.45 ACP vs. .45 Auto Rim

[BLUEDOT37]

I did find however that the 45 AR brass will not fit in the 45 ACP shell holder that I use to de-prime my brass, nor will they fit in the hand primer I use to prime brass with. I had to get a special shell holder and priming attachment for my rock chucker to de-prime and prime the brass.

Imagine, requiring a shell holder for each specific cartridge you load for. The nerve of them!

I de-prime my 45ARs just like any other cartridge & the Universal primer arm on my RCBS JR3 works on everything I reload. Don't know how the Rock Chucker is different in that regard?

.

 

[BLUEDOT37]

Ya need to back down there Ivan.........NONE of my 625's will constistantly fire 45acp without moon clips.......Chambers are bored too deep. Several miles back in this forum Tommy Campbell. Who worked and shot for S&W argued this point with S&W engineers and lost............SO.....Old guns yes/maybe......Newer guns......No

As Zeke stated that was an unfortunate period in the 45ACP revolver timeline, but very brief as it's been reported.

1917's had a chamber ledge & all of my modern 325/625s have one & mine shoot 45ACP (w/o moonclips) & 45AR reliably.

If your revolvers have chamber ledges but don't fire 45ACP reliably it's not because you're not using moonclips.

A lot of different factors can come into play, no matter which model:

- depth the chamber shoulder/ledge is cut to

- brass length

- firing pin length

- gross headspace

- cylinder endshake

- proper full length sizing of case

- proper crimp applied to bullet

- primer fully seated in primer pocket

- depth of the primer pocket

- &, primer hardness in conjunction with hammer/mainspring strength.

All the above, either singularly or in addition to other ones, can increase the likelihood your revolver will not fire them consistently without moonclips.

My oldest related revolver was made in 2008 but all (4) of mine shoot separate ammo, without moonclips, just fine. I hasten to add I'd never purposely load it that way if self-defense needs were anticipated for it. Range/casual use is fine.

I shoot mainly 45ARs but keep a loaded moonclip at the ready.

.



.
.



.

 

[Mike SC Hunter]

Regarding the ability of the S&W ACP revolver to chamber an ACP without a moon clip (full, 1/2 or 1/3) it depends on what era your revolver was built. All of the blued revolvers were built to standards that allowed the ACP round to be chambered and fired by headspacing on the cartridge mouth, just like the 1911. When you get into the stainless steel revolvers and later, it becomes iffy. Some do, some don’t.

Here is a copy of an article by Brian Pearce, he explains it better than I.

Kevin

You nailed what I was trying to explain in my post..........VERY good information.

 

[zeke]

Still there (in Sierra VI) & no change in it's data from Sierra V.

They did add a 45ACP (+P) section but the revolver section is hotter.

.

Thanks for the correction, had skipped right over it! Glad they kept it.

 

[BLUEDOT37]

I am aware of that Handloader article (Handloading the 45 Auto Rim - Handloader #254) & I find the side-bar in it a bit wanting.

That is a Sept-2008 article that refers to a problem a decade (no exact year) before (1998?) & then mentions a problem a few years (again no year mentioned) later (2001?)

He says he compared both revolvers (1998 & 2001 models?) and:

"Examination of both revolvers revealed that there were some “engineering changes” with noticeably greater space between
the firing pin and breech of the chamber/cylinder."

In the next paragraph he goes on to say that S&W is no longing cutting chamber shoulders/ledges in the 625s.

He never specifically says that the two revolvers did not have chamber shoulders, only that they had excessive gross headspace (which in it self can cause misfires).

That's two different issues! Why did he not provide more details?

I'm unaware of any follow-up discussion in Handloader since this side-bar article on the topic 14 years ago.

I don't dispute that for a period some models had issues but it's not an across the board issue since 1917 thru the last models & none of my "modern" revolvers has a problem shooting rimless without moonclips.

.

 

[6string]

Why force yourself to choose?
Unlike women, cartridges don't get jealous. So, I like to "play the field", cartridge-wise. Tall ones, short ones, skinny ones, curved ones.... So, for .45 revolvers they're all good: 45 Colt, 45 ACP, 45 Auto Rim, heck, I even like making brass for 455 Eley!

I like best of all the S&W .45 revolvers built in the 1950s specifically for Bullseye shooting. The throats are generally tight (.453" +/- .001") and the chamber shoulders are generally correct for headspacing on the case mouth of .45 "hardball" match ammo as formerly made for the USAMU and other service pistol teams.
Here's something quoted from a post I made in another thread a couple years ago:

"There's a very important point that has been overlooked.
-Make sure the chambers are clean! These were originally built as target guns. The chambers were cut so that 45 ACP ammo headspaced off of the casemouth. The moon clips are only for expediency of carrying ammo, loading and unloading. They were not intended for headspacing. This is for target revolvers only!
The downsides are that 1) the chambers must be clean or the case may not fully seat, and 2) your ammo must be match grade. If your brass (reloads) are too long the gun will jam and if too short you may get misfires and bad accuracy.
My suspicion is that as careless customers griped, S&W began to cut chambers a little deeper, and for similar reasons increased cylinder throat diameters. The price for this was accuracy.
My observation is that most 1970s 25-2s don't shoot nearly as well as 1950s era 1950 and 1955 .45 Target models. This is dramatically evident at the 50 yd line.
But, by the 1970s folks were rarely shooting bullseye with revolvers.

Also, besides checking moon clip thickness, try dressing them on a lapping stone or other flat surface. You'll be surprised to see how those "flat" moon clips aren't so true.

 

[STORMINORMAN]

In my most humble opinion any S&W N-frame revolver will withstand much higher pressures than a 45acp (&+P) load will generate. They do it every day and have for decades.

Starline's AutoARim brass is indeed also plenty strong enough for any published (whatever THAT means?) 45acp (& +P) load, and then some!

Cheers!

 

[cmj8591]

Here is a copy of an article by Brian Pearce, he explains it better than I.

[/IMG]

Kevin

Can someone tell me what version of the 625 doesn't have a headspace ledge in it's chambers? I don't recall ever seeing one. The only ones I've seen that wouldn't fire with factory spec ammo without a clip had excessive end shake. As a side note, some of the early Colt New Services did not have the headspace ledge. They were so desperate to get guns turned out for the war that they used cylinders chambered for 45 Colt that they had on hand. A 45 auto cartridge will disappear into the chamber without a clip. S&W had no such problem because they didn't have any guns chambered in the Colt caliber in their inventory. If you have a Colt New Service without the ledge, you have a rare gun.

 

[StrawHat]

?.. Can someone tell me what version of the 625 doesn't have a headspace ledge in it's chambers? …

I do not believe any of the S&W revolvers were produced without chambers cut in the charge holes. The problem, in some, is the depth of the chamber to the mouth of the cartridge was excessive.

Of course, I have not handled the all!

Kevin

edited to correct the statement to “ …don’t believe any revolvers were produced withOUT chambers…”

 

[StrawHat]

In 1915 or 1916, Joseph Wesson realized that barring a miracle, the United States was going to become involved in WWI on a level much higher than providing supplies for the English. He also understood that the supply of US handguns was very low. Since they were building the 455 revolver for the British, he understood they could build a revolver to shoot the US 45 ACP cartridge by chambering it to hold the cartridge just like was done in the Colt 1911. The problem was ejecting it once it had been fired. The ACP has no rim for on which the extractor star can work. (S&W had already been through the situation of trying to introduce a new cartridge to the Army with the Schofield revolver and did not want to go that route.) In 1916, a patent was issued to Joseph Wesson and E S Pomeroy for a half moon clip and a full moon clip. The Army was given the choice of the two and wisely chose the 3 round option.

The moon clip was provided to merely enhance extraction of the rimless cartridge. It was not intended to ensure ignition of the cartridge.

Attached is an image of the patent sheet.

You can see this is far different from the earlier full moon clip used to load the top break revolvers and also different from what we are familiar with as a full moon clip.

Kevin

 

[AR_Black]

FAVORITE Revolver

I have a 5-inch in .45 ACP. By far my FAVORITE Revolver to shoot.

Handload .45 ACP and use moon clips. For practice.
Handload .45 AR for hunting and 'extra push'.

And now for the back story:

---------------

Picked up this 625-2 "Model of 1989" a few years ago. That was a very good year for me, and I always wanted one of these. Replaced the front sight with a green fiber optic.

.45 ACP - 200 grain plated Ranier TC reloads, full moon clips, very mild. 3.8 grains Bullseye. Target load, drops 5-inches @ 25-yards. I could adjust the rear sight, but the pistol zeroed for my hunting load....

.45 Auto Rim - 250-grain lead Keith flat nose reloads with 7.0 grains Unique. Stout. I can hit the six-inch plate @ 100 yards at the club consistently with this one, holding over one bead.

Shot a deer at 75 yards (2016) using my 45 Auto Rim loads, one shot, dropped on the spot. I carved a notch in the grip.

 

[cmj8591]

In 1915 or 1916, Joseph Wesson realized that barring a miracle, the United States was going to become involved in WWI on a level much higher than providing supplies for the English.

Great post. I don't think they ever manufactured the full moon clips. Maybe one of the collectors who specialize in 1917's will come along and fill us in. It's an interesting story of how they came about. Even though S&W held the patent, they shared it with Colt so that the demand for guns for the war could be met. Fast forward to 1925 and those guns were mostly declared surplus and sold to civilians. Peters came up with the Auto-Rim round to allow use of the guns without the clips. The load was, and continues to be, 230 grain, round nose lead at about 700fps. As I said in my previous post, those were the only guns that were envisioned using the AR and they were thinking about the wear and tear that a FMJ ball round would do to a revolver. Even though the 1917's were large frame, at the time the 45ACP was a high pressure round as designed for the 1911. As loaded for the 1911, the ACP ran at about 5000psi more than the 44 Special or 45 Colt. It wouldn't take too many rounds in those revolvers to shake them loose. I remember as a kid looking at ad's in the American Rifleman magazine for 1917's at about 9 bucks, postage paid, to your house. Times have changed a bit.

 

[PALADIN85020]

There was a time period when S&W eliminated the interior "ledge" in their 45 acp cylinders, but believe popular opinion brought them back. Had this discussion on some gun board awhile bacj with a non-believer. IMO, the ability to use regular brass without moon clips can certainly be an advantage in some cases. If i was a competitive shooter, would probably be more interested in moon clips. As it is, like the forceful ejection of a short rimmed case.

Early M1917 Colt revolvers did not have internal ledges for headspacing. A .45 ACP round will just drop through. I have one of those early ones, and only rounds with clips or .45 AR will work in it. I believe the M1917s made by S&W had the ledges from the start - I've never encountered one without them.

John

 

[cmj8591]

Early M1917 Colt revolvers did not have internal ledges for headspacing. A .45 ACP round will just drop through. I have one of those early ones, and only rounds with clips or .45 AR will work in it. I believe the M1917s made by S&W had the ledges from the start - I've never encountered one without them.

John

That Colt is one of the guns that utilized a 45 Colt cylinder. They didn't make many of those.

 

[H Richard]

In my 25-2 I have used full and half moon clips (ranch), since first loading it. I had some problems the first time or two, but then found the clip loader and it is easy as can be. I have loaded single loads and fired without any problems, probably a few hundred over the years. Here's the loader I use, and it has also been used for 9mm fpr a 940, and had an arbor made for the 9mm 986 7 shot.

I'm not sure if this company is still in business, but Dillon has literally the same design and I saw above TK Custom has one also.

 

[DeplorabusUnum]

Imagine, requiring a shell holder for each specific cartridge you load for. The nerve of them!

I de-prime my 45ARs just like any other cartridge & the Universal primer arm on my RCBS JR3 works on everything I reload. Don't know how the Rock Chucker is different in that regard?

.

It's irritating only because I've never primed cases on my rock chucker. I use the RCBS hand primer, which I love. There is no shell holder for the hand primer, only a spring loaded mechanism that holds the case. The 45 AR brass simply won't fit in it. So I prime every caliber I load for (12 or so) with the hand primer. The AR cartridge is the only one that requires installing the primer set up on the rock chucker, which for me is a much slower clunky process. Just wanting to make sure the OP was aware of the potential drawbacks. At least for me, the moon clips are easier with a good loading tool.

 

[zeke]

It's irritating only because I've never primed cases on my rock chucker. I use the RCBS hand primer, which I love. There is no shell holder for the hand primer, only a spring loaded mechanism that holds the case. The 45 AR brass simply won't fit in it. So I prime every caliber I load for (12 or so) with the hand primer. The AR cartridge is the only one that requires installing the primer set up on the rock chucker, which for me is a much slower clunky process. Just wanting to make sure the OP was aware of the potential drawbacks. At least for me, the moon clips are easier with a good loading tool.

Certainly a consideration with that style of hand primer. The older style however, works fine.

RCBS Hand Priming Tool

 

[rockquarry]

It's irritating only because I've never primed cases on my rock chucker. I use the RCBS hand primer, which I love. There is no shell holder for the hand primer, only a spring loaded mechanism that holds the case. The 45 AR brass simply won't fit in it. So I prime every caliber I load for (12 or so) with the hand primer. The AR cartridge is the only one that requires installing the primer set up on the rock chucker, which for me is a much slower clunky process. Just wanting to make sure the OP was aware of the potential drawbacks. At least for me, the moon clips are easier with a good loading tool.

Is this the RCBS Universal priming tool with the jaws? I bought two of these several years ago; neither would seat primers with 100% reliability. Additionally, more effort than usually necessary with a hand priming tool was required. I returned both. Perhaps I just got a couple of bad ones. The older RCBS tool requiring a shell holder was a much better priming tool.

 

[LostintheOzone]

The biggest problem, if you want to call it that, AR brass just isn't that common. I've never seen any in the brass bucket at the range. If you check the Starline website it isn't available where ACP is. That's because for every AR shooter there's 25 ACP shooters. I've literally picked up enough ACP range brass to keep me shooting for the rest of my life. I don't need to separate it either when I prep my cases for my 1911. One cartridge for 625 and 1911.

I understand why someone might not want to deal with moon clips. I was thinking about buying some AR brass until I bought a BMT Mooner. Easy in and easy out. Moon clips are really nothing more than speed loaders. I'm pretty sure Jerry Miculek doesn't use AR brass.

 

[StrawHat]

…Great post. I don't think they ever manufactured the full moon clips. Maybe one of the collectors who specialize in 1917's will come along and fill us in. It's an interesting story of how they came about…

They had to have made a couple dozen or so. Some for the patent office and some for the Army to test. I have never seen one in person or even a photograph.

…Even though S&W held the patent, they shared it with Colt so that the demand for guns for the war could be met…

One thing S&W did was learn from their mistakes. They wanted a Government contract in the 1870s. Instead of building a revolver for the 45 Army cartridge , they used an existing revolver and designed a cartridge to satisfy the caliber requirement. If not an outright failure with the Army it was at least a miserable success. So when designing the Model 1917, they made sure to use the existing US pistol cartridge.

Their willingness to share the half moon clip may date back to the American Civil War. Remember that silly bored through cylinder patent that a Colt employee sold to S&W? S&W wrote the contract so that they paid a royalty to Rollin White but required him to defend the patent against any and all patent infringements. And they insisted he do this. They also refused to grant use of the patent to the Colt’s factory at a time when the Union could have used the most advanced weapons of the day. A certain General, later President, U S Grant believed this prolonged the war and cost countless additional casualties. He held this against S&W and used his considerable clout to thwart contracts to them.

S&W did not want a repeat of this so gladly allowed the use of the patent.

…Fast forward to 1925 and those guns were mostly declared surplus and sold to civilians. Peters came up with the Auto-Rim round to allow use of the guns without the clips. The load was, and continues to be, 230 grain, round nose lead at about 700fps. As I said in my previous post, those were the only guns that were envisioned using the AR and they were thinking about the wear and tear that a FMJ ball round would do to a revolver. Even though the 1917's were large frame, at the time the 45ACP was a high pressure round as designed for the 1911. As loaded for the 1911, the ACP ran at about 5000psi more than the 44 Special or 45 Colt. It wouldn't take too many rounds in those revolvers to shake them loose. I remember as a kid looking at ad's in the American Rifleman magazine for 1917's at about 9 bucks, postage paid, to your house. Times have changed a bit…

The Model 1917 was the first revolver from S&W to have a heat treated cylinder, an Army specification. The rifling in the barrel was also specified. These revolver were built to handle the pressure of the cartridge. Target shooters, then and now, prefer much lower pressures. This is why the 45 AR is built the way it is. Also, that lead slug would lead severely if pushed faster than the sedate 700 fps.

What really beat up the Model 1917, in civilian hands, was the use of surplus ammunition (or any ammunition) with corrosive primers. Unless you meticulously cleaned the revolver, it would soon be a mess.

Kevin