[RGR]

There is a huge difference in brass base wall thickness between the 44 and the 45 Colt, and no, I do not mean the antique folded rim 45 colt, I mean even modern 45 Colt brass. Brass is a gasket, thats it, just like the head gasket on car, or think of it as a pressure valve, once the "valve" leaks, it matters not what the strength of the tank the valve is in.

Most modern rifles steel is in the low three digit range of holding PSI, but the BRASS starts to fail at around 75,OOO PSI. While a combination of factors apply, the brass has as much to do with it as the action strength.

but if a guy just sticks with the book loads, and every modern one I know of discusses the load limits in the modern lever guns like the 1894, one will have no issues, assuming they followed all the other common sense rules in handloading.

Like guys wanting to hot load the Smith 25-5 in 45 colt, hey first, the put the cylinder lock notches right over the chamber, while the 29 Smith in 44 mag are between the chambers, same with the Blackhawk and Super Blackhawk, a huge difference in cylinder design. If a guy wants to shoot 44 mag loads, they should get a 44 mag, or if they want a hot 45 bullet, get a 454 or what ever other variation.

but if guys want to swim in deep water, dont be surprised if its over the head. Same with hot loading guns. Dont blame the gun maker, if the gun comes apart when loading "off the reservation".:biggrin:

Like the last post hints, a good safe load even if at the high end, but still in the book range, will kill most anything a guy should be shooting with a handgun. Can never figure it out, a guy will shoot a big hairy dangerous critter with a 44 mag, just cause it say "mag" on the ammo box, yet they have kittens when some guy might walk up there with a 30 30, with down range energy etc, being real close to the same.

 

[eaglesnest]

There is a huge difference in brass base wall thickness between the 44 and the 45 Colt, and no, I do not mean the antique folded rim 45 colt, I mean even modern 45 Colt brass. Brass is a gasket, thats it, just like the head gasket on car, or think of it as a pressure valve, once the "valve" leaks, it matters not what the strength of the tank the valve is in.

Most modern rifles steel is in the low three digit range of holding PSI, but the BRASS starts to fail at around 75,OOO PSI. While a combination of factors apply, the brass has as much to do with it as the action strength.

but if a guy just sticks with the book loads, and every modern one I know of discusses the load limits in the modern lever guns like the 1894, one will have no issues, assuming they followed all the other common sense rules in handloading.

Like guys wanting to hot load the Smith 25-5 in 45 colt, hey first, the put the cylinder lock notches right over the chamber, while the 29 Smith in 44 mag are between the chambers, same with the Blackhawk and Super Blackhawk, a huge difference in cylinder design. If a guy wants to shoot 44 mag loads, they should get a 44 mag, or if they want a hot 45 bullet, get a 454 or what ever other variation.

but if guys want to swim in deep water, dont be surprised if its over the head. Same with hot loading guns. Dont blame the gun maker, if the gun comes apart when loading "off the reservation".:biggrin:

Like the last post hints, a good safe load even if at the high end, but still in the book range, will kill most anything a guy should be shooting with a handgun. Can never figure it out, a guy will shoot a big hairy dangerous critter with a 44 mag, just cause it say "mag" on the ammo box, yet they have kittens when some guy might walk up there with a 30 30, with down range energy etc, being real close to the same.

I have tried to measure the difference in case wall thickness between the 45 Colt and 44 magnum and found it is too difficult to measure the wall thickness at the base, and I will have to say without data that it is quite possible the 44 mag is thicker at the base. I have measured the case wall thickness down to about 3/4" from the neck and found them to be virtually the same, Hornady 45 Colt was .014, Remington 45 Colt was.011 and Federal 44 Mag was .012. As for sticking with published load data for the 45, there is such a wide disparity between loading manuals that it makes you wonder if these books are really written by lawyers. Lyman doesn't seem to offer anything that wouldn't be safe in a Colt SAA for instance stating what has been said for decades, that the cases are weak. 45 Colt seems to have similarities in this issue a lot like the 45/70, also dating to 1873, but because of the stronger modern rifles they seemed to have successfully changed with the times. On the 45 Colt side however, outfits like Buffalo Bore really push the envelope and seem to get by with it, perhaps they don't have lawyers, I don't know but it is difficult figuring out where the line of safety is. I suspect it is a little different for every set of variables there is. Any one or two of which gets out of whack wouldn't make that much difference, but the perfect storm could put it over the edge. I prefer to play it safe, but not necessarily Lyman safe. I do want to start loading some warmer loads for my 45 Colts, but have no desire to have a dangerous situation, or even to wear out the gun prematurely..

 

[Warhawk]

I haven't had a Marlin in .45 Colt yet, but I did have a Rossi 92 Trapper. I shot up some heavy "Ruger only" loads that I found after I had sold my Ruger Bisley. You can reach impressive power levels with .45 Colt loads in a carbine, especially the heavy 300+ grain loads. The recoil is also very impressive <G>/

John Taffin has some stout loads listed for the Marlin 1894 in .45 Colt at Make Mine A Marlin

And a few more in this article Marlin's 1894 Trappers

More good reading from Paco Kelly 45 Colt In Lever Action Rifles

 

[eaglesnest]

I haven't had a Marlin in .45 Colt yet, but I did have a Rossi 92 Trapper. I shot up some heavy "Ruger only" loads that I found after I had sold my Ruger Bisley. You can reach impressive power levels with .45 Colt loads in a carbine, especially the heavy 300+ grain loads. The recoil is also very impressive <G>/

John Taffin has some stout loads listed for the Marlin 1894 in .45 Colt at Make Mine A Marlin

And a few more in this article Marlin's 1894 Trappers

More good reading from Paco Kelly 45 Colt In Lever Action Rifles

Reading these articles about 45 Colt being loaded to 44 mag levels why has it been used in the Rossi 92 without the weak 45 Colt brass coming apart?

 

[Warhawk]

Reading these articles about 45 Colt being loaded to 44 mag levels why has it been used in the Rossi 92 without the weak 45 Colt brass coming apart?

I don't know where this "weak brass" myth got started.

 

[stevewhr]

I've been in the basement loading some .45's this afternoon. While handling the empty cases I noticed some weak cases have indeed come apart. I'd like to add that they did so after what has been at least 15-20 loadings. Some of the cases I'm still shooting are ones purchased when I first started playing with the .45's back in the mid 90's. They have seen loads rated to 30,000 CUP. I really don't know how many times I've actually reloaded them, but for the life of me. They don't seem weak to me. Not with the number of times I've loaded them. I'm a firm believer that John Linebaugh has researched and tested enough guns that the .45 is safe to 30,000 CUP in a Ruger Blackhawk. Note the the .44 is loaded to about 42,000CUP. Also it is my understanding that the early 454 research was with a .45 case and duplex loads that ran somewhere around 50,000CUP. Whether this is true or not, I'm not concerned with. What does concern me is safe loads. I can see no real world difference between a .44 case and a .45 case. The gun is what really needs to be considered. A Blackhawk is stronger than a Peacemaker and it's clones. It's my understanding that a model 92 is stronger than a 1894 Marlin. Why not load appropiately for the gun. My Blackhawks have digested thousands of pretty stiff loads. I deem them safe for that reason. My .45 load data was originally from John Linebaugh (designer of the .475 Linebaugh and custom gun maker). Today some of the manuals show similar recipes as John's. As stated previously, the case is little more than a convenient way of holding components together and then serves as a gasket. It puzzles me that we are discussing the strength of the case in the first place. If you reload and at least research what you're doing, the .45 is a tremendous cartridge. If you don't reload, it's probably best to stick with a .44 if you need that kind of power level.

 

[leverbros]

Reading these articles about 45 Colt being loaded to 44 mag levels why has it been used in the Rossi 92 without the weak 45 Colt brass coming apart?

Maybe because it is a '92 and has the parallel locking bars on either side of the bolt to make the action a bit stronger. The '94 has the big locking lug in the rear of the bolt but between there and the breech all there is is the single groove holding the bolt in place. That'd be my only take on the matter. Other than that I don't know. :dontknow:

 

[leverbros]

..... This being my personal opinion and worth exactly what you paid for it...Steve.

Good one! And funny too. :biggrin:

 

[Gohon]

I don't know where this "weak brass" myth got started.

It started many moons ago when the 45 Colt was loaded in the old balloon head cartridges. Modern 45 Colt cartridges are just as strong as any other cartridge.

As to comments by some that the 45 Colt can be loaded to the 44 magnum levels........what they are talking about is performance, not pressure levels. No one in their right mind would try to run the 45 Colt with 44 magnum pressure. However, when loaded at the top end of 30,000+ cup, the 45 Colt with it's larger case capacity, it's larger diameter and heavier bullet will equal and often exceed the performance of the 44 magnum in the field and on heavy game and do it with far less pressure.

 

[dpe.ahoy]

So you're saying that the Marlin 94 in .45 Colt should not be loaded hotter than a cartridge that a Ruger Blackhawk of the same caliber could take? I always figured the Marlin action was pretty tough but maybe it's not. I too would like to load some stiff rounds for my Marlin 94 .45 Colt but maybe I need to hold off until I learn some more about it. What does that say for the .44 mag cartridge in the same rifle? Aren't those factory rounds loaded much hotter than the .45 Colt (they both have the same action)?

I figure the Marlin action is pretty tough, it's loaded for the 44 mag, but the 45 is a bigger hole in the barrel where the threads are. Ruger/TC level loads are quite potent in a revolver and even more so out of a rifle barrel. With the right bullet you could take any game in the lower 48 using it. The 92 action is stronger, that doesn't mean the Marlin 94 is weak, just not as stout as the 92. If the 45 loaded to Ruger levels isn't enough for you, consider a Rossi M92 chambered for the 454 Casull. I'm getting old fast enough, I don't want to start losing parts of my face because I thought the rifle I was using was strong enough to hold pressure it was not designed to contain. DP

 

[dickydalton]

My 94 Winchester trapper (80s pre-safety) in 45 colt will let the cases bulge just in front of the rim, on the extractor side, when loaded too hot. I'd like to think the Marlin 94 supports the case better there but don't own one to find out. The only Marlin 44 mag I owned was a 336 trapper and I still kick myself for selling it.

 

[dpe.ahoy]

I believe it was Handloader Magazine had an artical on the strength of the 45 colt case. They had one cut in half along with a 44 mag case of the same brand, web thickness was equal. I know I have loaded 45 colt cases above Ruger levels for use in my 454 Casulls with out any issues what so ever. All brands of brass are not created equal, I find Remington 45 colt brass to be quicker to expand in a larger chamber than Starline or Federal. The 45 is my favorite revolver cartridge. DP

 

[RGR]

Unless the have changed the brass during the last 10 years or so, 45 Colt brass is THINNER than 44 mag brass. Aint no easy way to "measure" it, but I suggest splitting the case and see a visual comparison between the two.

Gohon, with respect I agree with part of your statement, but if 45 brass was as strong as 44 brass, as you contend, you could then load equal to the 35 K or what ever SAMMI is on the 44 mag in the guns that will handle it.

That the old school guys like Elmer Keith loaded 44 special loads to modern mag ballistics, simply proves one thing, they were racing full speed, with NO ROOM for error. No, the gun did not blow up "most of the time", but thats because Elmer was a cowboy, and we all know the good Lord looks after fools and cowboys, and teenagers.:biggrin:

As said, lots of factors apply, but thicker brass, properly milled and made into a case, is stronger than a thinner case of same outside dimensions.

I aint doing much tommorow, I will split a couple of cases, and show the photos here.

There is an old rule, written in stone for reloading, all things being equal, the more powder a guy burns, the greater the velocity. thus in correct powders the 45 case will hold more powder than a 44 M case, but it better be slow burning powder.

How do you think the modern Short mag cases are getting such hi velocity? Did ya ever look at their pressure levels in comparison to the old classics?

 

[ranger618]

Starline 45 colt brass is as strong as 44 mag brass.
However a with gun made in both 44 and 45,the 44 will be stronger because steel will be thinner on a 45.It's simple math,if the outside dimensions are the same drilling a bigger hole leaves less wall thickness.
I copied this from the starline website;
"45 Colt Brass (Large Pistol primer) 1.273"-1.283" O.A.L. 45 Colt Brass. Originally designed for use with blackpowder, the .45 Colt is one of the most powerful, commonly available handgun cartridges when loaded with smokeless powder. Our .45 Colt brass has been tested to .44 Magnum pressures in gun systems suitable for such loads."

 

[Gohon]

RGC, the 45 Colt brass has nothing to do with SAAMI specs but everything to do with all the old 45 Colt guns still in operation that will not take the higher pressure. This is the very reason the 357 magnum came into existence.....a little longer case to keep people from firing the hotter loads in 38 specials which would not take the higher pressure. Ditto for the 454 Casull to bring the 45 colt into the magnum world. Dick Casull could just as easily have call his cartridge the 45 magnum.

Cutting brass really doesn't mean much because no one is talking about pushing the 45 Colt to 44 magnum levels so it really doesn't prove much. Though I'm not a big fan of his Paco Kelly states the following.... "Please read carefully, there is pressure and there is pressure. Any small change in bullet weight, case thickness, case length, primer type, and many others can change the pressure very quickly...and if you are playing with top loads...take care!!! The next list of loads I feel are top even in the 1892s much less the 94s. I know as I said the 94s are rated for 40,000 CUP level loads...but I would be very careful approaching even 34 to 35,000 CUP....then if it absolutely safe move up. Older but strong leverguns belong in the 25,000+ CUP levels, the new strong Marlins and Win 94s are certainly strong enough for the 30,000 to 35,000 CUP levels. The new strong 92s can go to 50,000 CUP but I would not give them a steady diet of that." 45 Colt In Lever Action Rifles

Take a look at some of these loads John Linbaugh pushes from six guns.
Linebaugh's Custom Sixguns - The .45 Colt - Dissolving the Myth, Discovering the Legend A couple of them are at 31,000-32,000 cup. If the 45 Colt brass was as weak as some think, then I would suspect it should have shown up with these loads.

 

[stevewhr]

For no earthly reason I'm a devoted and loyal fan of the .45. Having said that I've no dog in this fight. Still I can't keep myself from asking if the brass strength was important, why not just use steel cases? In the end it confounds me to understand why this conversation is occurring. Some 15 years ago there was no "conventional" sources for current load data. Today there is no small number of sources listing loads heretofore unheard of. Loading manuals have the data, show or tell what guns they are safe in. What's being suggested by myself and others is nothing new really. So, in the end shoot what you will and enjoy yourself. The above link to John Linebaugh's article is a good source. The loads have been tested over time and in labs. If none of this convinces you, I understand that their are other cartridges out there. For the record, my current loading is rather sedate recipes of projectiles weighing around 300 grains running along at about 1,000-1,200fps. Old age and history make the real heavies uncomfortable to shoot anymore. Be safe. Steve.

 

[RGR]

RGC, the 45 Colt brass has nothing to do with SAAMI specs but everything to do with all the old 45 Colt guns still in operation that will not take the higher pressure. This is the very reason the 357 magnum came into existence.....a little longer case to keep people from firing the hotter loads in 38 specials which would not take the higher pressure. Ditto for the 454 Casull to bring the 45 colt into the magnum world. Dick Casull could just as easily have call his cartridge the 45 magnum.

Cutting brass really doesn't mean much because no one is talking about pushing the 45 Colt to 44 magnum levels so it really doesn't prove much. Though I'm not a big fan of his Paco Kelly states the following.... "Please read carefully, there is pressure and there is pressure. Any small change in bullet weight, case thickness, case length, primer type, and many others can change the pressure very quickly...and if you are playing with top loads...take care!!! The next list of loads I feel are top even in the 1892s much less the 94s. I know as I said the 94s are rated for 40,000 CUP level loads...but I would be very careful approaching even 34 to 35,000 CUP....then if it absolutely safe move up. Older but strong leverguns belong in the 25,000+ CUP levels, the new strong Marlins and Win 94s are certainly strong enough for the 30,000 to 35,000 CUP levels. The new strong 92s can go to 50,000 CUP but I would not give them a steady diet of that." 45 Colt In Lever Action Rifles

Take a look at some of these loads John Linbaugh pushes from six guns.
Linebaugh's Custom Sixguns - The .45 Colt - Dissolving the Myth, Discovering the Legend A couple of them are at 31,000-32,000 cup. If the 45 Colt brass was as weak as some think, then I would suspect it should have shown up with these loads.

Not all brass is equal, but here is visual proof of a visual difference between the two rounds. [image]http://www.marlinowners.com/forum/attachments/1894/20640-marlin-1894-45-colt-reloads-401_dsc00002.jpg[/image]

That brass case differences is well established in those wanting to hot load. I believe it was Dean Grennel in working with the 451 Detonics used mil spec 7.62 brass cut off for an improved 45ACP round. Same with the guys cutting off 5 56 brass to achieve an improved 9 based pistol load. They desired the thicker webs found on mil spec brass.

How much difference the 44 case on the right allows, I do not know, but it allows something. As you suggest, if guys dont push the 45 loads to extreme pressures, this thread is all por nada y no importa,
But they DO push them and are swimming in deep water when they do. As one mentor used to advise," if a guy has never had a pierced primer fail in his reloading, then he isnt learning much." there is some truth to that. If a guy wants to play with triplex loads, if a guy wants to cut back 454 brass to "hot load" 45 Colt, thats fine too.

All brass is not equal, I would rather have a good piece of 45 colt brass, than a soft piece of 44 mag brass I guess. And soft brass does come out of a factory box on occasion, and if so, and guys have their loads to the walls, then a locked bolt handle may be the result. I know most of us dont, but there is a reason they advise starting from scratch, when changing major components.

I would love to section a piece of Starline 45 Colt brass, (if its tested to higher pressure) I sure would not bet my left cojone, but would bet a beer that its thicker than the one I show. Same as with 454 Casull. Have never sectioned one, but always understood that its thicker, as well as longer.

 

[eaglesnest]

Not all brass is equal, but here is visual proof of a visual difference between the two rounds. [image]http://www.marlinowners.com/forum/attachments/1894/20640-marlin-1894-45-colt-reloads-401_dsc00002.jpg[/image]
View attachment 20640

That brass case differences is well established in those wanting to hot load. I believe it was Dean Grennel in working with the 451 Detonics used mil spec 7.62 brass cut off for an improved 45ACP round. Same with the guys cutting off 5 56 brass to achieve an improved 9 based pistol load. They desired the thicker webs found on mil spec brass.

How much difference the 44 case on the right allows, I do not know, but it allows something. As you suggest, if guys dont push the 45 loads to extreme pressures, this thread is all por nada y no importa,
But they DO push them and are swimming in deep water when they do. As one mentor used to advise," if a guy has never had a pierced primer fail in his reloading, then he isnt learning much." there is some truth to that. If a guy wants to play with triplex loads, if a guy wants to cut back 454 brass to "hot load" 45 Colt, thats fine too.

All brass is not equal, I would rather have a good piece of 45 colt brass, than a soft piece of 44 mag brass I guess. And soft brass does come out of a factory box on occasion, and if so, and guys have their loads to the walls, then a locked bolt handle may be the result. I know most of us dont, but there is a reason they advise starting from scratch, when changing major components.

I would love to section a piece of Starline 45 Colt brass, (if its tested to higher pressure) I sure would not bet my left cojone, but would bet a beer that its thicker than the one I show. Same as with 454 Casull. Have never sectioned one, but always understood that its thicker, as well as longer.

What was the brand of the 45 Colt case on the left?

 

[Gohon]

I think the correct statement is not all brass is equal among manufactures. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that a manufacture uses cost cutting measure of drawing their brass from the same brass plugs of closely related cartridges. 45 Colt, 45 ACP, 44 Magnum and even the 454 Casull would be good examples and I'm fairly certain Starline does this because I know for a fact their brass is thicker than most other manufactures. It only stands to reason then there would be a difference in thickness of the final product. It all boils down to the fact that it is not the brass that is the weak link but the gun itself.

I don't think anyone can challenge the fact that a 22 Hornet is a exceptional thin wall cartridge. The 22 Hornet brass is so thin that the brass is easily over worked during sizing to the point it becomes brittle with just a few reloads and a lot of people complain about the fewer reloads they get compared to other cartridges. Yet it has a SAAMI rating of 43,000 cup without cases rupturing and blowing gas in peoples faces. I'll say it again....it's not the brass that is the weak link but the gun. Just think about it.....38 Special, 38 Special plus, 357 magnum, and 357 maximum....same brass with just some longer than the other to keep people from loading the cartridges in the wrong gun that can't handle the pressure. The only reason manufactures stamp +P on 38 special cartridges is so people can identify what they are putting in their gun. Nothing different about the brass itself.

As a side note, I don't advise anyone to cut 454 Casull brass down for reloading the 45 Colt in an attempt to generate hotter loads. 454 Casull brass does have a thicker case head area because of the very high pressure the round generates. So if a case is cut down there is less space capacity which would result in much higher pressures if loaded with max 45 Colt loads.

 

[Sweetwater]

Having followed this thread from the beginning, several thoughts come to mind.

My 1894S Marlin 41mag would seperate case heads on loads that my Ruger Blackhawk regularly took down 200m rams with and was listed in the manuals.

The first cases were made of paper. The strength was in the receiver.

I don't believe the weak link is the gun or the case. It is the operator. We are supposed to be following proper handloading procedures. We are supposed to know when to say 'nuff! My guns have always without fail told me when they had enough, and usually I had reached my tolerance for noise and recoil before this point. 454 cases cut to 45colt length simply reach tolerable max pressures with less powder. At some point we have to be smarter than the books (which all disagree with each other).

Jeff
NRA Life