A question about the 45 LC
- Thread starter circa81
- Start date
NoSecondBest
New member
What is your definition of "superior ballistics"?
Clifford L. Hughes
New member
Crica81:
The forty-five Colt will always out shine the .357. However, it recoils more, burns more powder and more lead.
Semper Fi.
Gunnery Sergeant
Clifford L. Hughes
USMC Retired
The forty-five Colt will always out shine the .357. However, it recoils more, burns more powder and more lead.
Semper Fi.
Gunnery Sergeant
Clifford L. Hughes
USMC Retired
Jim Watson
New member
Yes.
It is not the absolute caliber that matters, but the expansion ratio; volume of the barrel relative to volume of the chamber. Since .45 and .357 are straight cases of the same length, their expansion ratios are the same in the same length barrel.
Of course there are a lot of other factors, like powder charge and chamber pressure.
It is not the absolute caliber that matters, but the expansion ratio; volume of the barrel relative to volume of the chamber. Since .45 and .357 are straight cases of the same length, their expansion ratios are the same in the same length barrel.
Of course there are a lot of other factors, like powder charge and chamber pressure.
Its hard to give you a strict yes or no answer...because the burn characteristics on the powder used..are a factor / and the amout of twist in the barrel, maybe even type and weight of the bullet...can be factors ..
But I think in general...revolver barrel lengths of less than 4" or so ...will affect the performance of the round ...whether its a .357 mag or .45 Colt...it will be about the same effect - if you were to fire each of them in a gun with a 2 1/2" barrel.
Looking at the reloading tables...most of the loads recommended for .45 Colt reference a 7.5" barrel.../ and most of the tables for a .357 mag reference a 10" barrel ...( for velocity, pressure, etc..).....but a couple of the reloading manuals I have online ...don't say what length of barrel they used to test the loads for velocity, pressure, etc...
But I think if you're going to shoot either caliber in a 2 1/2" barrel - you should anticipate some reduction in ballistic performance. You will experience a lot more muzzle jump, recoil, etc as well ...making a 2 1/2" barrel in a lot of calibers way more difficult to shoot effectively beyond 30 feet or so - especially when you add any speed factor into it ( like a double tap in under 1 sec..)...
If my standard is double taps in 1 sec / or triple taps in under 1.5 sec ...:
Personally I find 2 1/2" barrels in .357 reasonably easy to shoot in heavy frames ...not so easy in light frames - but at 4" - they shoot just as well as
6" or 8 3/8" barrels for me....
In a .44 mag ...(they're almost all in heavy frames - and any .44 mag in a light frame, I find unpleasant to shoot ) but personally I find barrels of 3" or
4" even in heavy frames ( like an N frame S&W )fairly difficult to double and triple tap....a 6" is much easier ...and an 8 3/8" is very easy to shoot.
In .45 Colt ...with 260gr or 300gr bullets...I can handle them in a heavy framed gun in 4 3/4" ....( never tried anything shorter than 4 3/4" ) ...and in
6" or 7.5" they're fine as well.
But weight of the gun ...in .44 mag or .45 Colt are a big factor for me ....or the muzzle jump gets to be too much for me to control ( a little arthritis in my hands, and wrists - hasn't made it any easier ) even though I'm 6'5" and 280 lbs...a steady diet of full power 230gr .44 mag in a S&W 629 3" ..even if its ported...( one box of 50 rds is enough for one day ! ) - and I'll move on to a gun in 6" or 8 3/8" if I want to shoot more .44 mag that day. Conversly, I can shoot 10 boxes of full power .357 mag in a 4" N frame S&W ( like a model 27 ) with no pain in my hands.
But I think in general...revolver barrel lengths of less than 4" or so ...will affect the performance of the round ...whether its a .357 mag or .45 Colt...it will be about the same effect - if you were to fire each of them in a gun with a 2 1/2" barrel.
Looking at the reloading tables...most of the loads recommended for .45 Colt reference a 7.5" barrel.../ and most of the tables for a .357 mag reference a 10" barrel ...( for velocity, pressure, etc..).....but a couple of the reloading manuals I have online ...don't say what length of barrel they used to test the loads for velocity, pressure, etc...
But I think if you're going to shoot either caliber in a 2 1/2" barrel - you should anticipate some reduction in ballistic performance. You will experience a lot more muzzle jump, recoil, etc as well ...making a 2 1/2" barrel in a lot of calibers way more difficult to shoot effectively beyond 30 feet or so - especially when you add any speed factor into it ( like a double tap in under 1 sec..)...
If my standard is double taps in 1 sec / or triple taps in under 1.5 sec ...:
Personally I find 2 1/2" barrels in .357 reasonably easy to shoot in heavy frames ...not so easy in light frames - but at 4" - they shoot just as well as
6" or 8 3/8" barrels for me....
In a .44 mag ...(they're almost all in heavy frames - and any .44 mag in a light frame, I find unpleasant to shoot ) but personally I find barrels of 3" or
4" even in heavy frames ( like an N frame S&W )fairly difficult to double and triple tap....a 6" is much easier ...and an 8 3/8" is very easy to shoot.
In .45 Colt ...with 260gr or 300gr bullets...I can handle them in a heavy framed gun in 4 3/4" ....( never tried anything shorter than 4 3/4" ) ...and in
6" or 7.5" they're fine as well.
But weight of the gun ...in .44 mag or .45 Colt are a big factor for me ....or the muzzle jump gets to be too much for me to control ( a little arthritis in my hands, and wrists - hasn't made it any easier ) even though I'm 6'5" and 280 lbs...a steady diet of full power 230gr .44 mag in a S&W 629 3" ..even if its ported...( one box of 50 rds is enough for one day ! ) - and I'll move on to a gun in 6" or 8 3/8" if I want to shoot more .44 mag that day. Conversly, I can shoot 10 boxes of full power .357 mag in a 4" N frame S&W ( like a model 27 ) with no pain in my hands.
Shotgun693
New member
The question might be, 'Why does cutting the barrel back to less than 4" make any gun easier to carry?' Bulkiness in a revolver is found in the grip and cylinder. The barrel is the easiest part to conceal, adds balance to the gun and gives a little sight radius, these are good things and I can never understand the urge to chop a barrel. Of course I've only carried guns for 35+ years.
NoSecondBest
New member
I've been doing it for over 40 years and couldn't agree with you more.
Because for the life of me I can't get a 4" revolver to go in my pant pocket without the entire grip hanggiing out.
As to the OP heavier bullets are easier to accelerate as they put more resistance on the pressure. In my experiance you can only get bullets to go so fast in a 2" barrel. With "Ruger only loads" your only going to get a 200gr 45 Colt going 1250-1300fps however you can a 360gr bullet to go 1100. A 357 will act similar but with lighter bullets.
Flyboy_451
New member
While the number of loads tested is somewhat limited, check out the info here
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/calibers.html
It would appear that when comparing .357 and .45 Colt fired from 4 and 2 inch barrels, the .357 suffers a greater loss when comparing these two barrel lengths, with the loads tested. the .357 loses between about 27% and 40%, depending on the load. The .45 Colt loses between about 19% and 28%.
Something else to consider is bullet construction. Bullets are generally designed to perform well within a specific velocity range. Push it too fast and you get explosive expansion, but limited penetration. Drive it too slow, and it may fail to expand, although it may (or may not) deliver more penetration.
My personal preference would be for the .45 as it is a slower cartridge to begin with, and thus there is a better chance that the bullet will perform well due to less reduction from standard velocity. Even if the bullet does fail to expand, it is starting out larger in diameter than the .357, and generally is a heavier bullet, giving a good probability of adequate penetration when shot at reduced velocity. I am sure others will disagree. As a friend of mine is fond of saying, that's why they make Ford and Chevy.
JW
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/calibers.html
It would appear that when comparing .357 and .45 Colt fired from 4 and 2 inch barrels, the .357 suffers a greater loss when comparing these two barrel lengths, with the loads tested. the .357 loses between about 27% and 40%, depending on the load. The .45 Colt loses between about 19% and 28%.
Something else to consider is bullet construction. Bullets are generally designed to perform well within a specific velocity range. Push it too fast and you get explosive expansion, but limited penetration. Drive it too slow, and it may fail to expand, although it may (or may not) deliver more penetration.
My personal preference would be for the .45 as it is a slower cartridge to begin with, and thus there is a better chance that the bullet will perform well due to less reduction from standard velocity. Even if the bullet does fail to expand, it is starting out larger in diameter than the .357, and generally is a heavier bullet, giving a good probability of adequate penetration when shot at reduced velocity. I am sure others will disagree. As a friend of mine is fond of saying, that's why they make Ford and Chevy.
JW
Taking a technical look at it, I would have to say that the burn rate of the pwder and the pressure curve would be important.
A .357will use 296 or similar powder and the charge will not efficiently fire in shorter barrels.
The colt usually uses a more medium rate powder, and hence it will have released more of its energy within the first two inches, by comparison.
This is what I would expect to happen when comparing super powered magnum loads, and moderate power colt loads.
A .357will use 296 or similar powder and the charge will not efficiently fire in shorter barrels.
The colt usually uses a more medium rate powder, and hence it will have released more of its energy within the first two inches, by comparison.
This is what I would expect to happen when comparing super powered magnum loads, and moderate power colt loads.
With all the choices I have - the gun that sits in my night stand drawer is a 2 1/2" Taurus Titanium 5 shooter loaded with .45 Colt 225 gr LSWHP by Federal. Brits believed in big and slow for their military handguns - seemed to have work well all around the world for them. Back in the the 1930's the .476 Brit mil revolver round was one of the top "cow" killers when tested by the US ARMY (Gen. Julian Hatcher source) - beat the .45 ACP and the .455 "Manstopper" - not one of which being a barn burner.
Last edited:
Get longer pockets!
And yes, I'm serious.
Rather than to to a less efficient gun (shorter barrel) why not just modify the pocket you are carrying it in? (and I assume you are using a pocket holster, cause if you aren't, you should be).
Yes, it takes a little planning to conceal longer barrels, but as mentioned, the real bulk is in the frame and grips.
It mostly depends on what you're trying to accomplish and how you prefer to get there.
To get the most from the .357 you have to run it hard... big boom, big flash and big noise.
The .45 Colt is adequate at 850 fps when used with a SWC or JHP designed to expand at those velocities. Pretty mild recoil, moderate boom.
To get the most from the .357 you have to run it hard... big boom, big flash and big noise.
The .45 Colt is adequate at 850 fps when used with a SWC or JHP designed to expand at those velocities. Pretty mild recoil, moderate boom.
highpower3006
New member
This.
A .45 is just a bigger bullet and will punch a larger hole. The .357 needs velocity to achieve good terminal ballistics. Both can be very effective with the right loads.
Loaded with bullets at the heavier end of the spectrum (reguardless of caliber) you are only going to loose 50 to 75 fps at the most going from a 4" to a 2 or 2 1/2" barrel. Given variations in revolvers like cylinder gap I've personally witnessed a shorter barrel to out perform a longer one with the same ammo.
Drawing a 4" revolver from a pocket is going to be slower.
Given the magnatude of variables there's really no way to tell weather 50fps or .05 seconds of draw time is going to make any difference.
Carryguns are as always a compramise. Carry what you like and I'll do the same
.