way, but I spent thousands and thousands of dollars exploring the world for what I considered to be the ideal short to long range whitetail hunting revolver. I largely landed on a desire for a regular/common large frame revolver which could run 180+ bullets over 1800fps, but retaining an SD over .200, and without excessive recoil per the menial task being performed (aka, I LOVE the 454 Casull and 475 Linebaugh, but they’re a bit much for whitetails), and with relatively good brass availability.

The 357max, 353 Casull, 357/44 Bobcat, and 414 Supermag were all very close, but finding 414 Supermag brass was nearly impossible, Max brass also uncommon, the Bobcat poly collars were the biggest pain in the ass I have experienced with any revolver, and the Casull wasn’t quite the right principle I was looking for - and not quite the same performance.

I stumbled upon a photo of a 357/44 Bain & Davis Mag about 7 years ago, bought a reamer and converted an ebay sourced 357mag Blackhawk cylinder to try it out, and found myself very close to my objective. So I bought 3 Redhawks in 357mag the next year, sent the cylinders to California, and have been very happy with the results. When I started with these, the Hornady 3505 180 SSP-SP was still in production, albeit a bit long, so I trimmed the meplats to fit cylinder length and drew them down to .357”. I also sourced a few thousand Speer 2435 180 HotCor’s, also drawing them down to .357” instead of .358”, which fit the Redhawk length beautifully. These rifle bullets have shorter bearing surfaces relative to similar weight conventional revolver bullets, so loads which absolutely flatten and seriously crater primers under conventional bullets will produce far less pressure with these (resized) rifle bullets. I can push those 180 Hotcor’s up over 1900fps, and have crossed over 2000 with some loads, whereas the 180 XTP taps out in the mid 1700’s. The ballistic coefficient of these 180’s is slightly better than conventional 180’s, and better than 44 and 45 300grn pills, but the big advantage is the speed opportunity.

For the powder I’m throwing, I could kill a water buffalo if I put a 44cal 300grn copper solid in front of it, which this tiny 357 bullet couldn’t dream of. But my objective is 0-250yrd deer killing, with moderate recoil. I have other revolvers for other tasks. But for this application, a high BC, high speed bullet is what I needed.

Admittedly, I did take one of my 44mags after doe last season, one of my Toklat’s the year before, and took my 475Line out this year for meat doe. So even though I finally have what I consider to be the ideal long Range deer killing revolver, I still find myself enjoying variety more than optimization.
 
I don't regret prying for a second. I have also considered the possibility of using spitzer type rifle bullets in a .357, and the same with the tips ground flat to cylinder length. I'm glad to read about someone who has done something similar with good results.
 
Last edited:
There’s really only one bullet which works on the market now for high velocity 35 cal revolvers. The 2435 Speer HotCor, and a guy does need to draw it down to .357” to avoid pressure issues (and chambering in some revolvers). No meplat trimming required, it’s already a flat nose. In addition to all of the loading, shooting, and hunting I do with these, I spent a few dozen hours on the phone and in email with bullet manufacturers working on bullet selection so the round could be more than a theoretical novelty or paper puncher.

Most of the 35cal rifle bullets on the market won’t expand at handgun velocities, and most of the handgun bullets won’t survive these increased impact velocity. I had nothing but headaches playing with hardcast, and have always felt gas checks are nothing but a bandaid, and copper solids are REALLY long for their weight, and typically have a long bearing surface and low malleability, so they build more pressure over a given powder charge... So I pulled through as many jacketed lead core bullet manufacturers as I could to find appriate weights and picked up the phone. A list of a couple dozen bullets suddenly pulled down to about 4 bullets, of which really only two stood out as performers in the field, one of which has been discontinued a few years ago.

If a guy is running a Contender and can get way up in velocity with a 14” barrel and bigger cases, there are a few other rifle bullets which work, and a guy can run heavier bullets slower, but they don’t deliver a manageable 300yrd trajectory outside of the most ideal conditions (check out what Ernie Bishop has been doing with the Bayside Customs FrankenRugers). But for a large frame wheelgun running 1800-1900fps, I haven’t found anything better at 300yrds than the 2435 HotCor and 3505 SSP-SP.
 
Do you know a good powder for a 950-1000fps 360gr .454 load? It looks like 18gr of h110 does it in 45 colt but the 454 minimums are more like 21gr with velocities a bit higher than that.

Those loads may produce the desired velocities in the 2.5" alaskan but I don't want to underload h110
 
What’s the reported difference in velocity for that 18grn 45colt load vs. the 21grn 454C load? Considering the case capacity difference, I would guess they’re pretty similar in speed, with the 454 running a bit lower pressure. Bigger volume needs more powder to create the same pressure. I typically figure 10% increase in powder to match velocity -ish, so that 21 vs. 18 SHOULD be a touch faster.

For me, if it’s a magnum revolver cartridge (which is mostly all I shoot in revolvers), I feed it copious amounts of H110/W296 and live life happy. 2400 and 4227 are great magnum pistol powders as well, but typically don’t keep up with H110/W296 for speed and accuracy.
 
I still am not getting it...you wont be able to achieve the same velocity at the same pressure with the shorter case...what exactly are you hoping using cut down 454 brass will accomplish that 45 colt brass would not?
I may be wrong, but he wants the added strength of thicker brass. If I load 45 super instead of 45acp, the brass is quite a bit thicker promoting less case failiures and longer life.

I don’t have a 45 colt but I do have a 454 and the brass is as thick as some rifle brass. Much thicker than 45acp and I assume 45 colt brass is close to the same thickness as 45acp. I may be wrong
 
Just because someone is selling something, doesn't mean it works. It may just means they want you to buy it.
 
I may be wrong, but he wants the added strength of thicker brass.

In most manufacturers, 454 Casull brass is no thicker in any dimension than 45 colt. I shoot a lot of 454, and have cross-sectioned cases myself, the only thing “thicker” is the width of the web around the pocket, since it has a small primer diameter pocket instead of a large pocket. It gets kicked around a lot online that Casull brass is stronger, but it’s really the revolvers, not the brass at all.
 
What do you aim to accomplish by pushing 1800fps? Or are you coming up with arbitrary velocity targets?

You can’t overstabilize that bullet by spinning it too fast. That’s not how physics works.



Nevermind, Lehigh says its fine

Screenshot_20190222-153309.png
 
Also I found a place to start for that 360gr load on...

...guess where...

The website of the manufacturer. It was just a whole separate process of "purchasing" their free load data pdf files with checkout and all, including my address. I was then able to download the manuals I was after.
I wish they had the barrel length posted.
Here's a screenshot to save someone else the trouble
Screenshot_20190222-154411.png
 
Last edited:
There IS an inherent fallacy in the logic here though - running a higher pressure primer can often LIMIT your performance. You’ll hit your pressure ceiling with a lesser powder charge, which is pressure, but pressure with a lesser expansion ratio, so it doesn’t push as much performance out of the muzzle. Same deal with magnum primers vs. standard large pistols - as long as it ignites well, I’d rather have my pressure come from powder burn not the primer.
 
The only reason there was a question about primers was because of the brass difference.

Are you suggesting that I load my heavy weight, lower velocity loads in 45 colt brass rather than 454 in a 454 cylinder, because of the large pistol primer having better performance than the small rifle primer of the 454?
 
No, I am telling you the hype you are reading about others using trimmed 454 brass to make 45 colt length loads is little more than hype. The influence of primer type is incredibly small on the actual ballistic performance.

I prefer to load full length rounds instead of offering a carbon ring room to take hold. So I typically run reduced loads in full length brass, instead of shooting shorter cartridges. The penalty there, of course, is the fact I have to feed ~10% more powder to get similar performance. That choice is completely about chamber cleaning, nothing to do with primer type or cartridge pressure. If I want to shoot 45 colt, I shoot a 45 colt revolver.

The only advantage I have found - as minuscule as it may be - in using SRP’s in 454 is the mental comfort some people draw from not flattening primers. Doesn’t actually change anything - just makes some people think they aren’t seeing pressure signs even though they really just used a thicker primer cup.

Reminding you here of some basic principles of reloading which will give you better insight into why these Internet legends about silly reloading practices don’t really pan out in the real world:

A) As I mentioned, the primer type is somewhere between a wash and a coin flip - if the primer increased ignition, then it’ll hit peak pressure faster, and a progressive powder will have to be reduced to stay under the same peak. A lighter load to get the same pressure, which means you may actually lose velocity by running a hotter primer.

B) Extra brass thickness doesn’t really add strength to resist more pressure, but it DOES rob you of case capacity. While most brands of brass are no thicker for 454C than 45 Colt, it’s not necessarily an advantage for the cases to be thicker. The cases have to have the same external dimensions, so any increase in thickness is crowding your powder cavity. In other words, less powder fits to create a given pressure, and can mean less velocity, just the same as the primer issue above. It sure sounds great online when guys say thicker brass can tolerate hotter loads, but again - that’s violating a basic principle of cartridge firearms: the brass serves 2 purposes 1) containerize the primer, powder, and bullet, and 2) seal the chamber. Some guys will spout off that thicker brass won’t crack as early, or will offer a stronger crimp, but in my experience, neither is really true to any statistically significant influence. The more you work the case neck, the more it work hardens. The only real influences I have seen from thicker cases have been stiffer sizing, lower powder capacity, and more springback on sizing - no improvement in muzzle velocity.

A lot of stuff gets passed around because it sounds logical. I’ve had older fishermen tell me they honestly believe a bass loses weight during a long fight, and have had highly experienced hunters tell me bullets get lighter in long distance flight because the air resistance ablates some of the jacket. The science is ALMOST there, so it sounds good, and guys keep handing it around. I know at least a dozen farmers who honestly believe hot water in a stock tank would freeze faster on a winter day than cold water because of the extra moisture evaporating at the surface... The 454 vs. 45 colt brass and primer thing is a lot less silly than these I’m mentioning, but there’s a line between pseudoscience and real science. But pseudoscience is used every day to mislead folks who don’t take the time to investigate the difference.
 
So will small pistol primers fit in the 454 primer pocket? Will anything other than srp's fit?
I'd prefer to have one type of brass to deal with.

Looks like I'll be loading for 2.5", 7.5", and 18" barrel lengths potentially.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top