45 Colt/454 Casull Dies

[44 AMP]

the sharp turn of the brass into the crimp can apply enough force ..

I'd say possible, so can, not "will", and I think its something that would depend on the dies and brass involved.

I'm well aware of the results of "overcrimping" and the bulged (even buckled) brass that can result, but I wonder, if, specific to the matter of crimping the slightly smaller diameter .454 it will be enough to do that.

I'd guess it would be a trial and error thing with the brass and dies you have in order to find out. Like the needed amount of crimp. A setting that works with one load level might not be enough to hold at a higher recoil level, but the only way to know how much is enough is to shoot and see the results.

 

[Unclenick]

Yes. It will be a matter of trying. I would not expect a problem crimping into the conventional cannelure in a jacketed bullet. It's going to be more likely on a cast bullet with a deep crimp groove, like the Keith designs, where your bend is more pronounced and the mouth is being formed to a smaller diameter, backing the brass up a bit.

 

[RoyceP]

RoyceP,

You must have an old cylinder if the throats are sized for 0.454" bullets. Some of the modern ones made after the complete changeover to 0.451" wouldn't let you chamber those.


AL45,

Assuming the Casull cases average 0.002" thinner at the necks, when you apply a heavy crimp, the sharp turn of the brass into the crimp can apply enough force to that bending point that the brass below the crimp actually lifts away from the sides of the bullet, lessening the portion of bullet pull due to friction below the crimp. That could account for the effect you saw. The reason I mentioned the Redding Profile Crimp die earlier is that it has a funny hybrid crimp profile that starts out as a taper crimp but terminates in a roll crimp. This causes the taper to be pressing against the sides of the case when the roll crimp shoulder starts to turn inward, thus eliminating the tendency to have the brass pull away from the sides of the bullet below the crimp and ensuring your crimp is solid. The problem is, I don't know the diameter the taper ends at in the 45 Colt and 454 Casull versions or if there could still be a gap with a Casull case when the roll crimp starts. I doubt it, but it is possible, and I would call Redding and ask before buying one for either chambering. Probably not needed for the 45 Colt if you aren't hot-rodding it.

All of my revolvers were made prior to SAAMI changing the specs for 45 Colt bullets, chambers and rifling in the 1990's. If you consider that to be "old" then so be it. I accept it as reality.

 

[Unclenick]

Colt changed the rifling groove diameter to 0.451" well before that. Mike Venturino says he's seen a 1922 Colt factory specification sheet showing the smaller diameter. It suggests that when they started making 1911s for the government, they decided they didn't want to maintain gun drills and reamers and rifling cutters for both sizes. But revolver chamber throats took a lot longer to change. At first, they would just be avoiding obsoleting old ammunition. Later, maybe they were keeping old bullet molds alive. I don't know. I actually can't find any hard dates for the cylinder throats mentioned anywhere, so my comment may have been misplaced. I know Ruger doesn't undersize throats, but I don't really know when other makers may have given the practice up.

 

[44 AMP]

There are lots of stories, some verifiable, some not so much.

Gun lore that I've heard says the shift down from .454 to the smaller .451-.452" bore size in the SAA was done to enhance the accuracy when shooting .45acp bullets, and as the lead .45 Colt bullets "squeezed down" just fine, the slightly smaller bore size was not an issue. Also makes sense from an economic /tooling issue as well. Making one common bore diameter for all your .45 barrels does make sense.

IF that was the case, not changing the throat size right away also makes sense, as well. .45acp ball ammo doesn't upset much in the chamber throat, and in that era that was the common ACP bullet. After WWII, with the increase in handloading and use of lead bullets in .45acp, chamber throats were (I think) better matched to the ACP bore size. Of course, none of this happened overnight...it was a gradual change by the industry some makers stuck with the .454" size for quite a while, I think some might still. SAAMI didn't formalize the change until many, many years later. (as far as I know)

I've also heard that the SAA tooling was stored outside on a loading dock in the years after Colt ended production. After WWII Colt had, initially no plans to bring back the SAA, and besides the tooling was "very worn/worn out" already. And it wasn't until popularity of "westerns" rose post war and foreign copies of the Single Action, and then Ruger selling an SA revolver convinced Colt mgt. that it was worth it to resume SAA production.

or so the story goes.

 

[RoyceP]

Colt changed the rifling groove diameter to 0.451" well before that. Mike Venturino says he's seen a 1922 Colt factory specification sheet showing the smaller diameter. It suggests that when they started making 1911s for the government, they decided they didn't want to maintain gun drills and reamers and rifling cutters for both sizes. But revolver chamber throats took a lot longer to change. At first, they would just be avoiding obsoleting old ammunition. Later, maybe they were keeping old bullet molds alive. I don't know. I actually can't find any hard dates for the cylinder throats mentioned anywhere, so my comment may have been misplaced. I know Ruger doesn't undersize throats, but I don't really know when other makers may have given the practice up.

I own only two SAA's, one made in 1980 and one made in 1885 with neither being 45 Colt caliber. I have owned Ruger SAA's in 45 Colt and still own many S&W's in that caliber. Never measured a throat - I only shoot for accuracy. I selected what works the best. If I buy factory ammo it is only to get the brass. I have not bought factory 45 Colt ammo in at least 35 years.

I only know what I know because I started reloading around 1985 and at the time Sierra and Hornady offered 45 Colt components with bullets sized to .454". It was maybe 10 years later before I ever saw any bullets sized to smaller dimensions for 45 Colt caliber.

 

[Unclenick]

In general, if a lead revolver bullet is too loose in a chamber throat, it shoots poorly. An extra-tight bore does not have nearly as deleterious an effect on accuracy, though it will make it more important than usual to have a perfectly symmetrical forcing cone and for it's chambers to line up accurately with the bore. So we have a chicken and egg situation wherein oversized throats may cause mold makers and sizing die makers to favor those wide throats to try to get as much accuracy as they can from the wide-throat/narrow-bore arrangement, while the wide bullets make the manufacturers stick to wide throats. How to break the cycle?