Ross Seyfried's article on the 45 colt

[BigSky56]

Ross's article on the 45 colt, if your wondering what a 45 is capable of, good read and info. danny
http://www.riflemagazine.com/magazine/a ... 1&magid=24

[klhill]

I've read that article several times over the years since it was first published.Still a good read!

[Idiot]

From everything I've read on the various forums the 45 Colt is at least two or three times as effective on game as the hottest loaded 44 Magnum. On top of that the 45 Colt can accomplish this nearly "supernatural" effect while maintaining the recoil of a 22 Magnum and the muzzle blast of a cork loaded pop gun. And if that's not enough I've also heard that the slower you shoot the bullet the straighter and deeper it will penetrate any and everything. It is one heck-of-a cartridge - whew!

The 45 Colt is a good cartridge, and Ross is without peer as its promoter. Thanks for the article.

[Old Ironsights]

In the late 80s/early 90s Ross did an article for one of the rags about his adventures turning a Ruger Red Label into a Double Rifle. I wish I could find it.

His article on the .475 Linbaugh (Maximum frame) is what got me interested in the idea of whompum-stompum handguns based on .45/70 cases.

[AJMD429]

From everything I've read on the various forums the 45 Colt is at least two or three times as effective on game as the hottest loaded 44 Magnum. On top of that the 45 Colt can accomplish this nearly "supernatural" effect while maintaining the recoil of a 22 Magnum and the muzzle blast of a cork loaded pop gun. And if that's not enough I've also heard that the slower you shoot the bullet the straighter and deeper it will penetrate any and everything. It is one heck-of-a cartridge - whew!

Oddly enough, I think I've read the very same thing regarding the magnificent .45-70 versus the over-rated and anemic .444 Marlin. . .

[Chas.]

From everything I've read on the various forums the 45 Colt is at least two or three times as effective on game as the hottest loaded 44 Magnum. On top of that the 45 Colt can accomplish this nearly "supernatural" effect while maintaining the recoil of a 22 Magnum and the muzzle blast of a cork loaded pop gun. And if that's not enough I've also heard that the slower you shoot the bullet the straighter and deeper it will penetrate any and everything. It is one heck-of-a cartridge - whew!

And if you shoot that bullet with a sling-shot, you'll be surprised at the performance.

[CowboyTutt]

Ross's articles on the 45 Colt were pivotal in my choice of caliber in my first handgun (a 45 Colt Ruger Bisley). I knew I would eventually get into handloading and the versatality of the good ol' 45 is unmatched.

-Tutt

[Grizz]

hate to break the news to y'all, but I'm shooting a 405g large meplat hard cast bullet from my 5-1/2" redhawk that departs at 947 fps, it leaves another guy's redhawk at 1030 fps, and that load penetrated 13 gallon jugs of water, which is as good as my 45/70 525g load has ever done.

so far I've never seen a load for the great Colt 45 that comes anywhere near the TKO of my .44 mag load.

come back,

Grizz

[CowboyTutt]

hate to break the news to y'all, but I'm shooting a 405g large meplat hard cast bullet from my 5-1/2" redhawk that departs at 947 fps, it leaves another guy's redhawk at 1030 fps, and that load penetrated 13 gallon jugs of water, which is as good as my 45/70 525g load has ever done.

Grizz, I'm unclear what is what here. Are you saying this 405 grain load is a 44 mag or 45 Colt? I've never heard of a 44 mag with such a heavy bullet so I presume its in a 45 Colt Redhawk? But then you say,

so far I've never seen a load for the great Colt 45 that comes anywhere near the TKO of my .44 mag load.

So I'm unsure of what you are trying to say? Please clarify.

-Tutt

[Grizz]

Tutt,

So sorry, I didn't mean to be unclear. My 405g load is for my Redhawk .44 mag. Shooting this bullet seated out in the lower cannelure:


405g WLN DCGGC

The load has been tested by a couple of other guys that I know of. I've shot it clean thru a douglas fir firewood round at 907 fps. It's a low pressure load until you get it much above 1000 fps.

I've plinked a gong with it at 107 yards, but I don't know what it will penetrate at that range. Deer I imagine are gonna get double holed at any range I could hit them. It's my Alaska carry gun.

I believe, and I'm going on my memory here, that Marshall has run it to 1100 fps from his 5-1/2" Redhawk.

Regards,

Grizz

[CowboyTutt]

Fascinating! This is something new to me. Marshal is a very nice and knowledgeable person too.

-Tutt

[claybob86]

Oddly enough, I think I've read the very same thing regarding the magnificent .45-70 versus the over-rated and anemic .444 Marlin. . .

And vice versa!

[Lobo]

Hi All,

I might be partial since I have a Ruger Bisley Blackhawk in .45 Colt and a Puma 92 in the same cartridge, but they are such fun to load for and to shoot!!

[Ysabel Kid]

Cool! Two .45 Colt articles to read. Thanks for sharing!

[Grizz]

Oddly enough, I think I've read the very same thing regarding the magnificent .45-70 versus the over-rated and anemic .444 Marlin. . .

And vice versa!

OK guys. I'm not anti-Colt45. I love the history and the potential of the caliber. I gravitated to the .44 mag as a hunting gun when I lived in Alaska.

So, in a way this is similar to the 45/70 vs 444 discussions in that the 45/70 has a throw-weight advantage. The 405g load is a 45/70 standard that is also avaible for the .44s. And from my redhawk the 405g load reaches the lower end of the 45/70/405 terminal ballistic range.

That 405g bullet can be fired from a 444 but needs a fast-twist barrel to stabilize it. A friend who is working on the revolver load too bought a Marlin with the right barrel to do the load development.

This brings us to the counter argument that if I can push a xxx grain bullet fast enough I can far exceed the ballistics of the heavy for caliber bullets, etc. etc. That gets into a closed loop for ten pages usually, with no real resolution.

My thought about it is that I can take a stock, unmodified gun, load six rounds into it, and have a low pressure low recoil load that can likely penetrate a brown bear through and through from any direction. By low pressure I mean that Marshall says the load I'm shooting generates 28K CUP. This is well below the pressure range the gun is built for, will never wear out the gun, and will never break my forehead.

Now back to the regularly scheduled topic. I like the gun and the story. It's fantastic. I'd love to shoot it. I like to see what guys are doing with the old standby Colt. My info isn't a knock on the gun or story in the article. It is a knock on Linebaugh's assertion:

I simply like the big bore revolvers because they are a BIGGER HAMMER. They can deliver a bigger slug with less pressure than the next smaller round can. This means less breech pressure, less felt recoil, less wear and erosion on the sixgun itself, less noise and blast and more enjoyable shooting.

The entire first half of the article is explaining why shooting 55K CUP loads is such a good thing. I'm comparing the performance of my 28K CUP load to that.

I am pushing back a little on the idea that the 45 Colt's versatility is unmatched, because the versatility of the 44 mag still isn't completely explored. But we're working on it.

Regards,

Grizz

[CowboyTutt]

I think its cool that the 44 mag can still compete!

Seriously, can your 44 mag twist rate stabilize that long a bullet? Even the 45 Colt 400 grain WLN that Marshall makes needs to be driven to max to stabilize (according to his web site).

Just curious!

-Tutt

[Grizz]

I think its cool that the 44 mag can still compete!

Seriously, can your 44 mag twist rate stabilize that long a bullet? Even the 45 Colt 400 grain WLN that Marshall makes needs to be driven to max to stabilize (according to his web site).

Just curious!

-Tutt

Good one!! Yeah, it still competes.

The jug tests are pretty good at testing this. Tumbling bullets depart the side of a jug, usually one of the first couple it encounters. 12 to 13 jugs with the bullet centered in the last one is a pretty good indication of stability. And there was no sign at 100+ yards that they were hitting the gong sideways.

Interesting thing in John's article is that his loads are not radical pressure-wise. His very last posted load is only a slightly heavier charge than my hunting load of a 325g cast bullet from a 10" sbh. I was getting around 1100+ fps from that load and it double punched every animal I took with it except one. I agree with him about almost everything except his assertion that he's getting superior performance to the .44.

I was also interested that he said that 360g was the heaviest bullet he wanted to shoot from a .45.

I did like what he said about powders and I may switch to H110 for this season's experiments.

Regards,

Grizz

[O.S.O.K.]

I read Ross's articles as they came out and then several times afterwards. For Ruger-class pressure levels, I don't recall there being much of a gain over the 44 Mag with 300 grain cast boolits. Yes, a bit larger and heavier (360 grain boolits) and some gain but not rearly as much as for the next level up - for custom 5-shots, it rises to the next power level and beyond the 44 Mag with 300's.

It's been a while since I read them but that's what I took away.

So, lets talk apples and apples.

[Buck Elliott]

There is nothing "magical" or "mysterious" about the performance of top-end .45 Colt loads, if you have a rudimentary understanding of internal ballistics and physics...

The really good big cartridge will whip the really good littler cartridge every time, when really big results are needed... All else being equal. One of the primary "equals" to consider is sectional density, rather that raw bullet weight.

There is no subsititute for cubic inches...

Is the advantage of the bigger cartridge something that everyone wants or need? Maybe not, and maybe some shooters just WILL NOT admit to the differences....

Are the real-world differences BIG enough to lose sleep or come to blows over? "Not Hardly...!"

But they DO exist, as a matter of FACT.

[Grizz]

So, lets talk apples and apples.

well, if you're talking 405g apples, maybe the .45 can't compete.

Grizz

[KirkD]

hate to break the news to y'all, but I'm shooting a 405g large meplat hard cast bullet from my 5-1/2" redhawk that departs at 947 fps, it leaves another guy's redhawk at 1030 fps, and that load penetrated 13 gallon jugs of water, which is as good as my 45/70 525g load has ever done.

That's not all that bad, at least for a 44. Makes me wonder what a 45 Colt would do with a 500 grain bullet?

[CowboyTutt]

Kirk! So funny you should ask! I just emailed Mic MicPherson about some experiments he did with 500 grain bullets in the 45 Colt and 454. Here is his response!

Dear Andy,

Original test, Lyman 458190 RN mould (bullet sized to 0.454-inch), Ruger 45 Colt.
Follow-up, Custom 525 WC, Ruger 45 Colt, FA 454 Casull.
No problems at all with stability. Load is simple, for the Ruger, enought H110 to get about 800 fps, for the 454, all you can seat the bullet on. Always CCI-350. In the 454, serious problems keeping the bullet in the case.

The moulds are now in the hands of an acquaintance but I intend to ask for those to be sent back to me. I have already told Dick all about the testing.

If the twist is the same as the 454, it will work fine in the 460, so long as you keep the velocity down to about 900 fps (so the bullet will stay in the case). Of course, you will need a front sight that is 3/16-inch taller (6-inch barrel).

The RN is accurate to any distance -- I used to hammer a derelict refrigerator at one-half mile using the Ruger. The WC is accurate to only about 400 yards and then it goes wild. With one box of 454s at Whittington, I used three cylinders full shooting at the Turkeys on the rifle silhouette range (385 yards). After I got the hold over, I knocked three off the stands. Then I used the remaining 35 rounds to try to hit a ram. With three observes using various optical aids none of us saw even one of those 35 bullets hit! No idea where the rounds were going but it was not even close to the target. That is typical of all blunt bullets (WFN and such), for some reason, those just are not accurate at long range.

My best advice, is to order a custom mould made to drop a bullet that is identical to the Lyman 458190 mould (standard 45-70, 500-grain RN) except that the bullets drop out at about 0.453-inch. Then cast bullets from wheel weights by water dropping. Loaded conventionally, it is accurate and impressive at extreme range. Loaded backwards, it is a serious hunting bullet.

There you go.


Sincerely Yours,

Mic

Man, I gotta get me a custom mould in that round nosed monster! Hehe! See what you started Grizz???

-Tutt

[Griff]

There is no subsititute for cubic inches...

The TRUTH is so self-evident, why do so many seem to ignore it!

[Old Ironsights]

There is no subsititute for cubic inches...

The TRUTH is so self-evident, why do so many seem to ignore it!

'cause in most places packing a .45 Colt doesn't work, and .45 C snubbies are still relatively huge.

After much agonizing in my early days on the forum I went the .357 route for that very reason. .357 SP101 & Rossi vs Taurus .45 & Rossi...

But, by in large, I agree - which is why I was so grumpy in the early 90's in AK when I couldn't get a .454 (or .475 L) levergun...

[Grizz]

Man, I gotta get me a custom mould in that round nosed monster! Hehe! See what you started Grizz???

Good idea! I'm all for it. I think there's a whole world of fun in exploring those loads in the 45. The surprising thing is that you don't need a wrist-wrecker load to get good performance on the business end.

I wonder about turning the round nose around tho, have you ever tried that one? Would that invite flame-cutting?

Grizz

[CowboyTutt]

Grizz, I cannot personally anwer your question, but my understanding of the concept of loading bullets backwards seems to be shared by Mic, Paco and I think even Jim Taylor. If metplate diameter is the "what it's all about" then a reverse loaded bullet would be the ideal ticket at short ranges as the metplate diameter matches bullet diameter. Obviously, such a bullet would be very UN-aerodynamic and would loose velocity very quickly, so such a bullet is only a short-range affair.

-Tutt

[rjohns94]

thanks I book marked it.

[KirkD]

I wonder about turning the round nose around tho, have you ever tried that one? Would that invite flame-cutting?

I wonder if the bevel base bullets would enter the forcing cone a little easier?

[CowboyTutt]

Kirk, at the velocities were talking about, ie 800-1000 fps I don't think it would matter much, but that is only an unfounded opinion. There is no substitute for line-boring and a forcing cone cut with the proper (11 degree?) angle.

I'm hoping to do some practical research in this matter in the near future and will report back as it happens, which may take a few months!!!!

-Tutt

[Buck Elliott]

In my book, a 405-gr. bullet in a .44 Mag. is a bit of a stretch. Sure, it CAN be done, but that doesn't mean it SHOULD BE done. At reasonable pressures, it gives up a lot of velocity -- and trajectory -- to more "normal" bullet weights. If penetration is your only criterion, you could step up the speed another 200 fps and get even more of that, but then you run into the pressure problem again.

A 405-gr. .44 caliber slug takes up too much valuable powder capacity in the .44 Mag. case, if the bullet is seated to operate in most revolvers, where case capacity is already marginal, for many applications.

Just my observations, Gents...

[Grizz]

Here's my observations with 405g in .44 mag.

Low pressure load of 28K CUP produced 907 fps from my 5-1/8" redhawk.
The redhawk has a cylinder length that accepts the bullet seated out.
There is enough room in the case to get 1100 fps at 36.4K CUP.
The 907 fps load will probably double hole any animal on the continent, but that's not proven. Yet.
The 907 fps load easily hits a gong at 107 yards. I don't think the trajectory is too challenged.
Extra velocity will not necessarily produce extra penetration, and many times it produces less.

A lighter bullet, shot faster, will not out-penetrate this round, at least I've not seen it done. Yet.

My current load makes 942 fps at the muzzle and will do at 50 yards what the slower round does up close and personal.

In my book this makes the redhawk loaded with 6 rounds of this low pressure load the best bear defense hand gun available to me, and as an afterthought, it will make an excellent venison maker too. Or moose burger. Or elk roasts. Or bison steaks. etc.

Low pressure. Low recoil. Good accuracy. Good range. And most excellent penetration. What's not to like about it? It's fun to shoot, everyone that trys it says so.

If I can get better bear protection with some other load I'll certainly switch to that one, this is the best one I've found so far.

Best,

Grizz

[CowboyTutt]

Grizz, your probably correct. Scott Tischart really liked a heavy weight but slow moving bullet in his 500 Linebaugh if memory serves and I think others have also. Yes, the trajectory does get "loopy" but that can be accomdated for BUT you really have to accurately know the range because bullet drop will be substantial. Really, except when shooting at derelect refridgerators on a hill, such heavy weight, slow bullets are for up close and personal work only.

In fact, the original "buffalo hunters" used very heavy, slow moving, pure lead and very soft paper patched bullets when shooting buffalo's and they penetrated through and through. These bullets also expanded mightily, I would need to add. This might have made a difference when compared to what we are talking about.

All this being said, I still think there is something to be said for lighter, mid-weight bullets at moderate vecocities that might also offer more "stopping power" which is something that has never been well quantified reliably and probably never will be.

I really like using 316 grain Punch Bullets in my 45 Colt and 454 Casull arms because they penetrate all out of proportion to their weight. If you examine the Linebaugh Seminars and penetration results, you can see what I mean, and the 454 with a Punch Bullet need make no apologies to any bullet/cartridge anywhere. I use them in a 45 Colt +P load when in black bear country and have never felt under-gunned.

I think you have a useful load there in your 44 mag, and it will probably serve you well if you should ever need it to defend you life (which I hope never happens, by the way!!!!)

As with so many things, there is more than "one way to skin a cat" .

Regards my friend! And thanks for sharing the information!

-Tutt

[Buck Elliott]

IIRC, Ross used a 5-shot Seville conversion (Linebaugh), in .45 Colt, loaded with 345-gr hard-cast bullets to shoot through BOTH shoulders (and out...) of a large Cape Buffalo. The 325-gr Cast Peformance bullet at 1200 fps will shoot lengthwise through a big Grizz or Bison at reasonable range, or completely through a '56 Buick -- end to end -- if that is of interest to anyone.

There is a point of diminishing returns in any ballistic equation. Those of us who seriously fool with such things find that point to be at or about 350 grains of bullet weight in the .45 Colt, and 325 grains in the .44 Magnum. Bullets of heavier weight begin to give up real-world usefulness in a hurry.

If you NEED to shoot longer, heavier bullets of a given diameter, use a bigger case, like the .44 Marlin, or the .45-70, and leave the revolver stuff to do revolver stuff business.

YMMV...

[Idiot]

There is a point of diminishing returns in any ballistic equation. Those of us who seriously fool with such things find that point to be at or about 350 grains of bullet weight in the .45 Colt, and 325 grains in the .44 Magnum. Bullets of heavier weight begin to give up real-world usefulness in a hurry.

This is a point seldom discussed or considered when seeking a certain ballistic goal. You can actually "over reach" with either velocity and/or bullet weight (caliber diameter as well) and by doing so end up with a load that is less effective than a load back in the development chain. I found this to often be the case when fiddling around with wildcat cartridges. The optimum may reached long before the scale of options are diminished.

I am currently working on a project to determine optimum balance between expanded bullet diameter, weight, and penetration. Finding the optimum balance is the key. However, I do continue to remind myself that if you stick just about any decent bullet in the right place the animal will usually become meat.

[Grizz]

and 325 grains in the .44 Magnum. Bullets of heavier weight begin to give up real-world usefulness in a hurry.

Not according to my humble experience. I guess when I have as much real-world experience as the experts I'll give up the benefits afforded by my much too heavy bullets. Until then I'll just forge along as a lone pilgrim whose bullets are too heavy in the experience of real-world experts.

Youse guys are really cracking me up.

amused,

Grizz

[O.S.O.K.]

If he's getting 947 fps with the 405 grain boolits, then that would indeed be "useful".

That's not even an argument is it?

Now, you can argue that 325 grain boolits going 1200 fps is better, or more useful...

I guess we just like to argue and fuss and fume about minutia don't we?

I say "we" because I've been guilty of this in the past myself

[Grizz]

No argument from me. I report, you decide.



Grizz

[Idiot]

If he's getting 947 fps with the 405 grain boolits, then that would indeed be "useful".

That's not even an argument is it?

Now, you can argue that 325 grain boolits going 1200 fps is better, or more useful...

I guess we just like to argue and fuss and fume about minutia don't we?

I say "we" because I've been guilty of this in the past myself

However, minutia is the difference between the 44 Magnum and 45 Colt +P, but the argument still exists, and in some limited applications the benefit of that minutia is tangible and real.

Grizz, your real world experience is without question, and I respect that, and you know it. There does, however, exist a point of diminishing returns for any of the ballistic categories. Whether you've reached that point or not is only known by you, since you are the Lone Ranger at the moment seeking to find just how much bullet you can get into a handgun case and still fit enough powder to get it to exit the barrel. And you and I have gone around and round about the "slow verses fast equals penetration" equation and have agreed to let the other believe what they want - for now, so this isn't new. But, I must ask this, what advantage does the 405 grain bullet have over the 325 grain bullet when launched at 300 fps lower velocity? I am curious.

As you know I like a bit more velocity, so I stick with a lighter bullet (280 grains) and I think it hits hard enough and will penetrate deep enough to kill anything lurking in the low land cactus or the highland forests. So, either load listed above is more than I need, but again, I'm curious, what is the advantage?

[Grizz]

So, either load listed above is more than I need, but again, I'm curious, what is the advantage?

It's not scientific for sure. It's just where I've been and what I've done. I shot quite a few deer with .44 magnums. I shot quite a few with a ruger sbh with a 325g cast bullet. Before I knew about LBT stuff. Before the internet. That bullet was great for venison. But I worried about bears. Lots of local stories, mine and my neighbor's, reinforced my worries.

I got a 45/70 and loaded from 300g to 525g bullets and compared the smacking-power. I compared them shooting into 70# lead balls, among other things. Then I compared the .44's smacking power to the 45/70 and started loading heavier bullets in the 44.

You shoot rocks like I do. There is a difference when rocks are hit with different weight bullets. The heavier bullets smack the rocks harder, even if the lighter bullets are travelling faster. To me this suggests that in a bad-bear situation I want the heavier bullet, because its momentum is gonna carry it MUCH FARTHER thru the toughest parts of the bear. The lighter bullet slows faster.

This isn't universally true because a .223 will penetrate a gong that a hardcast bullet will bounce off of. So the application makes the choice.

The light bullet side of this is reflected in the disappearance of someone who was carrying a 38 spcl to the outhouse. Eventually a bear was killed that had a number of 38 revolver bullets lodged in its jaw and face muscles. The 38 didn't have the smacking-power to make it thru to the CNS. Bear 1, pooper 0.

After a third of a century of trying this and that, and hearing this and that, I convinced myself that a 38 spcl was pretty near hopeless. I hunted with a 325g bullet that gave a great account of itself making venison, but when strolling along the deer trail and getting to the buried meal, or strolling along the deer trail and finding the recently eviscerated buck, the bullets in the cylinder just didn't seem all that smacky.

I started doing more interesting penetration tests with the 45/70, and I can assure you that a 525g bullet cruising at 1400 fps has a MUCH BETTER chance of grinding thru an animal's tough parts than a 425g bullet cruising at 1900 fps. I've posted those penetration videos here and on several other forums. The 525g bullet, even though it's 500 FLS SLOWER, penetrates water much farther than the 425g bullet. I know, the bear isn't a water jug, but the momentum factor still applies.

Now I grant you that if there is an unalarmed brown bear in the woods and I shoot it with my 325g 44 load, and it doesn't scent me after I put a bullet thru it heart, it's gonna die. The question that preys on my mind is this: is it gonna die before it kills me? It's not such a rediculous question because that very thing has happened. More than once.

So my preference for that heavy bullet, in both the 45/70 and the 44, is because the 38 spcl proves to me that I can have too small of a bullet, but I can't have one that's too big for my purposes, which is to make meat inside of 100 yards, and to ward off wild animals with the highest probability on my side. Not just bears but steers, moose, etc.

(I know, I know, they're commonly put down with .22s) If that's all it takes, why carry anything else?

For me it is not an issue that a (whatever you like) bullet can "take" (whatever). Because you could kill a bear with a 38 spcl. I knew of someone who killed one with a .22 rifle. But I already know that's not what I want to have available as my hard chance tool.

To say that a 325g bullet at any velocity from a hand gun is gonna do more damage to the bones and CNS of a large tough dangerous animal than a 405g bullet, more often and more reliably, just doesn't fit with my experience. So now I only buy one bullet for my redhawk. Because that bullet has better smacking-power than any other I've shot from it.

At 1030 fps it went thru 13 jugs of water. I'm waiting for someone to beat that with a 5-1/2" barrel revolver. Any revolver shooting a 325g bullet. I'm pretty sure it won't be done. And that's why I don't shoot em any more.

I hope this explains it clearly, I sincerely would like for my POV to be understood. I really don't care if anyone else agrees with me. I'm more than happy to let the one with the 325g bullet shoot first. As long as he's standing in front of me!

Does this make any sense?

Regards,

Grizz

[Idiot]

Thanks Grizz. I still think you are much braver than I to be walking among big Brownies with a handgun or 45/70. In that situation I think I'd prefer something that shoots wide, heavy, and fast(er), like a 458 Winchester Magnum. I think I'll remain content killing rocks that don't bite back or wandering around forests with black bears or high desert chollas with armed illegal alien drug smugglers. Take care old timer.

"Now, what to carry, the .357 Magnum with 158 grain soft points, or the 45 Colt with 280 grain keiths, or my Glock 10MM with 15 200grain FMJacketed cartridges and an instant back up of 15 and 30 more." Yep, it's the application that dictates.

[Grizz]

Thanks Friend

Not brave, scared spitless in the woods sometimes. But exquisite beauty in between.

I thought of one more analogy, but there's really no point. Just only depends on what you want to STOP.

Look forward to busting rocks with you someday.

Grizz

[Buck Elliott]

Apart from the probability that big bears are neither rocks nor gallon jugs of water, through & through penetration is about all anyone can ask of a properly-construced bullet of any suitable weight. You'll still need to break down either the supporting structure of the animal or its CNS to have any hope of a "stop..." Placement is still the prime directive here, followed closely by bullet construction.

If the desired penetration can be achieved with Ross Seyfried's .45-caliber, 345-gr. bullet, there is nothing more -- of a practical nature -- that a 405-gr. slug can do in the same scenario, regardless of its velocity. If one can shoot through the shoulders of TWO bull elk with the same 315-gr. bullet from a .454 Casull rifle, at 2100 fps MV, then what advantage is offered by a 900+ fps 405-gr. pill, in the same circumstance?

When all is said and done, you will still work with what you feel best and most comfortable with, and if that works for you, then so be it; but don't expect the rest of us to shout AMEN or follow suit -- "just because..."

[Grizz]

If one can shoot through the shoulders of TWO bull elk with the same 315-gr. bullet from a .454 Casull rifle, at 2100 fps MV, then what advantage is offered by a 900+ fps 405-gr. pill, in the same circumstance?

Glad you asked. I can shoot thru the shoulders or TWO bull elk with the same 405g bullet from a 5-1/2" barrel revolver at 1000 fps at less than 30K CUP with MUCH LESS recoil and much less wear and tear on the gun. Seems like a heap of advantage to me. What's the advantage of doubling the pressure just to make 4 holes?

BTW, the rifle thingy is pretty far off topic, since the post is about comparing revolver performance. I'm comparing apples to apples, more or less.

Buck, I'm not trying to fight about this. I'm not proselitizing. If no one else in the entire universe ever wants to try or use the load I'm using, I don't care. But folks who've never tried it make statements that don't square with reality. I'm trying for a little balanced reporting. Sorry if I ruffled your feathers.

Regards,

Grizz

[Buck Elliott]

No feathers ruffled. Not looking for a fight here, either. Just trying to put things in perspective, from long experience of my own...

I just don't see the sense in driving a Mack Truck to the store for a box of oatmeal and a gallon of moo-juice, when there are more suitable, efficient means of accomplishing the same task...

FWIW, I have also shot through large deer, end-to-end, breaking bones along the way, with a .45 Colt Ruger SBH, loaded with that same 315-gr. bullet, at 1200 fps, and have shot through an elk, on a quartering angle, with the same load. Broken shoulder; In-and-out... Bang/Flop... Have seen the same results on elk from the .44 Mag, stoked with 265-gr JSPs.

Bears are NOT as indestructable as many folks have made them out to be, but to STOP one still requires a hit with a good bullet, in the right place. Miss that "right place" with a .460 Weatherby, and you still haven't closed the argument...

[jd45]

Someone will, eventually, make a 405GR .452 bullet, & then what, Grizz? jd45

[Grizz]

Someone will, eventually, make a 405GR .452 bullet, & then what, Grizz? jd45

Then it will be just as good as the 405g .432 bullet, but with a worse sectional density at a lower case pressure.

Grizz

[jd45]

Bingo Grizz! the advantage of the .45 Colt is at least the same energy at lower pressure. jd45

[Grizz]

Bingo Grizz! the advantage of the .45 Colt is at least the same energy at lower pressure. jd45

ya'but: it's kind of a moot point when I'm running 28K CUP loads...

and they're competing in performance with 64K PSI loads....

thanks for the bump, I love the topic

Grizz

Profiling_Image.jpg

[jd45]

I stand corrected, Grizz.....Good shooting! jd45

[CowboyTutt]

When is someone going to make that 400 grain 22 mag bullet I want for the rifle with the 1 in 2 twist? That's what I want to know!

-Tutt