Darker Loaf
New member
Does anybody have experience firing .45 Long Colt out of .460 S&W X-frame revolvers? How accurate are they with .45 Long Colt? I'm guessing .45 LC is less accurate out of a .460 S&W barrel.
Last edited:
.45 Long Colt out of .460 S&W X-frames?
- Thread starter Darker Loaf
- Start date
I have a BFR, not a Smith. But the 45 Colts out of mine are hit and miss (literally I guess). Some loads are fine, but the weird thing is, anything loaded with Unique powder sends the bullets tumbling. Can't hit anything at 20 yards with those.
Basically, I loose a lot of accuracy with 45 Colt and 454 Casull out of mine, so I don't bother with anything other than 460. I handload, so I can make wimpy loads if I don't want to shoot high power loads.
Your gun may act totally different than mine though.
Basically, I loose a lot of accuracy with 45 Colt and 454 Casull out of mine, so I don't bother with anything other than 460. I handload, so I can make wimpy loads if I don't want to shoot high power loads.
Your gun may act totally different than mine though.
buckhorn_cortez
New member
I have a S&W X-Frame .460 with the 5-inch barrel. The gun is just slightly less accurate with .45 Long Colt than it is with .460 ammunition. Certainly usable, and easy to shoot as the recoil is minimal out of the heavy X-Frame.
buck460XVR
New member
While my X-Frame shoots .45 Colt accurately, POI is much different than with legitimate .460 ammo. Since I reload, the little bit of difference in cost of the ammo is not worth the bother to adjust the sights, and I have given up shooting .45 Colt.
Darker Loaf
New member
Thanks for the feedback! I really appreciate it!
I'm sure a BFR is pretty similar to a S&W in terms of performance, or at least I appreciate the data point you provide.
Thanks for your feedback on a 5" S&W, too! If .45 LC works pretty well (like <4" at 25 yards), I'd consider getting one. I really want to get one and cut the cylinder for .45 ACP, so I can have a cheap plinker round, and I'm asking for feedback on .45 LC because they have similar fps. This is why I love TFL! How many gun shops would I have to loiter around to find just one person who owns a .460 and shoots .45 LC through it to get feedback?!?
Why .45 ACP not LC? Because .45 LC is too expensive almost as expensive as .460 S&W.
I'm sure a BFR is pretty similar to a S&W in terms of performance, or at least I appreciate the data point you provide.
Thanks for your feedback on a 5" S&W, too! If .45 LC works pretty well (like <4" at 25 yards), I'd consider getting one. I really want to get one and cut the cylinder for .45 ACP, so I can have a cheap plinker round, and I'm asking for feedback on .45 LC because they have similar fps. This is why I love TFL! How many gun shops would I have to loiter around to find just one person who owns a .460 and shoots .45 LC through it to get feedback?!?
Why .45 ACP not LC? Because .45 LC is too expensive almost as expensive as .460 S&W.
Darker Loaf
New member
buck460XVR, is the point of aim much different at 25 yards or less? I was hoping that it would be pretty similar, if only off by a couple of inches. I am not hoping for longer distances than 25 yards for just plinking.
If you are a reloader, I can definitely see why you don't shoot much .45 LC, given that brass is expensive already and the components are similar.
This is a silly thought, but I wonder if you could make up for the difference in speed/performance by using irons for .460 S&W (so you wouldn't have to re-zero) and putting a red-dot on a railed version for .45 ACP/LC plinking. Since .45 ACP is cheaper, it would be easier to rezero the red dot when you didn't want it on and you wouldn't wreck the zero on your irons for .460.
If you are a reloader, I can definitely see why you don't shoot much .45 LC, given that brass is expensive already and the components are similar.
This is a silly thought, but I wonder if you could make up for the difference in speed/performance by using irons for .460 S&W (so you wouldn't have to re-zero) and putting a red-dot on a railed version for .45 ACP/LC plinking. Since .45 ACP is cheaper, it would be easier to rezero the red dot when you didn't want it on and you wouldn't wreck the zero on your irons for .460.
My 460 shot jacketed bullets great but the accuracy was not as good with lead bullets. Same was true with shooting 45 Colt, not as accurate as the 460 jacketed. I got suspicious and checked the cylinder throats and they were undersized. After reaming the throats to spec, now it shoots 45 Colt and lead bullets much better but there was not measurable improvement with 460 jacketed. I would still give a little edge to the jacketed bullets but it is not much. Now it will routinely shoot under 2" groups at 25 yards with 45 Colt and occasionally closer to 1". Hope this helps.
Darker Loaf
New member
Nice! Thank you! It does.
I have the 12" XVR , and shot a few boxes of 45LC , accuracy seemed poor compared to shooting full hammer .460 loads. Keep in mind shooting 45LC out of the 460 you are jumping the bullet into the forcing cone over .500" , and ultimately accuracy will suffer. When I'm in the mood for milder "cowboy" loads I just load up 250gr hard cast SWC's and use about 12gr of WST powder using the correct 460 mag casings. Gets me to about 1200 fps almost NO recoil.
460
l would not do it. Those shorter cases leave carbon rings in the cylinder that are a real PAIN to remove. Accuracy is terrible too. They look more like patterns instead of groups at 25 yards.... For reduced loads in my 460 l use lead bullets and IMR Trail Boss powder.. Load info is on the IMR website for TB.. 1100fps is really mild and accurate too. More reduced loads can be found in Speer 12 and 14. These are in the 45Colt +P+ Buffalo Bore and 454 Cassul power range... l prefer these reduced loads because it allows me to shoot 45 Colt rated bullets from my 460...example.. 100 box of 225gr Flex Tip Hornady 45 Colt bullets cost about the same as a box of 50 200gr Flex Tip Hornadys made for 460 Mag velocities..They are both .452 '' dia... The 225gr is rated for 1800fps. 200gr for 2400 fps.. They both have cannalures too...l can shoot their fine 240 and 250gr XTPs too.. Sometimes you need lots of power.. 0ther times not
l would not do it. Those shorter cases leave carbon rings in the cylinder that are a real PAIN to remove. Accuracy is terrible too. They look more like patterns instead of groups at 25 yards.... For reduced loads in my 460 l use lead bullets and IMR Trail Boss powder.. Load info is on the IMR website for TB.. 1100fps is really mild and accurate too. More reduced loads can be found in Speer 12 and 14. These are in the 45Colt +P+ Buffalo Bore and 454 Cassul power range... l prefer these reduced loads because it allows me to shoot 45 Colt rated bullets from my 460...example.. 100 box of 225gr Flex Tip Hornady 45 Colt bullets cost about the same as a box of 50 200gr Flex Tip Hornadys made for 460 Mag velocities..They are both .452 '' dia... The 225gr is rated for 1800fps. 200gr for 2400 fps.. They both have cannalures too...l can shoot their fine 240 and 250gr XTPs too.. Sometimes you need lots of power.. 0ther times not
Darker Loaf
New member
I really appreciate the feedback guys! The only way to learn these things is to do them yourself, and it's so nice to be able to hear what you have to say, rather than to have to buy a gun first to know if it is a good idea or not.
For sure, I'd be worried/annoyed by carbon buildup. The question is whether it is worth it or not...
For sure, I'd be worried/annoyed by carbon buildup. The question is whether it is worth it or not...
Lost Sheep
New member
Correction, please.
Darker Loaf, you are truly wise to seek the counsel of others.
As for the original question, I solve both the problems of the "carbon'crud ring" and the "bullet jump through the freebore" by using only magnum brass in my magnum handguns (.357 Mag, 44 Mag and 454 Casull). When I want to shoot .38 Special, 44 Special and 45 Colt power levels, I just use a quick powder and light powder charge (slightly increased "Special" and "45 Colt" charge weights, to compensate for the volume increase).
saleen322's post is worth thinking through, too. Most likely, the .460 S&W is optimized for jacketed bullets (my assumption). Chamber throats and the forcing cone of the gun are then likely designed for jacketed. Revolvers expecting to be shooting lead bullets have those two dimensions (and the forcing cone angle) optimized for lead, not jacketed.
Good luck.
Lost Sheep
"The wise man learns from his mistakes. The TRULY wise man learns from the mistakes of others." This is a paraphrase, and a better expression of ( believe), Otto von Bismarck's, "'A fool learns from his mistakes, but a truly wise man learns from the mistakes of others".
Darker Loaf, you are truly wise to seek the counsel of others.
As for the original question, I solve both the problems of the "carbon'crud ring" and the "bullet jump through the freebore" by using only magnum brass in my magnum handguns (.357 Mag, 44 Mag and 454 Casull). When I want to shoot .38 Special, 44 Special and 45 Colt power levels, I just use a quick powder and light powder charge (slightly increased "Special" and "45 Colt" charge weights, to compensate for the volume increase).
saleen322's post is worth thinking through, too. Most likely, the .460 S&W is optimized for jacketed bullets (my assumption). Chamber throats and the forcing cone of the gun are then likely designed for jacketed. Revolvers expecting to be shooting lead bullets have those two dimensions (and the forcing cone angle) optimized for lead, not jacketed.
Good luck.
Lost Sheep
Darker Loaf
New member
(accidental duplicate post)
Last edited:
Darker Loaf
New member
RE Lost Sheep: Thanks! I try to listen as much as I can to those that have done things before me. So many people try to blindly lurch forward through life without asking anybody if what they are doing is a good idea. To me, that ignores all of human progress. If each of us had to relearn everything that humanity has already learned, on our own, we would never get anywhere as a species or individual.
If I bought a .460, it would likely push me into handloading, probably for the better, but my thoughts are that I'd likely shoot .45 ACP (jacketed) through it. I'd save the .45 ACP brass, though. It's very hard to throw away anything caught in a moonclip. I've got a good collection of 9mm brass growing already because of my 986.
It sounds like the accuracy with jacketed .45 LC is good enough that I could stand shooting .45 ACP through a .460.
I've had some experience with the carbon ring problem from shooting .38 SLP from a .357 Black Hawk. Are there any quick fixes? I could handle scrubbing my .460 out periodically (like once a month) in order to shoot actual .460 out of it. It's not like I'd use it for self-defense. I'd probably shoot .460 out of it more seriously if I was hunting with it or using it for bear protection, which would only be a couple times a year.
If I bought a .460, it would likely push me into handloading, probably for the better, but my thoughts are that I'd likely shoot .45 ACP (jacketed) through it. I'd save the .45 ACP brass, though. It's very hard to throw away anything caught in a moonclip. I've got a good collection of 9mm brass growing already because of my 986.
It sounds like the accuracy with jacketed .45 LC is good enough that I could stand shooting .45 ACP through a .460.
I've had some experience with the carbon ring problem from shooting .38 SLP from a .357 Black Hawk. Are there any quick fixes? I could handle scrubbing my .460 out periodically (like once a month) in order to shoot actual .460 out of it. It's not like I'd use it for self-defense. I'd probably shoot .460 out of it more seriously if I was hunting with it or using it for bear protection, which would only be a couple times a year.
buck460XVR
New member
I don't understand the thought process of buying a X-Frame revolver in order to shoot .45 ACP and .45 Colt. The X-Frame is very good a what it is designed for, shooting .460 mag loads at distances of more than 50 yards. If one is not going to do that regularly, there's little justification to owning a X-Frame other than bragging rights. One is better off with a smaller gun chambered in .45ACP or .45 Colt if that's is what they are wanting to shoot. The .460 is definitely a hand-loaders gun, not only because of ammo cost, but because it lends itself to having ammo tailored for it. I know S&W touts the fact that one can shoot .45 ACP(if cut for moon clips), .45 Colt and .454 outta their X-Frames as well as the mighty .460, but legitimately, the gun is really made for .460. My advice to those thinking they are going to buy a X-Frame and then just run cheaper and the lesser caliber ammo thru it, is to think again. If you cannot afford the price of .460 ammo or handle it's recoil, get something else.
Darker Loaf
New member
That's a fair argument, buck460XVR, and sound reasoning. This is going to seem counter-intuitive, but if I didn't own a .460 cut for moonclips, I wouldn't shoot .45 ACP either. I don't own a gun that can shoot .45 ACP.
So far, I've kept my collection to the big, cheap types only: .22 LR, 9mm, .223/5.56, 7.62x39, and 12 gauge. I've always wanted something bigger than 9mm, and buying a .460 would certainly satisfy it. I'm leaning towards revolvers because a magnum revolver would be able to shoot a cheap caliber if it was cut for moonclips, and still provide a fun experience for a range gun. One of my first guns was in 10mm and it was a huge disappointment (very finicky), but if that gun had been a revolver in 10mm, cycling wouldn't have been an issue and I would have been able to shoot .40 S&W out of it. So, that's the charm of a .460 for me is being able to shoot a variety of bullets out of it but I could still step it up to .460 if I wanted to go hunting or do some long range plinking.
But.... a .40 S&W only or a .45 ACP only revolver don't charm me the way a 10mm revolver or a .460/.454 revolver would. I will admit that S&W does make some really cool .45 ACP revolvers and did make a cool 10mm revolver. But, for me, if I bought a .45 ACP revolver, I might be tempted to buy an actual magnum revolver of some stripe eventually, so I might as well just buy a magnum revolver to begin with...
I just feel like .45 ACP or .40 S&W on it's own is not really compellingly different than 9mm. The argument for .40 S&W for me is that it is fairly cheap still and in the case of an ammunition shortage it is just uncommon enough to stay on the shelves. But to me, .40 & .45 are mostly just more expensive versions of 9mm.
But buck460XVR, I agree this is all probably fairly irrational. I should probably never depart from 9mm and .22 LR for pistols. It's more like I think the idea of a .45 ACP with magnum options is cool, and that coolness as you gentlemen have been pointing out, might not translate into actual real-world coolness. Is it any more rational to consider .454 as a revolver chambering instead of .460 for a gun build like this? Or should I just abandon the concept and concentrate on other builds?
Part of the reason I like the S&W .460 as a basis for a .45 ACP-cut revolver is that the trigger is better and they already come with porting. Yes... I know I have a porting sickness, but I'd likely end up porting a .454/.45 ACP Ruger SRH, so a S&W .460 would save me some gunsmithing, shipping, and waiting. Basically all I'd do to a .460 is send the cylinder in to TK Customs.
So far, I've kept my collection to the big, cheap types only: .22 LR, 9mm, .223/5.56, 7.62x39, and 12 gauge. I've always wanted something bigger than 9mm, and buying a .460 would certainly satisfy it. I'm leaning towards revolvers because a magnum revolver would be able to shoot a cheap caliber if it was cut for moonclips, and still provide a fun experience for a range gun. One of my first guns was in 10mm and it was a huge disappointment (very finicky), but if that gun had been a revolver in 10mm, cycling wouldn't have been an issue and I would have been able to shoot .40 S&W out of it. So, that's the charm of a .460 for me is being able to shoot a variety of bullets out of it but I could still step it up to .460 if I wanted to go hunting or do some long range plinking.
But.... a .40 S&W only or a .45 ACP only revolver don't charm me the way a 10mm revolver or a .460/.454 revolver would. I will admit that S&W does make some really cool .45 ACP revolvers and did make a cool 10mm revolver. But, for me, if I bought a .45 ACP revolver, I might be tempted to buy an actual magnum revolver of some stripe eventually, so I might as well just buy a magnum revolver to begin with...
I just feel like .45 ACP or .40 S&W on it's own is not really compellingly different than 9mm. The argument for .40 S&W for me is that it is fairly cheap still and in the case of an ammunition shortage it is just uncommon enough to stay on the shelves. But to me, .40 & .45 are mostly just more expensive versions of 9mm.
But buck460XVR, I agree this is all probably fairly irrational. I should probably never depart from 9mm and .22 LR for pistols. It's more like I think the idea of a .45 ACP with magnum options is cool, and that coolness as you gentlemen have been pointing out, might not translate into actual real-world coolness. Is it any more rational to consider .454 as a revolver chambering instead of .460 for a gun build like this? Or should I just abandon the concept and concentrate on other builds?
Part of the reason I like the S&W .460 as a basis for a .45 ACP-cut revolver is that the trigger is better and they already come with porting. Yes... I know I have a porting sickness, but I'd likely end up porting a .454/.45 ACP Ruger SRH, so a S&W .460 would save me some gunsmithing, shipping, and waiting. Basically all I'd do to a .460 is send the cylinder in to TK Customs.
Cosmodragoon
New member
The .460 is amazing. Being able to shoot .454 Casull, .45 Colt, .45 Schofield, and .45 ACP (if cut for clips) sure is cool. Like a lot of things in life, just because you can doesn't mean you should. The reasons why you might not want to have been covered. Of course, lots of people run specials through their .357 and .44 magnum revolvers. (Some guns even print the option!) Yeah, there may be a difference in relative scale but I don't like it there either. That's why I'm part of the market for guns specifically chambered in .38 special. 
Darker Loaf
New member
Thanks for the feedback! I'd pretty much only shoot .45 ACP under 25 yards, so that would limit the annoying POI difference.
45 from a 460 Smith Performance Center
I have sighted in my new 10.5 inch Smith and Wesson 460 Performance Center. Very nice and accurate. I have been reading the posts about using 45LC and the weapons accuracy shooting 454 and 45LC. I didn't read the forum before sighting in. So I began sighting in with my Leupold VX3 with 45LC just to get it on paper at 50 yards. I adjusted the scope and got a decent group in the center of the target. I then switched to Hornady 460 200gr and the first 3 grouped at the bottom of the target. I was using a large target. The 460 rounds were way low so I was puzzled why a slower round would group high and a much flatter round shoot low. Then I read this forum and saw others have this issue. So it appears if you want to shoot 45 you have to sight in for 45 and if you plan on shooting 460 you have to sight in for it specifically. I really didnt buy the gun for its ability to use several types of rounds so I am not mad at Smith & Wesson. I only plan to shoot 460 mag from it. I do wish this was mentioned in the manual since I did do a lot of work to make sure the scope was mounted correctly and used a lot of ammo. I am just posting this to save another owner some time. It is a great firearm. I also have a Super Redhawk in 454 so I can always plink with 45 in it.
I have sighted in my new 10.5 inch Smith and Wesson 460 Performance Center. Very nice and accurate. I have been reading the posts about using 45LC and the weapons accuracy shooting 454 and 45LC. I didn't read the forum before sighting in. So I began sighting in with my Leupold VX3 with 45LC just to get it on paper at 50 yards. I adjusted the scope and got a decent group in the center of the target. I then switched to Hornady 460 200gr and the first 3 grouped at the bottom of the target. I was using a large target. The 460 rounds were way low so I was puzzled why a slower round would group high and a much flatter round shoot low. Then I read this forum and saw others have this issue. So it appears if you want to shoot 45 you have to sight in for 45 and if you plan on shooting 460 you have to sight in for it specifically. I really didnt buy the gun for its ability to use several types of rounds so I am not mad at Smith & Wesson. I only plan to shoot 460 mag from it. I do wish this was mentioned in the manual since I did do a lot of work to make sure the scope was mounted correctly and used a lot of ammo. I am just posting this to save another owner some time. It is a great firearm. I also have a Super Redhawk in 454 so I can always plink with 45 in it.