.45 Colt: HOT loads (Ruger SBH Hunters and Marlin)

[Pat Riot]

13 minutes ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

Maybe you can also post a screen shot of the 240 grain bullets.

 

Here ya go. By the way, I wasn’t posting to prove your loads. I was posting to show El Chapo that Hodgdon doesn’t start at 10% low.

 

[Widder, SASS #59054]

51 minutes ago, Pat Riot said:

Here ya go. By the way, I wasn’t posting to prove your loads. I was posting to show El Chapo that Hodgdon doesn’t start at 10% low.

 

 

My bad PR.   My previous post wasn't in response to you or any thing you said.   Sorri!

I'm trying to understand why others find it necessary to disparage my test,   The shooting results are what they are, plain and simple.

 

If someone don't like the manner in which I test or the results, it still doesn't change the facts of those results.

 

Thanks for posting the extra screen shot.    Have a good day.

 

..........Widder

 

 

Edited September 26, 2024 by Widder, SASS #59054

[El Chapo]

9 hours ago, Pat Riot said:

Here ya go. By the way, I wasn’t posting to prove your loads. I was posting to show El Chapo that Hodgdon doesn’t start at 10% low.

 

I never said they did, in fact, I said just the opposite.  H110 isn't loaded like a normal powder with a 10% reduction for a start load and a maximum load.  It has published loads in a narrow range based on very specific component selection.

 

Which is all the more reason why shortening a piece of brass meant to operate at 65,000 PSI and putting a 45 Colt load in it, even a Ruger Only one, is dangerous.

[Widder, SASS #59054]

1 hour ago, El Chapo said:

 

 

Which is all the more reason why shortening a piece of brass meant to operate at 65,000 PSI and putting a 45 Colt load in it, even a Ruger Only one, is dangerous.

 

Howdy El Chapo.

Your concern is a valid concern.   And, its is one I verified years back when I started using shortened Casull

brass in my .45 Colt hot loads.

 

Here is my data concerning the case capacities which many who are following this thread will be surprised.

 

I used a powder trickler to OVERFLOW each case, and then I skimmed off the top with a straight edge so that each case

was full to its maximum WITHOUT being a compressed powder charge.

Each charge was weighed using my Ohaus 1010 scale, which is a very accurate scale.

The brass was not weighed...... only the powder capacity.

 

For H-110 powder in the .45 Colt brass, full case capacity was 42.6 grains.

For H-110 powder in the shortened .454 Casull brass, full case capacity was 43.4 grains..... an advantage of .8 of a grain.

 

For Lilgun powder in the .45 Colt brass, full case capacity was 39.9 grains.

For Lilgun powder in the shortened .454 Casull brass, full case capacity was 41.0 grains.....an advantage of 1.1 grains.

 

EDIT:  All the brass was resized using the same Redding, carbide die.  This eliminated

any variances in the brass in resizing.

 

In reality, there is more capacity inside the shortened Casull brass than the .45 Colt brass.   So any excessive pressures that

might have been a concern from using the shortened Casull brass has been no concern for me.

 

In the past 50 years, I've done a lot of testing with my reloads, including powder capacity, bullet seating depth, crimp

security, flash hole uniformity and many other aspects of reloading.   Like I've stated before, I don't get into

Wildcat loading but rather try very hard to check out all aspects of my reloads, ESPECIALLY when working with

loads such as Hot .45 Colt fodder and my .460 Rowland reloads.

 

Thanks for bringing up the 'case capacity' topic, which has allowed me to post my information on the brass.

 

..........Widder

 

 

Edited September 27, 2024 by Widder, SASS #59054

[Widder, SASS #59054]

More info on the brass:

 

If you look down inside Starline .454 Casull brass, you will see the brass has a small

recess in the bottom, around the primer flash hole area.   This is probably why the Casull brass has more volume than

.45 Colt brass.

 

The numbers above indicate that LESS pressures are likely obtained using Casull brass than with .45 Colt brass when

using the same data for 'HOT .45 Colt' loads.

 

..........Widder

 

[Pat Riot]

8 hours ago, El Chapo said:

I never said they did, in fact, I said just the opposite.  H110 isn't loaded like a normal powder with a 10% reduction for a start load and a maximum load.  It has published loads in a narrow range based on very specific component selection.

 

 

Apologies. I apparently misread your post. 

[El Chapo]

9 hours ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

 

Howdy El Chapo.

Your concern is a valid concern.   And, its is one I verified years back when I started using shortened Casull

brass in my .45 Colt hot loads.

 

Here is my data concerning the case capacities which many who are following this thread will be surprised.

 

I used a powder trickler to OVERFLOW each case, and then I skimmed off the top with a straight edge so that each case

was full to its maximum WITHOUT being a compressed powder charge.

Each charge was weighed using my Ohaus 1010 scale, which is a very accurate scale.

The brass was not weighed...... only the powder capacity.

 

For H-110 powder in the .45 Colt brass, full case capacity was 42.6 grains.

For H-110 powder in the shortened .454 Casull brass, full case capacity was 43.4 grains..... an advantage of .8 of a grain.

 

For Lilgun powder in the .45 Colt brass, full case capacity was 39.9 grains.

For Lilgun powder in the shortened .454 Casull brass, full case capacity was 41.0 grains.....an advantage of 1.1 grains.

 

EDIT:  All the brass was resized using the same Redding, carbide die.  This eliminated

any variances in the brass in resizing.

 

In reality, there is more capacity inside the shortened Casull brass than the .45 Colt brass.   So any excessive pressures that

might have been a concern from using the shortened Casull brass has been no concern for me.

 

In the past 50 years, I've done a lot of testing with my reloads, including powder capacity, bullet seating depth, crimp

security, flash hole uniformity and many other aspects of reloading.   Like I've stated before, I don't get into

Wildcat loading but rather try very hard to check out all aspects of my reloads, ESPECIALLY when working with

loads such as Hot .45 Colt fodder and my .460 Rowland reloads.

 

Thanks for bringing up the 'case capacity' topic, which has allowed me to post my information on the brass.

 

..........Widder

 

 

 

I was actually going to try to shorten an old 454 case to check for you before you posted this.  a 2-3% difference in volume isn't a big deal.  Usually I use water to do the same type of test with a dropper.  I'm honestly surprised they're that close, but that's why it's good to measure, as sometimes the truth is a surprise.  I may very well do the same with my future "Ruger Only" loads as the small primer and brass designed for higher pressures gives a margin of safety.

 

I suppose if Elmer Keith was shooting these loads in old Colts we have little to worry about?  Sixguns is a good read.

[Widder, SASS #59054]

El Chapo,

if you can, let me know if the .454 brass you have also has the slightly recessed area around the flash hole.

 

I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing its designed that way because of the smaller primer pocket.

I once read that original .454 Casull brass used large pistol primers but Dick Casull decided that small

primers were better suited for the higher pressures generated by the .454

 

My guess is that my Hot .45 loads generate LESS pressures than my .44 Mag loads.

 

..........Widder

 

[Widder, SASS #59054]

Hey PatRiot,

when are you gonna load up some 'thunder boomers' and let us know what you think about em?

 

..........Widder

 

[IMSHA leg]

This is great as I too am looking to hot load a Dan Wesson 10" for imsha. Have you tried any of the Starline 45 LC brass?

Edited January 1 by IMSHA leg

[Widder, SASS #59054]

1 hour ago, IMSHA leg said:

This is great as I too am looking to hot load a Dan Wesson 10" for imsha. Have you tried any of the Starline 45 LC brass?

 

For my hot loads....... NO, I haven't loaded up nor tested any 'hot' stuff using .45 Colt brass.

 

All the load data I have tested used Starline .454 Casull brass with small primer pocket.

The reason I specify 'small primer pocket' is because I've read that some original Casull brass had large primer pockets.

 

..........Widder

 

[Boggus Deal #64218]

2 minutes ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

 

For my hot loads....... NO, I haven't loaded up nor tested any 'hot' stuff using .45 Colt brass.

 

All the load data I have tested used Starline .454 Casull brass with small primer pocket.

The reason I specify 'small primer pocket' is because I've read that some original Casull brass had large primer pockets.

 

..........Widder

 

They were and Freedom Arms sold itty bitty sleeves that went into the LP pockets to bush them down to small primer size. I have some here somewhere.

[Dantankerous]

Excellent topic here. Thank you Widder for starting it.

 

My small contribution...

 

I played with some 45 Colt "Ruger only" loads recently grabbing load data directly from Lyman 51 and Hornady's latest manual. I used 250 and 300 grain XTPs over charges of 2400. Shot these out of a 4 inch Redhawk and a 5.5 inch Bisley Blackhawk. While I do not have chronograph data, I can say that these things are hot hot hot. The 250s actually had more felt punch in terms of recoil than the 300 grain loads did. Accuracy was very surprising out to fifteen yards. I don't use a rest or a sandbag, but shoot offhand with a two hand hold. If I don't flinch I can get quarter size groups at those distances. Touching off 20 grains of 2400 under a 250 grain XTP from a four inch barrel is fun. 😀

 

After expending my 45 Colt ammo I moved up to my 480 Ruger SRH and my BFR 500 JRH Bisley. Good Lord, but those things are absolute canons! Must exercise caution when touching these off.

[Eyesa Horg]

That's what I thought with my Ruger Super Redhawk 454. There is no doubt you pulled the trigger! Although it was much more controllable than a Freedom Arms SA! Fun, fun, but I finally sold it a few years ago.

[Pat Riot]

On 9/27/2024 at 8:04 PM, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

Hey PatRiot,

when are you gonna load up some 'thunder boomers' and let us know what you think about em?

 

..........Widder

 

I decided to skip that project. I think my days of heavy recoiling handguns is over. My right wrist where the thumb meets the wrist (Schaphoid process) has just a fraction of the cartilage it started out with. If I wish to continue shooting handguns and riding motorcycles I need to change my habits. 

[Widder, SASS #59054]

Dan,

I've thought about getting me a .480 Ruger SBH, but haven't committed yet.

Because I got so much stuff for .45 calibers, I'm leaning towards a .454 Ruger SBH Bisley.

 

I've also thought about a short barreled S&W 500 mag.   Expensive.

TN Williams has one and I've thought about a 'midnite requisition'  on it...... if you know what I mean.....

P.S.  Dont tell him.  He'll never miss it!

 

 

Decisions, decisions!  

 

..........Widder

 

[Dusty Boots]

Not to side track the topic, but do you feel the Mag Na Port 1) reduces recoil and to what extent 2) reduces muzzle flip and to what extent 3) the results justified the cost and probably depreciated value, I know this is very subjective. 

[Widder, SASS #59054]

1 minute ago, Dusty Boots said:

Not to side track the topic, but do you feel the Mag Na Port 1) reduces recoil and to what extent 2) reduces muzzle flip and to what extent 3) the results justified the cost and probably depreciated value, I know this is very subjective. 

 

I've had a couple firearms Mag-Na-Ported.  One was a Marlin 1895 in 45-70.  The barrel was cut to 18" and  they put 4 ports in it.

Very professional work.   It was a long, long time ago and cost didn't seem bad to me back then.

 

The other is one of my Ruger SBH 'Hunter' models in .45 Colt.   The barrel is cut to 5.5" and ported by Mag-Na-Port.

I dont remember the cost but I can perceive some reduction in recoil 'flip', but more so I can detect less 'smack' in my

hand from that recoil.     How much reduction,  I've never tried to monitor it.

My Hunters shoot those 'hot' loads listed in this thread and it seems the hotter the ammo, the greater the effect of the ported systems.

 

..........Widder

 

[Widder, SASS #59054]

3 hours ago, Dusty Boots said:

Not to side track the topic, but do you feel the Mag Na Port 1) reduces recoil and to what extent 2) reduces muzzle flip and to what extent 3) the results justified the cost and probably depreciated value, I know this is very subjective. 

 

On a side note concerning muzzle brakes (same as porting).

 

I own two .460 Rowlands.  These are sup'd up 1911's in the .45 ACP realm.  

.460 Rowlands use muzzle brakes to enhance their functioning AND..... to help reduce recoil and lesson the 'smack' in your hand

when firing them.

 

Anyhow, the company strongly suggest NOT to fire these 1911's without the muzzle brake.

I thought I would remove one of mine and see just how much 'recoil' a 'brakeless' .460 Rowland generates.

To put it lightly, I could only fire 3 rounds without the brake.   It hurt.

With the brake, I can shoot dozens of hot rounds with no issues of painful recoil or intimidation.

 

Muzzle brakes and porting works.

 

..........Widder

 

[Three Foot Johnson]

I recently loaded up a few rounds with a 255 grain cast SWC and 26.0 grains of 5744 for an H&R rifle - Ruger/TC loads, not max, but pretty warm, but I didn't chrono them.  Also used it to dispose of some hot Ruger/TC W296 loads before I'm gone and somebody sticks 'em in a Uberti Cattleman or something. 

 

Most folks are familiar with the 32" H&R Buffalo Classic .45-70, and the 28" Target Classic .38-55, but they also made a third rifle in the Classic line called the Classic Carbine in .45 Colt with a 20" barrel. Introduced in 2007 and only available for a few months in 2008, I believe. 

[Muleshoe Bill SASS #67022]

cant find my hot 45 Colt load data....durn but it is dangerous in anything other than the TC Contender