zzzippper
Member
Will a 4506 with heavy springs hold up to 45 Super loads? Is only the recoil spring needed?
4506 45 Super?
- Thread starter zzzippper
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
I have been shooting 45 SUPER for decades, but never in a 4506.
In addition to the Springfield that was specifically made for the 45 SUPER I use HK USPs and Smith & Wesson model 625s. That does not include the long guns
I do not know if a 4506 is a candidate for conversion
In addition to a stiffer spring for the 4506, the barrel must have a fully supported chamber.
I do not own a 4506 to examine. Pull your barrel and check it first.
In addition to the Springfield that was specifically made for the 45 SUPER I use HK USPs and Smith & Wesson model 625s. That does not include the long guns
I do not know if a 4506 is a candidate for conversion
In addition to a stiffer spring for the 4506, the barrel must have a fully supported chamber.
I do not own a 4506 to examine. Pull your barrel and check it first.
BruceM
Member
Real Guns - A kimber in .45 Super for $8
This is for converting a 1911 but the same principles are involved. Springs should be available from Wolff.
The 4506 is built like a tank so that is a non-issue.
Bruce
This is for converting a 1911 but the same principles are involved. Springs should be available from Wolff.
The 4506 is built like a tank so that is a non-issue.
Bruce
Charlie Foxtrott
Member
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2009
- Messages
- 1,260
- Reaction score
- 2,112
I have been shooting my 4506-1-3.
Converted to .45 Super for a while now. It runs well, and quite accurately as well. No negative issues to date.
Converted to .45 Super for a while now. It runs well, and quite accurately as well. No negative issues to date.
45 Super in 4586
As far as I know all the 45 3rd Gens have fully supported chambers, unless someone has played with their dremel on it.
I shoot handloaded S-L 45 Super in my 4586 with no problems. I'm currently using a flat wire ISMI GLC-22 for the recoil spring & a Wolff 20# mainspring. Adding Wolff +5% extra power magazine springs is a plus too.
The article BruceM mentioned is what I source my load data from also, 11.3gr/Power Pistol with a 185gr JHP. I also use it in my Colt Govt Series 70, without issue. The 1911 requires a bit more to set it up for 45 Super.
I seat the bullet for maximum COAL", & still pass the plunk test, which is 1.220" for the 4586 but only 1.200" for the 1911 (because it has less leade/freebore).
.
4586, 4-1/4" bbl.
(-04a)
.
As far as I know all the 45 3rd Gens have fully supported chambers, unless someone has played with their dremel on it.
I shoot handloaded S-L 45 Super in my 4586 with no problems. I'm currently using a flat wire ISMI GLC-22 for the recoil spring & a Wolff 20# mainspring. Adding Wolff +5% extra power magazine springs is a plus too.
The article BruceM mentioned is what I source my load data from also, 11.3gr/Power Pistol with a 185gr JHP. I also use it in my Colt Govt Series 70, without issue. The 1911 requires a bit more to set it up for 45 Super.
I seat the bullet for maximum COAL", & still pass the plunk test, which is 1.220" for the 4586 but only 1.200" for the 1911 (because it has less leade/freebore).
.
4586, 4-1/4" bbl.
(-04a)
.
Last edited:
I have been shooting 45 SUPER for decades, but never in a 4506.
In addition to the Springfield that was specifically made for the 45 SUPER I use HK USPs and Smith & Wesson model 625s. That does not include the long guns
I do not know if a 4506 is a candidate for conversion
In addition to a stiffer spring for the 4506, the barrel must have a fully supported chamber.
I do not own a 4506 to examine. Pull your barrel and check it first.
I notice that you include the S&W 625 in your guns that can shoot the 45 Super.
Tritron back in the day had the 625 listed in their 45 Super info as capable of handling the 45 Super so I and a friend were both loading and shooting it in our revolvers. I contacted Sierra's online experts about which bullet they would recommend for whitetail hunting and was told that the 45 Super could ruin the pistol. I used that gun for pin shooting so I quit shooting the Supers in it.
My friend kept shooting them and all of a sudden his groups opened way up. If you look where the cylinder turning notch is, it sits right over the chamber making the wall paper thin. The 45 Super will cause a bulge to form there if loaded to max.
That is simply not true that the cylinder wall is "paper thin"
It is also not true that 45 SUPER will bulge a cylinder at the stop notch unless that cylinder left the factory with a metallurgical defect
Now, are you trying to tell us that your friends revolver had a bulge at the cylinder stop notch and that caused the revolver to be inaccurate?
Or are these two totally unrelated comments?
You are correct that the cylinder stop notch is the thinnest part of the cylinder. So what? What makes you think that the thinnest part of the cylinder is not 100% capable of safely containing the pressure of the cartridge?
You are forgetting that 45 SUPER brass has a significantly stronger web to the cartridge casing than 45ACP. The strongest part of the brass is sitting over the thinnest part of the cylinder. Or was your buddy loading 45 ACP brass to 45 SUPER levels?
The 625 V-comp that I use for pins has had upwards of 20,000 45 SUPERs put through it over the years I have owned it.
Many folks even shoot the MUCH higher pressure 460 Rowland in their 625s
45ACP runs at 21,000 PSI
45ACP+P runs at 23,000 PSI
45SUPER runs at 28,000 PSI
460 Rowland runs at 40,000 PSI
The 625 is plenty strong for a cartridge like the 45 SUPER.
Sierra's Ballistic staff does not make loading recommendations on cartridges that have not been submitted to SAAMI. Perhaps that is why you received that comment instead of information on the cartridge
Last edited:
I'm not here trying to start an argument, just relaying information.
I shot probably 3-400 rounds of the Super through my 625 before calling Sierra. I was not calling for loading info, I was asking if the bullet was suitable for the velocity I was loading to. I liked the gun so I quit.
My friend said he ruined his, I never saw it. I was doing this way before my internet days but I have seen conflicting reports about this through the years, I do not know the answer.
Al I know is my 625 still knocks down pins and I still shoot my V16 with Supers but I went to a heavier spring than Springfield recommends and hate putting it back together. Cheers.
I shot probably 3-400 rounds of the Super through my 625 before calling Sierra. I was not calling for loading info, I was asking if the bullet was suitable for the velocity I was loading to. I liked the gun so I quit.
My friend said he ruined his, I never saw it. I was doing this way before my internet days but I have seen conflicting reports about this through the years, I do not know the answer.
Al I know is my 625 still knocks down pins and I still shoot my V16 with Supers but I went to a heavier spring than Springfield recommends and hate putting it back together. Cheers.
The answer is yes it will quite easily...I am shooting 200 grain cast swc's at 1230 fps with no issues at all. I have a full sized 4506-1 and I replaced the stock 14 pound recoil spring with a Wolff 18 pound spring and replaced the stock firing pin spring for a Wolff extra power spring. Feeds perfectly from stock mags, doesn't throw brass 20 feet and maintained all its accuracy. I deer hunt with this gun. I found that I needed the stronger firing pin spring because I was seeing some firing pin drag on the primers with the stock spring.
Last edited:
MattyD380
Member
So, the 4506-1 is beefed up compared to the no-dash 4506 (which is more or less a 645, AFAIK).
Given that... is there any issue running 45 super in a no-dash 4506 or 645?
Given that... is there any issue running 45 super in a no-dash 4506 or 645?
Charlie Foxtrott
Member
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2009
- Messages
- 1,260
- Reaction score
- 2,112
I can not say just yet.
But as soon as I get my 645 set up for 45 Super, I should know something. As near as I can tell the 645 is every bit as beefy as the 4506s. I would be surprised if the 4506 no dash or the 645 guns had any problems with the 45 Super round. I think the biggest issue is just getting 45 Super brass.
But as soon as I get my 645 set up for 45 Super, I should know something. As near as I can tell the 645 is every bit as beefy as the 4506s. I would be surprised if the 4506 no dash or the 645 guns had any problems with the 45 Super round. I think the biggest issue is just getting 45 Super brass.
chuck perry
Member
Google Ace Custom. They were at the forefront of 45 Super development, and performed conversions on both 1911s and the 4506.
Not really. Should not be a problem in either if in good condition. Personally I wouldn't use less than a 20# recoil spring. The factory is 17#.
.
The old Ace Custom website hasn't worked in some time.
This archive link still works:
Ace Custom 45s, Inc.
.
As far as suitability for the .45 super is concerned that is NO difference between the 645, 4506 and the 4506-1. Any and all can handle it fine. The slide/barrel mass is the same..
If this is any help I copied this off the Wolff web catalog:
Recoil Springs
For Use in:
645, 745, 4506, 4526, 4546, .45ACP
Reduced Power : 8, 9, 10, 11 & 12 Lb. (Variable)
Factory Standard : 14 Lb.
Extra Power : 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 22 & 24 Lb.
Recoil Calibration Pak below includes 1 each of 15, 16, 17, 18 and 20 pound extra power recoil springs. 3 extra power firing pin springs are also included.
Recoil Springs
For Use in:
645, 745, 4506, 4526, 4546, .45ACP
Reduced Power : 8, 9, 10, 11 & 12 Lb. (Variable)
Factory Standard : 14 Lb.
Extra Power : 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 22 & 24 Lb.
Recoil Calibration Pak below includes 1 each of 15, 16, 17, 18 and 20 pound extra power recoil springs. 3 extra power firing pin springs are also included.
MattyD380
Member
Gotcha. I was thinking I might go on a hike this fall... considered toting my 645. Don't think I'd really need .45 super east of grizzly country, but it's good to know the capability is there... with the right spring.
The reason I asked about the 4506-1... my research suggests it's essentially a 1006, rechambered for the .45. The frame doesn't have relief cuts like the 4506/645. Also, you don't see the "rib" that runs along the top of the slide on the 4506/645 in the -1; which may suggest less metal was machined away in the -1 slide?
I don't have a 4506-1 to compare... so I can say for sure... but that's what I've gathered from reading posts looking at pics.
.
IIRC, the wadcutter spring that S&W offered for the 5" bbl. 45ACP (4506) was 14# & that's what Wolff calls the standard spring. This has been discussed before.
Wolff lists the standard power spring for the 4566 (4-1/4" bbl.) as 17#.
I've weighed the slide/barrel combo of each & the 5" bbl. is only .7 oz. heavier than the 4-1/4" bbl.
.
This whole 45 super thing is an interesting physics problem. You start with conservation of momentum and end up with a final speed of the slide as it hits the back of the stop on the frame. The way we have traditionally done it is just to increase the recoil spring force poundage until the gun stops throwing cases 20 feet and maybe that still works fine but all this can be calculated to predict the effect of different recoil spring weights on a cartridge that gives a specific momentum when fired. I will try to work on this today and come up with an spread sheet calculator to figure this out. I will take the simple approach that we have no energy losses due to friction etc so that we start with pure conservation of momentum.
You can also increase the mainspring's poundage to add more resistance to the slide's initial motion. This doesn't seem to be really necessary on the 3rd Gen's but is on the 1911 setup for 45 Super.
I upped my 1911's to 28# from the factory 23#. (My Colt 1911 Govt. Series 70 barrel/slide weigh 16.7oz while the 4506 slide weighs 18.7oz.)
.
Well I just got through doing a small "ton" of calculations to describe the physics of semi auto pistol slide velocities for the standard .45 acp vs the .45 super. I did this to help me understand the effect of replacing recoil springs on the gun. To do this I assumed a perfectly elastic conservation of energy within the gun, which is not totally realistic but close enough for comparison of spring rates. I developed an equation with muzzle energy on one side and on the other I had the energy absorbed by the recoil spring + the energy in the barrel + the energy in the slide. By solving some other subordinate equations I was able to determine slide energy at lock back. Interestingly the energy absorbed by a 17 lb recoil spring is described by Ks=1/2 K (x squared) where x is the compression of the spring at full slide travel and K is the spring constant in Newtons per Meter. With the 17 lb spring the total absorbed energy is less than 2 Joules where as the total recoil energy of a 900 fps bullet at 200 grain wt is 487 Joules. So it is easy to see that the effect of the weight of the recoil spring has very little to do with the lock back slide velocity at all. The biggest effect is the mass of the slide...The actual effect of putting a very high power recoil spring on a gun converted to .45 super is just to make the slide return to battery faster requiring a higher power mag spring and more battering at closing. The real effect of converting a .45 acp to .45 super is about double the slide stop energy regardless of recoil spring weight and if the gun can take it it can take it but wear and tear will increase. I shoot my .45 super only about 20 rounds per year for sight checks and hunting so I am not worried. I will be glad to share my spreadsheet for those who what to play around with it and I welcome anybody else to check my calculations. I am an Electrical Engineer so I am pretty rusty with dynamics...
In the interest of science there is a flaw in my approach as indicated above. I was not thinking clearly due to some Crown Royal and I based my initial equations on complete conservation of muzzle energy which is NOT correct even though all energy IS conserved it does not all go toward the recoil impulse. Only MOMENTUM is totally conserved in the recoil impulse therefore the recoil velocity of the slide will be much lower by starting with the velocity dictated by conservation of momentum...The result is not much different in that going from a 15 to 25 lb recoil spring has very little effect on the remaining slide energy as it strikes the stop. Please forgive my mistake. I have corrected my spreadsheet calculator.
In the interest of science there is a flaw in my approach as indicated above. I was not thinking clearly due to some Crown Royal and I based my initial equations on complete conservation of muzzle energy which is NOT correct even though all energy IS conserved it does not all go toward the recoil impulse. Only MOMENTUM is totally conserved in the recoil impulse therefore the recoil velocity of the slide will be much lower by starting with the velocity dictated by conservation of momentum...The result is not much different in that going from a 15 to 25 lb recoil spring has very little effect on the remaining slide energy as it strikes the stop. Please forgive my mistake. I have corrected my spreadsheet calculator.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
