Difference between 45 acp and 45 colt?

I have Berry's 200gr .452 plated flat point bullets that I've loaded in both 45ACP & 45 Colt that work perfect for range fodder. Also have 100gr .356 plated round nose that I load in 380 & 9mm for plinking. It's nice to have a multi-task bullet than can be used in different cartridges.
 
It is good thing to have one bullet that can be used in both. Am using a 200 lrnfp for both the 45 acp and 45 LC. Yes the 45LC's front sight needed filing down a tad. When using some 45 acp bullets in 45 LC, might benefit from checking the actual dia, especially jacketed. Have used a 45 acp sizing die to neck size 45 LC cases for undersize 230 fmj that were actually measured at about .450 (winchester)
 
Yes the 45LC's front sight needed filing down a tad.
Click to expand...

That right there would be a deal breaker for me.

I don't, and won't file the sights on any of my guns. One of the reasons I prefer adjustable sight guns.

Your gun, your business, but I've always held you should fit the ammo to the gun, not the other way around, and filing is just so...permanent...

No two people look through the sights exactly the same way. File the gun to fit your eyes for one load, it loses value to me. Fine if you never plan to sell the gun, but if you do??? Are you going to be telling them its been filed so to be sighted in for just your load??

IF I'm shooting 200gr in one of my .45 Colts, its for recreation, and I just learn the needed amount of "hold off" to be on target. I won't touch the sights, because, its a given that someday I'm going to be shooting 250s, again, and I want the sights to be set for them.

Sure, its nice to be able to use the same bullet in both, but I haven't bothered doing that for about 30 some years. My ACPs get several different bullets, cast and jacketed, my .45 Colts get only one, a 250gr SWC (hard) over 10.0gr Unique. Not for everyone, but works well for me, including ringing the 200yd gong offhand. :D
 
They are Ruger Blackhawks with adjustable sights, and i still needed to trim the front site. Unlike S&W's, wasn't aware of any higher rear bladed sights for them. They still can be adjusted to shoot 250-300 grain loads at 25 yds easily. Have several 44 special fixed sight sa's, and the sights are adjusted for 200 grainers. If i need something heavier have 44 mags. Am preferring to have most all my pistols set to same POI, using same sight picture. This keeps from ad infinitum number of loads adjusted for differing pistols. Find an advantage to this. But to each their own.
 
Both the ACP and the Colt bullets have a .452" dia. The ACP round has to handle some serious engineering and, thusly has less forgiving parameters to hold. Bullet weight for both rounds are interchangeable between 180gr to 230gr. Because of the radical difference in case length, load data can be noticeable different for either round inspite of their similarities.
 
"Both guns served until the 1890s when the Army went to the .38 Colt. Both types of ammo, .45 long and short were in inventory. The S&Ws could only shoot the short round, the Colt could shoot both. This is probably the time when the .45 Colt came to be called "Long Colt"


Mmmmm.... no.

After S&W submitted its first 3,000 revolvers to the Army in 1875, they also (since the gun couldn't take the .45 Colt cartridge) submitted the rounds for it that would be used for testing.

These early rounds, produced by, I believe, the US Cartridge Company, had a rim that is larger than what we see on today's .45 S&W cartridges (S&W's big fear was that the tiny Colt rim wouldn't function in their ejector system), a rim that would not work in the Model 1873 Colt revolver.

The Army saw the potential of the .45 S&W round, which used a lighter bullet and powder charge, because they were receiving complaints about the recoil of the .45 Colt round.

So, Frankford Arsenal reworked the commercial .45 S&W round to reduce the rim diameter so that the cartridge would function in both revolvers. By 1877 the .45 Colt cartridge was out of production at Frankford (the only military small arms manufacturer at the time) and was being eliminated from military stores. My guess is that .45 Colt ammunition was completely out of military inventories by no later than 1880.

The guns that went to the Philippines were all Colt 1873. By the time of the Spanish American War all S&W Schofield models had been either parceled out to state guard units or sold to commercial retailers like Bannerman or Hartley, Schuyler, and Graham.
 
As originally designed by John Browning for submittal to military trials with his Model of 1905, the .45 Browning Automatic Cartridge had the same case dimensions as today, but it used a 200 grain bullet at about 920-950 feet per second.

After successful initial testing, the gun and cartridge were both redesigned to the form that we now know today as the Model of 1911 and the .45 ACP cartridge.
 
Has anybody ever found some well preserved .45 1905 and choreographed it? The claimed 900 fps seems like an awful lot for the old parallel ruler guns.
 
I don't doubt it.
But we are told not to shoot .38 Super in a .38 Auto. So a .45 Rimless Smokeless at the same pressure as .45 ACP would seem overloaded.
 
You do realize that .38 ACP is higher pressure than .45 ACP?

And .38 Super pressure is FAR higher than either?

The Model 1905 could handle the 1905 designed round just fine.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 
True, but the .45 has a lot larger head area to multiply the chamber pressure by, too.

Few people shoot the old guns any more, I do know of one 1905 slide broken by ACP ammo.

There was somebody making cross bars (slide lock on the original parts list) out of high strength steel for those who chose to use their 1900/02/03 .38s. I don't know if they are still available or if he made one for the 1905. It sounds a good idea even with period loads or less.
 
I do know of one 1905 slide broken by ACP ammo.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you do. Now here's the question, do you know if it was broken by ACP ammo, or if it broke with ACP ammo?

I doubt there's really any way to know, of course, but its always possible a single individual gun simply failed, where a different one under the same conditions might not have.

Now, if you get multiple examples, over time, failing due to the same conditions, then you've got a good basis for saying "don't do this, with that".

Kind of like the convered Webleys, being shot with full power ACP ammo. Every one of them hasn't failed, but enough of them have failed that we can say its a bad idea.
 
"True, but the .45 has a lot larger head area to multiply the chamber pressure by, too."


So, what's the multiplier?

3? 7? 4 pi lambda over theta to the infinity?

A larger diameter case head increases bolt thrust/speed. It doesn't multiply chamber pressure.

Counteracting that are the recoil spring and the mass of the slide.

Given that the gun was designed by John Browning (granted, he was a real slap who didn't know what he was doing about 99% of the time), he apparently felt the design was more than capable of handling the pressures generated by the 1905 version of the cartridge.



44 AMP has it correct when he says "Now here's the question, do you know if it was broken by ACP ammo, or if it broke with ACP ammo?"

But there's another possible factor... was the gun simply going to break no matter what because of a flaw in manufacturing or materials?

That happens. It even happens with the vaunted 1911. It can happen with all guns, no matter what their pedigree.

There's also no information about the ammo itself. Was it an overloaded or otherwise improperly loaded hand load? Was it a bad factory batch?

There's simply not enough information about the incident you cite to draw any useful conclusions.


The reason why the parallel rule lock system was abandoned in the 1911 is because the Army HATED it because, in part, there were a lot of small, fiddly parts that made it difficult and time consuming to disassemble/reassemble. The Army also wasn't fond of the T-square grip angle, which made it awkward to handle on horseback, and they weren't fond of the lack of safeties.
 
in part, there were a lot of small, fiddly parts that made it difficult and time consuming to disassemble/reassemble.
Click to expand...

And they weren't the only ones. My neighbor the gunsmith did a steady business in reassembling Browning shotguns that came in with the working parts in a cigar box.

I read somewhere on the internet that the early .38 Auto was at nearly the velocity of the 30 year later .38 Super but was toned down to what the guns would take.
 
Mike,

I think Jim just meant you multiply chamber pressure by the area of the head to get the pounds of force pushing the barrel mass and, via the locking lugs, the slide mass rearward. Thus, if you have a larger area head and a proportionally smaller peak pressure, you can wind up with the same number of pounds of force starting the slide back.

What is missing from that is the duration of that force; the impulse (force×time). Applied for a shorter duration, the force will accelerate the slide less. So what one actually wants to look at to see how slide much momentum and velocity result is the two impulses driving it: the one from accelerating the bullet while it is traveling down the barrel and the one from rocket effect when the propellant gases escape the barrel immediately after it is vacated by the bullet.
 
And Mike means that the gun was designed for the ammo so all is well.

Phil Sharpe cited the usual 200 at 900 in 1937 and said it stayed in production as a high velocity alternative for the 1911 up into the 1920s. The closest thing to that in his loading data is 6.6 gr DuPont No 5 for 905 fps, pressure not given. Hercules values of 5.2 gr Bullseye for 885 fps at 15000 crusher psi and a whopping 8.1 gr Unique for 960 fps at 15000. Current data for 200 gr .45 ACP allows more Bullseye but a lot less Unique.
 
Practical Experience- I used to shoot a 1911 in league target shooting and .45 LC Ruger Blackhawk 5 1/2" (stainless with Vaquero grip frame) for deer hunting and fooling around at the range. I was using 185 g semi-wadcutters in the 1911. My dad gave me another .45 Blackhawk that had .45LC and .45acp cylinders.

The 1911 was set up for light target loads- the feed ramp was cut for semi-wadcutters and the recoil spring was lightened... I forget what it was, but I was not to shoot hardball with that gun as it would batter the slide.
Practically, the 1911 was tuned to either 185 or 220 grain semi wadcutters- as was my progressive loading press as I was using about a hundred rounds a week in practice. I liked the lighter bullets which gave up a fraction in accuracy (maybe?) and set the dot sight for them.

The .45 Blackhawk I usually used 255 grain Keith style semi-wadcutters or 240 grain XTPs.. after trying just about bullet under the sun, just for fun.

I sold the .45 Convertible Blackhawk. I liked the idea- I don't always want to be hammering away at full hunting power and I always had a coffee can of .45acp target ammo continuously on hand- but there were practical problems-
1. The point of aim between switching cylinders was so different as to be unacceptable to me.
2. My target .45acps were sprayed all over the paper compared to putting them in a competition 1911... light recoil and lost accuracy... what's the point?
3. Already having a pistol for target shooting and one for hunting, swapping cylinders and cranking on the rear sight screw seemed redundant.

Well, so I tried loading 185 grain .45acp semi-wadcutters in a .45 LC case with the same few grains of Bullseye powder as my .45acp recipe. Result:
Same unacceptable change in point of impact.
Nearly loss in accuracy (The Stainless gun had really good throats according to a very good gunsmith- apparently that can happen by chance and this one was a shooter but still not competition class)

So practically yes, you can use any .452 bullet in any barrel that takes .452 bullets.

In order to get my "light" loads, I dropped my load of 2400 to around 16.5 grains. which is very pleasant to shoot but with the 255 g keiths.

As was said above, changing the bullet weight seemed to move the point of impact much more than amount of powder.

My advice is to try it yourself because I really had a lot of fun at the range trying a whole bunch of different bullets and loads and seeing what happened.

Right now I am learning about the difference between essentially the same bullet but at various alloy harnesses. (in this case, .38 wadcutters... some swaged and some really nice cast and am surprised to find they are noticeably different!)
 
"Phil Sharpe cited the usual 200 at 900 in 1937 and said it stayed in production as a high velocity alternative for the 1911 up into the 1920s."

I know it was commercially available for some years, but I've never tried to figure out how long.

IAI has a lot of scanned ammunition catalogs on their site. https://cartridgecollectors.org/ammunition-catalogs

A wealth of information for the ability to trace commercial offerings in the US.

A few years ago I did some research on these catalogs over a discussion about commercial black powder loads for the .38 and .44 Specials. I was shocked to learn that both were available right up to World War II.


According to the catalog I just downloaded (1926), Peters was still offering the 200-gr. load at that time.

Unfortunately, the catalog doesn't provide velocity figures. That may be in a table in the back -- unfortunately what I downloaded appears to be half the catalog.
 
Maybe I just got a good one....

I bought a New Model Blackhawk .45 Colt/.45ACP 7.5" barrel in 1983. At the time, I had about zero experience with SA revolvers, and none at all with the .45 Colt. I had some handgun experience, having used my Dad's pistols in the early to mid 70s, before I went into the Army, but he didn't have any SA revolvers. He said he didn't like the grips.

I bought the Blackhawk because it had a .45ACP cylinder, and my thought was, since I already had a ,45 auto pistol, I could use the Ruger to plink with, and not have to chase my brass and play hide and seek in the sagebrush.

Turns out I was right about that, but I made one tiny mistake...
On my way home with the new gun (and, of course dies) it occurred to me that since the guns was "also" a .45 Colt, I ought to get at least some ammo for that, so I stopped at a hardware store (yes they had ammo, in those days, this was long before Walmart..:rolleyes:) and got a box.

Winchester 255gr, the standard factory ammo. (no cowboy stull back then, either). My small "mistake" was that I shot the gun with .45 Colt ammo FIRST!!

I fell in love!!! :D The heavens shook with thunder!! The barrel pointed to the sky, and it seemed the ground shook, though I know it actually didn't.

THIS was GREAT!!!! :D THIS was a REAL GUN!!!

By comparison, a little later, when I did shoot the ACP rounds, I was considerably "underwhelmed". What was a powerful load in my semi just went "pow" and barely seemed to recoil in the big Ruger. All in all, shooting ACP in that gun just seemed "meh".

I "solved" the "practical problems" of swapping cylinders and different points of aim simply by not bothering to use the ACP cylinder. In the next 30 years, I don't think I put 300 rnds of ACP in that gun. A few thousand .45 Colts though..

SO, ironically, the gun I bought with the intention of shooting ACP, taught me the .45 Colt, and more than that, what a Ruger Blackhawk could DO with the .45 Colt.

Never heard a word about Ruger's "bad" chamber throats when I got the gun. Best I can recall, I never heard about that until years later. I've never checked my gun's throats, don't see the point.

I've put 5 shots in one hole and one just barely out at short range (50ft) using 200gr ACP LSWC bullets over 8gr Unique, and the load I settled on as my standard, after a time of loading everything, including "Ruger Only" loads is a 250gr SWC over 10gr Unique. Does about 1100fps from my gun, groups well and hits what I aim at out to 200yds. Recoil is there, enough to let you know you're shooting something with some power, but not so bad that it beats you up. Or me, at any rate. ;)

Some years later, I bought a second one. That one had Hogue grips on it, and I wanted to try them. Figured with a second one, I'd make that one a .45ACP and just use it that way, so no switching cylinders, just change guns...

Sadly, I was unhappy with the Hogue grips, the size and shape were ok, but the hard plastic pebbled surface just didn't do it for me, compared to the Pachmayrs I have on my first Blackhawk.

Also the hollow hard plastic Hogue grip acted like a speaker box, there was a loud hollow sounding "ka Klunk" when you cocked the gun. Didn't care for that. That gun now has stock Ruger grips, the ACP cylinder, and I almost never use it.

My original Blackhawk .45 is about my favorite revolver, with my S&W M28 (6") a virtual tie, depending on what I want to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top