Extention of the Accurate Range Of The .44-40 Cartridge

R

RFB

Inactive
TO: thefiringline.com/forums



SUBJECT: Extention of the Accurate Range Of The .44-40 Cartridge By Switching From The Handgun to the Rifle.

My Brother-In-Law and I were discussing (actually arguing about) the extended (accurate) range ostensibly obtained by switching from using a .44-40 Colt Single-Action Army Revolver to using a Winchester 1873 Rifle. It follows, then, that this question is really about the "interchangeability" of the .44-40 WCF ammunition that was used as a selling point for purchasing these two fine guns at the same time in the late 1800s. QUESTION: Can the accurate range really be usefully extended by dropping the Handgun and grabbing the Rifle ? If so, by how much ??

We both have read articles wherein the Handgun was getting around 800 fps and the Rifle was getting around 1100 fps using the .44-40 WCF cartridge with modern hand-loads. We have no idea what those figures would have been in the 19th Century.

So, with this data as a basis for a reply, what would be the effect of these muzzle-velocities on the efffective (accurate) range as between the two firearms ?
Can we believe that the differences in muzzle-velocities of 300 fps between the weapons would push the (accurate) range (distance) out by a factor of 4 X. Or could it be more ? Or less ? (We understand that this "practical" effect might have been extremely useful in certain hunting situations -- such as an escaping Bear).

Accurate Range Say, Maximum Range
Winchester 1873 Rifle 200 Yards 800 Yards

Colt Single-Action Army 50 Yards 200 Yards

Any clarity that could be given this matter through some opinions posted in the forum would be greatly appreciated.


RFB 538eb1d61704c9dd575982875be382c18a47ed73
 
Last edited:
I dont have answer

I don't have the answer either, but I am curious. I am curious if you gain much using 45 colt from single action pistol to lever action rifle. I would be interested to see what you gain from one to the other.
I would like to follow this thread, see if anyone has the answers.

Thanks

Jay
 
What you seem to be forgetting is that the .44-40 was originally a rifle (okay, carbine) cartridge. The Colt SAA was not originally chambered in .44-40 (or .44 WCF, as it was known back then). Colt didn't begin offering the revolvers in .44-40 until several years after the revolver was first sold.

The reason for carrying the same cartridge in both handgun and carbine wasn't to "extend" the range (since the carbine came first), but simply to make life easier by carrying a handgun chambered to use the same ammo your saddle carbine shot.
 
Years ago Winchester made a high velocity .44-40 round with a 217 grain bullet specifically for the model 1892 rifle. The muzzle velocity was around 1,800 fps. The label on the box warned against using that ammo in 1873 Winchesters or revolvers.

That high velocity Winchester round was about guaranteed to lift the top strap off a single action Colt and spring the action or destroy a model 1873 rifle.

Well, some folks don't read warnings on cartridge boxes: So the round went away. In the 50s i killed several deer using that high velocity Winchester round in my Winchester model 1892 rifle.
 
Have you checked the ballistic tables that most ammo manufacturers have on their web sites?
They will have trajectory and drop tables for handguns and rifles.
Just compare this round on both tables and you should have the answer.
 
I suspect that the original blackpowder loading achieved a muzzle velocity of a lot more than 800fps in the revolver. You can't get 40 grains of black powder in modern .44-40 cases (I can load only 34-35 grains), but back in the day, shooting a 7.5" Colt, I'd expect closer to 1000fps with a 200gr lead bullet. Of course, you'd get more velocity from the rifle as well, but maybe not as much more as you would with smokeless loads tailored for rifle use.
I've shot 200gr/850fps .45 ACP loads at targets 100+ yards away, and had to hold about a foot high to hit the center of a torso-sized target; with a black powder .44-40 revolver, you could certainly aim at Black Bart's head, and hit him in the belt buckle at well over 100 yards, iffin' your pistolero skills were up to it. Hitting that same target with a rifle, or carbine, would be relatively easy.
The army decided, circa 1941, that a pistol isn't of much use if you can't hit anything with it, and tried to replace the M1911A1 with the M1 Carbine, but a pistol on your hip is of a lot more use than the rifle that you put down somewhere!
 
One significant aspect, it's far easier to shoot a rifle well at distance compared to a pistol. That alone will give more effective range, despite whatever velocity difference there is. Thats not just a guess, I shoot at 18-24" plates at 300 yards and more with a pistol on a fairly regular basis. No matter how well I can do with an iron sighted pistol I can do better with a similar caliber carbine or rifle.

And yes, the original loads were more potent than the modern wimpy cowboy loads meant for shooting steel plate targets at close range.
 
In terms of pure mechanical accuracy I think the difference between the 44WCF pistol and the rifle is very small. I wouldn't be surprised to encounter individual 44WCF pistols which were more accurate than an individual rifle. In terms of practical use, if I stepped around a corner and had to make a shot at fifty yards at a deer who was about to bolt, I might pass with the pistol. With the rifle I would make a quick snap shot.

Past 150 yards a bullet from either the rifle or the pistol will drop like a rock, and more important than the difference in velocity, if you expect to make any hits at those ranges you're going to have to cold know the range within a very small increment and how fast your load drops from your gun.

I think the 44WCF is a great close range cartridge, but the American shooter largely abandoned it for the 1894 because of the difference in long range capabilities.
 
Years ago Winchester made a high velocity .44-40 round with a 217 grain bullet specifically for the model 1892 rifle. The muzzle velocity was around 1,800 fps. The label on the box warned against using that ammo in 1873 Winchesters or revolvers.

1873 was built with black powder the 1892 was built with the new smokeless powder that had just become popular.
 
...curious if you gain much using 45 colt from single action pistol to lever action rifle.
Click to expand...
Using a nominal 11gr/HS-6 (14,500psi) under a classic 255gr Keith:

5.5" Ruger BlackHawk: 940fps
20"Marlin : ~1,200fps

Which... (if I run QuickLoad's ballistics trajectory) means the rifle hangs unto the pistol's muzzle velocity out to 175 yds; and I'm point blank (±3") out to ~115yds
 
A major factor in accuracy, or at least consistency, in carbine vs. pistol is sight radius. The longer distance between sights means that for the same apparent visual error in the rear sight there is a larger difference in angle from the target for a shorter sight radius.
 
Mike Venturio (sorry if I have the spelling wrong) has written several books on guns and loads of that period if you want some well researched details.

Anyway, a difference of about 300 FPS is probably about right. Don't think of it as "only" 300 FPS, think of it as the same advantage as the 44 mag has over the 44 special. Add the rifles easier shootability and I would say it has a real advantage in range. Maybe not double the range if the revolver shooter is competent, but still a usable advantage.
 
the rifle will increase the range and the practical usage of the cartridge.

Its a given.

however accuracy will be different with each weapon, and with each loaded cartridge. jsp/fmj/lrn etc. and velocity.


Example, at the gunstore today found a box of brenneke hd reduced reciol 12 guage slugs. box said 1800 pounds muzzle energy, but only a practical range of 35 yards. But yet people are still able to take a 4-6 inch K frame loaded with 158 grain lrn and hit a target all day away at 100 yards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top