I am looking for a 45 Colt load that is close to a 44 mag factory load. I am talking about a 250 grain lead swc and I prefer a load using 2400. These loads will be fired in a Ruger Alaskan so I have a pretty strong platform.
45 Colt load that is close to 44 mag
- Thread starter max
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Start at 24 and work up to 26 grains of H-110, under a good hardcast bullet. That will give you what you want.
With 2400 John Taffin shows the following data in his Taffin tests column in Guns, July 2001-
Starting with 20 gr 2400 under Lyman 454424 255 grain bullet=1240
21 gr= 1265
and finally 22 gr giving1330 fps
( notice the jump in velocity from 21-22 gr. That tells you that he was getting close to the top where pressure was concerned in this particular gun)
All from a 7.5" Blackhawk.
I have clocked the 24 gr of H-110 under a Lyman 454424 weighing 265 grains in my 4" 25-5 ( same barrel length as yours, though no where near as strong a gun as an Alaskan), and it gave 1121 FPS @ 15' across my Oehler 35P. I could feel no difference in this load's recoil, and that of my .44 with full power loads fired right after it.
18.5 grains of 2400 under the same bullet and fired from the same gun gave 1080 fps @ 15". That weight bullet at that velocity is square in the middle of average .44 magnum ballistics, and it cuts a noticably wider hole all the way through things.
You may want to read the following too. It is from John Linebaugh, and is basically on the S&W 25-5, but will show you a wide range of loads that are obviously safe for your strong Redhawk.
http://handloads.com/articles/default.asp?id=12
With 2400 John Taffin shows the following data in his Taffin tests column in Guns, July 2001-
Starting with 20 gr 2400 under Lyman 454424 255 grain bullet=1240
21 gr= 1265
and finally 22 gr giving1330 fps
( notice the jump in velocity from 21-22 gr. That tells you that he was getting close to the top where pressure was concerned in this particular gun)
All from a 7.5" Blackhawk.
I have clocked the 24 gr of H-110 under a Lyman 454424 weighing 265 grains in my 4" 25-5 ( same barrel length as yours, though no where near as strong a gun as an Alaskan), and it gave 1121 FPS @ 15' across my Oehler 35P. I could feel no difference in this load's recoil, and that of my .44 with full power loads fired right after it.
18.5 grains of 2400 under the same bullet and fired from the same gun gave 1080 fps @ 15". That weight bullet at that velocity is square in the middle of average .44 magnum ballistics, and it cuts a noticably wider hole all the way through things.
You may want to read the following too. It is from John Linebaugh, and is basically on the S&W 25-5, but will show you a wide range of loads that are obviously safe for your strong Redhawk.
http://handloads.com/articles/default.asp?id=12
Last edited:
Can it be done? I took a quick glace at some data to compare and can not find anything even close to 44 mag velocity with the 45 Colt. Not much data for 2400 for that bullet in 45 Colt.
Saw some closer with H110 but still not a Magnum load.
I will not bet that someone doesn't have something for you though.
Saw some closer with H110 but still not a Magnum load.
I will not bet that someone doesn't have something for you though.
Last edited:
Most .44 magnum's with 4" barrels are hard pressed to go much beyond 1200-1250 with a lighter weight 240 grain bullet.
All velocity does over 1100 -1200 fps is flatten trajectory, you gain nothing in real world killing power unless you go to a heavier and/or wider bullet. That is also mentioned in the Linebaugh link. It seems to be true as far as I have observed on live game as well.
All velocity does over 1100 -1200 fps is flatten trajectory, you gain nothing in real world killing power unless you go to a heavier and/or wider bullet. That is also mentioned in the Linebaugh link. It seems to be true as far as I have observed on live game as well.
Last edited:
That didn't take long
Just got done reading the article. Lots of good info. I didn't know the 45 Colt could be pushed that hard.
I was messing with a Ruger Alaskan at the gun shop and it sure is a nice gun. Really built, it would be hard to break that one.
I'm still waiting for my M 25 to do it's 30 days in the hole before I can pick it up. Don't think I will be loading it at the levels in the article though.
Just got done reading the article. Lots of good info. I didn't know the 45 Colt could be pushed that hard.
I was messing with a Ruger Alaskan at the gun shop and it sure is a nice gun. Really built, it would be hard to break that one.
I'm still waiting for my M 25 to do it's 30 days in the hole before I can pick it up. Don't think I will be loading it at the levels in the article though.
OCD-
I've posted it both here and on the other sub forum's many times that I have used the Linebaugh loads with no trouble. There's another member who just posted the other day that he has been doing the same thing.
The 25's are much stronger than you always hear. I guess once a rumor gets started, it's hard to lay it to rest.
Guys have no trouble using full power loads in a 29, but seem to think that suddenly the gun is weak and frail because it has a little larger sized chamber in it.
S&W never has come forwards and rated the 25's. I have a clip here in an old issue of Shooting Times, where a reader asked Skeeter Skelton if S&W had completed testing the 25's to see if they would handle the Blackhawk loads. At that time they hadn't was hsi reply (and as far as I know, they never went public with the results). I assume it is because as soon as someone heard that they were safe with Blackhawk loads, S&W knew that that same idiot would then try to push it even farther.
Look at the 60 series of .357's. Granted, their stop notches are not over the center of the chamber, but their walls are much thinner yet. I have one, and I shoot full power .357's out of it without fear. That's what it is rated for.
Same goes with the Linebaugh loads. Since he is one of the top pistolsmiths in the country, and a business man to boot, I listen to him. He isn't going to recommend loads that will ruin his potential customers guns. That's just bad business sense. Plus, he is in a position to put these guns to the test for limits and durability. The biggest drawback to the 25's ( and the 29's for that matter), is their tendency to loosen up with continued use of full powered loads- in this case, the upper levels of the Linebaugh loads. The ones he rcommends for everyday carry and use are simply no harder on a gun than full power loads in a 29. The cylinder contains them just fine, and that always seems to be the point of contention with the naysayers- the cylinder is too weak.
Yea, right!
I've posted it both here and on the other sub forum's many times that I have used the Linebaugh loads with no trouble. There's another member who just posted the other day that he has been doing the same thing.
The 25's are much stronger than you always hear. I guess once a rumor gets started, it's hard to lay it to rest.
Guys have no trouble using full power loads in a 29, but seem to think that suddenly the gun is weak and frail because it has a little larger sized chamber in it.
S&W never has come forwards and rated the 25's. I have a clip here in an old issue of Shooting Times, where a reader asked Skeeter Skelton if S&W had completed testing the 25's to see if they would handle the Blackhawk loads. At that time they hadn't was hsi reply (and as far as I know, they never went public with the results). I assume it is because as soon as someone heard that they were safe with Blackhawk loads, S&W knew that that same idiot would then try to push it even farther.
Look at the 60 series of .357's. Granted, their stop notches are not over the center of the chamber, but their walls are much thinner yet. I have one, and I shoot full power .357's out of it without fear. That's what it is rated for.
Same goes with the Linebaugh loads. Since he is one of the top pistolsmiths in the country, and a business man to boot, I listen to him. He isn't going to recommend loads that will ruin his potential customers guns. That's just bad business sense. Plus, he is in a position to put these guns to the test for limits and durability. The biggest drawback to the 25's ( and the 29's for that matter), is their tendency to loosen up with continued use of full powered loads- in this case, the upper levels of the Linebaugh loads. The ones he rcommends for everyday carry and use are simply no harder on a gun than full power loads in a 29. The cylinder contains them just fine, and that always seems to be the point of contention with the naysayers- the cylinder is too weak.
Yea, right!
Last edited:
Gun 4 Fun, you are exactly right. I'm surprised that no one is bashing you yet for saying such things.
20.0 gr. of 2400 under the 255(?) RCBS SWC gives 1150 fps in my 5 1/2" Blackhawk. It will take higher loads, but no more velocity is needed.
That's interesting tome right there. My 5.5" Blackhawk showed 1180 fps from a 265 Lyman 454424 over 18.5 grains of 2400. It just goes to show that what ammo companies and handloading mauals list are just a go by, and not to be taken as actual.
As for the bashing- let 'em. Right is right.
VAdoublegunner
Member
Another option is to go to the slightly heavier RCBS45-270-SAA, generally weighing in at 282gr and an excellent bullet design for both accuracy and penetration (although long range accuracy doesn't seem to be your primary concern with an Alaskan).
With the Ruger Alaskan, you can go to levels equivalent to the Blackhawk @ 32Kpsi. Pearce in Handloader #246 indicated he got 1262fps with the 282gr bullet and max load of 21.0gr of 2400 (suggest working up from 19.0) in a 5.5" Blackhawk. For max performance in true 44Mag territory (even possibly exceeding it), he reported getting 1387fps with that bullet in the same gun with a max load of 25.0gr of H-110 (suggest working up from 23.0; even 24.0 was reported as giving 1327fps).
But I guess the question is ... what do you need to achieve and why? If you are worried about penetration, that particular bullet is a proven penetrator, the extra weight and design being favorable, and anything around 1100-1200fps should give you what you need.
(Edit: Note: this information is for Ruger Blackhawks and Alaskans and is NOT intended for S&W Model 25 variations. These are heavier than the Linebaugh loads mentioned by Gun 4 Fun which I also use, albeit less often, in my Model 25s without concern)
With the Ruger Alaskan, you can go to levels equivalent to the Blackhawk @ 32Kpsi. Pearce in Handloader #246 indicated he got 1262fps with the 282gr bullet and max load of 21.0gr of 2400 (suggest working up from 19.0) in a 5.5" Blackhawk. For max performance in true 44Mag territory (even possibly exceeding it), he reported getting 1387fps with that bullet in the same gun with a max load of 25.0gr of H-110 (suggest working up from 23.0; even 24.0 was reported as giving 1327fps).
But I guess the question is ... what do you need to achieve and why? If you are worried about penetration, that particular bullet is a proven penetrator, the extra weight and design being favorable, and anything around 1100-1200fps should give you what you need.
(Edit: Note: this information is for Ruger Blackhawks and Alaskans and is NOT intended for S&W Model 25 variations. These are heavier than the Linebaugh loads mentioned by Gun 4 Fun which I also use, albeit less often, in my Model 25s without concern)
Last edited:
Skip Sackett
US Veteran
Max-
If you want to soundly beat the .44 magnum, send me a PM. I have some data here that is safe for Redhawks only that uses 300 grain and heavier bullets. It runs 50,000 psi.
I don't want to post these out here on the forum where someone who didn't take the time to read all of these posts, and the caveats that go with them, can take them and run to their bench, then blow themselves up by shooting these out of a Colt SAA or S&W 25.
Brian Pearce listed some of these in Handloader #217, which is still the best article written on loading the .45 Colt yet - IMHO
Again, as VAdoublegunner and I have said here, this info is for the Redhawk only, and is even above the perfomance level of the Blackhawk.
If you want to soundly beat the .44 magnum, send me a PM. I have some data here that is safe for Redhawks only that uses 300 grain and heavier bullets. It runs 50,000 psi.
I don't want to post these out here on the forum where someone who didn't take the time to read all of these posts, and the caveats that go with them, can take them and run to their bench, then blow themselves up by shooting these out of a Colt SAA or S&W 25.
Brian Pearce listed some of these in Handloader #217, which is still the best article written on loading the .45 Colt yet - IMHO
Again, as VAdoublegunner and I have said here, this info is for the Redhawk only, and is even above the perfomance level of the Blackhawk.
Skip Sackett
US Veteran
I don't have the #217 article and I cannot find any of that data on the LoadData website. There are some WHOMPER loads on there for the 45 Colt though. The highest loads come from an article from the Handloader Magazine #81 and are supposed to be "Contender Only" loads.
The #246 article is a great one and lists 3 levels of loads for the 45Colt, 14,000psi, 20,000psi and 32,000psi. In my opinion, and that doesn't count for much, you CAN shoot any of these in Smith or Ruger guns. A steady diet of them in a Smith is going to loosen it up a bit. I have yet to venture into that area with my new to me M25 -7, again, just me.
Now the Ruger Blackhawk 45 Convertible I have, it has had some fire breathers come out of it!
That being said, I have shot the 45-270-SAA from it loaded to the maximum with H110/W296 from that gun and all I can ask is, why in the world would you EVER want more?
Now, I'm a big fellow. 6' 2", 270lbs, have hands like a gorilla. On every single action firearm I have ever shot, the butt hits me in the palm of my hand with standard grips. I put Hogue's on every one. This Ruger is no different. With that bullet at that velocity from that firearm with those grips it is just about all I would ever want for felt recoil from that frame style and type.
I have shot a 3 1/2" 500Mag. Nowhere near as bad as the 45 Colt in a single action platform. Maybe a Bisley would be better.
All of that being said, I cannot imagine a 52,000psi load in that firearm. I'm afraid I would have to move up to the "X" frame or a Contender for that level of performance.
Just me though.
The #246 article is a great one and lists 3 levels of loads for the 45Colt, 14,000psi, 20,000psi and 32,000psi. In my opinion, and that doesn't count for much, you CAN shoot any of these in Smith or Ruger guns. A steady diet of them in a Smith is going to loosen it up a bit. I have yet to venture into that area with my new to me M25 -7, again, just me.
Now the Ruger Blackhawk 45 Convertible I have, it has had some fire breathers come out of it!
That being said, I have shot the 45-270-SAA from it loaded to the maximum with H110/W296 from that gun and all I can ask is, why in the world would you EVER want more?
Now, I'm a big fellow. 6' 2", 270lbs, have hands like a gorilla. On every single action firearm I have ever shot, the butt hits me in the palm of my hand with standard grips. I put Hogue's on every one. This Ruger is no different. With that bullet at that velocity from that firearm with those grips it is just about all I would ever want for felt recoil from that frame style and type.
I have shot a 3 1/2" 500Mag. Nowhere near as bad as the 45 Colt in a single action platform. Maybe a Bisley would be better.
All of that being said, I cannot imagine a 52,000psi load in that firearm. I'm afraid I would have to move up to the "X" frame or a Contender for that level of performance.
Just me though.
Last edited:
Skip-
I agree with you there! But if you re-read my post, I specifically mentioned those loads are for the Redhawk only, and the pressure was actually 50,000 psi not 52,000. Well, Redhawk's and Freedom Arms. They are quite useful loads that take the old .45 Colt to a whole different level, and are getting close to the .454. It gives the owner of a Redhawk the chance to go from cowboy loads to a level that will allow him to reasonably hunt anything anywhere with one gun.
The purpose is to be able to use 325 grain all the way up to 360 grain bullets at meaningful velocities. I had a Redhawk in .45 Colt at the time with a 7.5 " bbl. Those loads are, and will do exactly as he said they would from a 7.5" gun. Recoil from the Redhawk isn't that bad. About like shooting 270-300 grain bullets from a 29 with a 6" barrel, which I also have and do.
The Redhawk is a large and heavy gun, and is a totally different animal than the Blackhawk (of which I've owned many, and have been able to compare them side by side on many occassions with full power Blackhawk loads.) The recoil is much, much easier on the shooter from big Red.
I read that article many times, and then I decided to write to Pearce asking him if there had been a mis-print before I decided to try them. He wrote me back (I still have the letter) that no, it was accurate info. He told me he had seen the high speed video that showed what pressures a Redhawk will take before letting loose, and it is waaay above any of his loads.
I'm suprised that as much as vadoublegunner and I have mentioned that issue, that you don't have it yet. It is far more informative than #246. It would be well worth your time and money to own.
I have been shooting 18.5 grs. of 2400 under a 255SWC cast bullet for several years and like the accuracy and control I have. No need for much more speed in my opinion. I get great penetration
ArchAngelCD
Moderator, SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
I would think any of the loads listed under the .45 Colt Ruger, Freedom Arms, T/C only loads on the Hodgdon Load Data Site will give you exactly what you're looking for.
Skip Sackett
US Veteran
Tim,
The 52,000psi number was a bit of literary license, my apologies.
Once you shoot completely through an animal, what else is there to do?
Certainly, we aren't talking about using these kinds of loads for personal defense, so hunting loads would seem to be the focus.
I have a local gun pusher that is a big fan of Contenders in rifle calibers. He is an avid hunter and has been doing his own survey on our Indiana deer.
When the DNR laws changed to allow some pistol caliber carbines for deer hunting, one such round in use was the 500Mag. H&R or NEF or Marlin or whomever owns them now, made a Handi-Rifle in that caliber, they left the store shelves like they were the same magnetic polarity as the shelves. Like polls repel.......
Yeah, well, of the folks that have used them to shoot deer here in Indiana, he claims that without fail, the owners of those cannons had to track the animal farther than if say, shot with a 12ga slug. That being the previously most popular thing allowed for that task.
All I saying is this, whether it is a 44Mag in 400gr that penetrates 30" of soft pine or a 45Colt 280gr @ 1400fps, what is the point if all we are doing is shooting deer?
A well placed bullet, traveling at a decent velocity of substantial weight and effective design will do the job in these hunting situations anywhere in the lower 48 and then some.
Just to do it? OK, I got that too and fully understand. Sometimes you just HAVE to go there. No problem with that either.
I just don't think that is the OP's original intent on asking the question and I think ArchAngel has answered it exceptionally well.
There isn't anything we NEED to get the deer hunting job done than to use the "Ruger Only" data.
Just my opinion. Personally, I think the 240gr bullet for the 44Mag and the 45-270-SAA for the 45Colt is more than enough for the things we will most likely encounter here in America.
Unless of course you are one of those kooks that is planning on the possibility of taking down a helicopter or something!
FWIW
The 52,000psi number was a bit of literary license, my apologies.
Once you shoot completely through an animal, what else is there to do?
Certainly, we aren't talking about using these kinds of loads for personal defense, so hunting loads would seem to be the focus.
I have a local gun pusher that is a big fan of Contenders in rifle calibers. He is an avid hunter and has been doing his own survey on our Indiana deer.
When the DNR laws changed to allow some pistol caliber carbines for deer hunting, one such round in use was the 500Mag. H&R or NEF or Marlin or whomever owns them now, made a Handi-Rifle in that caliber, they left the store shelves like they were the same magnetic polarity as the shelves. Like polls repel.......
Yeah, well, of the folks that have used them to shoot deer here in Indiana, he claims that without fail, the owners of those cannons had to track the animal farther than if say, shot with a 12ga slug. That being the previously most popular thing allowed for that task.
All I saying is this, whether it is a 44Mag in 400gr that penetrates 30" of soft pine or a 45Colt 280gr @ 1400fps, what is the point if all we are doing is shooting deer?
A well placed bullet, traveling at a decent velocity of substantial weight and effective design will do the job in these hunting situations anywhere in the lower 48 and then some.
Just to do it? OK, I got that too and fully understand. Sometimes you just HAVE to go there. No problem with that either.
I just don't think that is the OP's original intent on asking the question and I think ArchAngel has answered it exceptionally well.
There isn't anything we NEED to get the deer hunting job done than to use the "Ruger Only" data.
Just my opinion. Personally, I think the 240gr bullet for the 44Mag and the 45-270-SAA for the 45Colt is more than enough for the things we will most likely encounter here in America.
Unless of course you are one of those kooks that is planning on the possibility of taking down a helicopter or something!
FWIW
Last edited:
Skip,
I don't know about you or anyone else here, but I have no desire to do any terrorist type activities. I certainly hope you were trying to imply that I may be like that.
The OP didn't specify what his use would be, so I believe that if someone asks for info, he is best served if he is armed with as much info as is possible. It may be something he isn't even aware of, or realizes is possible with his gun, thus my reason for the extra data/info.
I agree that most things down here in the lower 48 can be taken with a good hard cast in a Blackhawk type load.
However, I lived in Alaska for a while with my brother (who still does), and I can tell you from firsthand experience, that when you are standing fairly close to a decent sized brownie, nothing feels big enough in your hand! The .338 I had in my hands at the time didn't (though I'm quite certain it was).
If I have to face one with a handgun, or I go back up there for moose, I want as much penetration as I can get, and while those Blackhawk loads are good penetrators, I would prefer a much heavier bullet than can be launched from one of them at high enough velocity to reach 1100-1200 fps.
I can do just that in a 5.5" Redhawk, and the OP can with his 4" version if he ever wants, or needs to.
I don't know about you or anyone else here, but I have no desire to do any terrorist type activities. I certainly hope you were trying to imply that I may be like that.
The OP didn't specify what his use would be, so I believe that if someone asks for info, he is best served if he is armed with as much info as is possible. It may be something he isn't even aware of, or realizes is possible with his gun, thus my reason for the extra data/info.
I agree that most things down here in the lower 48 can be taken with a good hard cast in a Blackhawk type load.
However, I lived in Alaska for a while with my brother (who still does), and I can tell you from firsthand experience, that when you are standing fairly close to a decent sized brownie, nothing feels big enough in your hand! The .338 I had in my hands at the time didn't (though I'm quite certain it was).
If I have to face one with a handgun, or I go back up there for moose, I want as much penetration as I can get, and while those Blackhawk loads are good penetrators, I would prefer a much heavier bullet than can be launched from one of them at high enough velocity to reach 1100-1200 fps.
I can do just that in a 5.5" Redhawk, and the OP can with his 4" version if he ever wants, or needs to.
Skip Sackett
US Veteran
Tim,
No, I'm not trying to imply anything and I think you know that I can say just what I mean and mean just what I say!
Again, literary license, as in, cannon or bazooka or grenade as in............
No, I'm not trying to imply anything and I think you know that I can say just what I mean and mean just what I say!
Again, literary license, as in, cannon or bazooka or grenade as in............
Tim,
No, I'm not trying to imply anything and I think you know that I can say just what I mean and mean just what I say!
Again, literary license, as in, cannon or bazooka or grenade as in............
Well, I didn't think so, but want to be sure.
If you would send me your mailing addy, I would be happy to have Wolfe send a copy of #217 to you as a gift (or charma if you believe in that) for all that you do for everyone else here.
VAdoublegunner
Member
Those Redhawk only loads!
I have a 5.5" Ruger Redhawk and have on more than a few occasions loaded up and shot those 50Kpsi loads. The 300gr Hornady XTP was my preferred bullet in the gun, also with high end loads approaching 50Kpsi, but the 328 Lyman at 1500+ was...impressive. His reported velocities, as in all of his articles, are take it to the bank reliable. I used to hunt with them, but decided they weren't really necessary for anything east of the Miss once I started using 45-270-SAA bullets at more moderate velocities and found them just as effective. But the big loads are really attention getting whompers, that's for sure!! The RHs grip design seems to throw more energy into my hand than the BH/Vaq since I've learned to shoot a single action correctly to let it roll in the hand. If I was worried about big bears, I'd go back to the 300 jacketeds at that level, or even larger cast bullets.
I never really pushed my Contender that hard in 45 Colt. I think they are generally limited to the 32Kpsi range but dont recall ever seeing it published as to what they will take. But I have a 12" 45-70 barrel anyway; a Rem 300 JHP at 1700fps was plenty sufficient!
I have a 5.5" Ruger Redhawk and have on more than a few occasions loaded up and shot those 50Kpsi loads. The 300gr Hornady XTP was my preferred bullet in the gun, also with high end loads approaching 50Kpsi, but the 328 Lyman at 1500+ was...impressive. His reported velocities, as in all of his articles, are take it to the bank reliable. I used to hunt with them, but decided they weren't really necessary for anything east of the Miss once I started using 45-270-SAA bullets at more moderate velocities and found them just as effective. But the big loads are really attention getting whompers, that's for sure!! The RHs grip design seems to throw more energy into my hand than the BH/Vaq since I've learned to shoot a single action correctly to let it roll in the hand. If I was worried about big bears, I'd go back to the 300 jacketeds at that level, or even larger cast bullets.
I never really pushed my Contender that hard in 45 Colt. I think they are generally limited to the 32Kpsi range but dont recall ever seeing it published as to what they will take. But I have a 12" 45-70 barrel anyway; a Rem 300 JHP at 1700fps was plenty sufficient!
