Remington Converson Blows Up

As stated earlier 44 c&b is .45cal.

In the old black powder days folks measured things all kinds of differently. Some of it is still labeled weird like how .38 special and such isn't .38cal its actually .357cal.
Click to expand...

In those days, the nominal caliber was the diameter of the bore before the rifling grooves were cut. A .44 inch bore with grooves .006 deep made the groove diameter .452.

So, whether it's a ".44" or a ".45" depends on what you are measuring.

If you measured land to land instead of groove to groove, a Colt .45 actually is a .44 caliber gun.

Why the .38 Special is really a .357 and the .44 Special is really a .429 is a long story that involves a change over from heeled bullets to inside the case bullets.

For what it's worth, MODERN revolvers have been blown up with reloading mistakes with results closely resembling that of the Remington in the link.
 
Last edited:
For what it's worth, MODERN revolvers have been blown up with reloading mistakes with results closely resembling that of the Remington in the link.
Click to expand...
I've seen photos of Ruger Blackhawks that blew up in exactly the same way. My guess is a double charge -- I don't buy the double bullet theory.

Previous explanations about diameter are correct. I used to have one of those .44 caliber 1858 Remington clones. The instructions with mine called for .454" lead balls. The bullet diameter for .45 Colt is .452". The conversions work Very well -- I've shot both the R&D type that was "featured" in this incident, as well as the competing Kirst conversion. It's just unfortunate that the conversion cylinders cost more than the guns.
 
different theory

I had a somewhat similar experience several years ago. I had a new .223 rifle that I wanted to work up a load for. I found a load for some powder and bullets that I had on hand and decided to start with the minimum load lised in the reloading manual. At the range a couple of days later the first shot produced a much louder report, muzzle blast and significantly more recoil than expected. I also had gas blowback thru the pressure relief hole. Extraction was difficult and the primer was set back and was pierced. After doing some research my conclusion was the volume of that powder charge did not fill the case enough so that when the cartridge was laying flat as in the chamber of the rifle the powder was laying in the bottom of the case. So when the primer went off the spark ignighted the entire charge instead of a progressive ignition of the charge. In the original post he stated it was a minimum charge.
 
The problem was, he was loading to .45 Colt specs, when clearly .45 Long Colt loads should have been used.

*Ba dum ching*
Click to expand...

WRONG! .45 Colt is the proper cartridge designation. There is no 'proper' designation of .45 Long Colt. It came into use when the Army went to the S&W Schofield revolvers. They could not chamber the .45 Colt cartridge because the cylinder was too short. They chambered a round that was about 2/3's the length of the .45 Colt. To simplify logistics, the Army started to issue only the the .45 S&W round for both the Colt and S&W revolvers. Because both rounds could be fired in the Colt revolvers, the REAL .45 Colt round was colloquially referred to as the 'Long' Colt.

*Ba dum ching*
 
Give it a rest.


.45 Colt and .45 Long Colt refer to the EXACT SAME CARTRIDGE. It's known, accepted, understood, and yes, even historical.

Do you get all bent out of shape when someone says 9mm Luger instead of 9mm Parabellum?

Or how about when someone has the temerity to say .30-30 instead of .30 Winchester Center Fire?

Many cartridges have multiple correct and/or accepted names, yet it seems that people only get bent out of shape over this one particular cartridge.

Next time someone talks about having a .38 Colt New Police chambered revolver, I expect to see all of the "NO SUCH THING AS A .45 LONG COLT!!!!!" crowd immediately castigate the transgressor with a severe history lesson in how it's correctly the .38 Smith & Wesson... :rolleyes:
 
Get off my back here! Andy Griffith was the one who stated .....

The problem was, he was loading to .45 Colt specs, when clearly .45 Long Colt loads should have been used.

*Ba dum ching*
Click to expand...

Obviously he is wrong and needs an explanation, no matter what you think. It would be irresponsible to let other folks read that statement and believe that was the cause of the incident.
 
Gentlemen, I was only trying to be funny. Sorry if everyone didn't know I was trying to lighten up the thread a bit. It was completely *tongue in cheek*
Please accept my humble apology.
 
Agula Blanca said:
I was once told that my sense of humor had been surgically removed.

The person who said that hasn't been heard from since ...
Click to expand...

My soon-to-be-ex wife has said that to me recently. I hope to have a similar result.

(Now THAT is sarcasm) :D


T6
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top