45 LC barrel on SB1 frame

[a4beltfed2000]

Just double checking that I can put a 45LC barrel on the SB1 frame. I have one of the 410/45LC barrels and I know it can be used on the SB1 frame but wantd to make sure that I can dedicate a SB1 frame to the 45LC barrel and not damage anything.....

thanks guys!
kevin

[cwlongshot]

The factory wont do it, but if your only up to RUGER level loads you will likely be just fine. The magic number is stay under 40,000cup.

CW

[a4beltfed2000]

I had planned on shooting the same cowboy loads as used in a 1860 cylinder version, so I would assume they would be ok

[Lazermule]

The factory wont do it, but if your only up to RUGER level loads you will likely be just fine. The magic number is stay under 40,000cup.

CW

So should folks be concerned with a Maxie on the sb1 frame?  I see some book loads over 40K?

I would definitely not recommend reaming to a 454 / 460 with the 45 lc on the sb1 frame.


LM

[quickdtoo]

The 357Max has a smaller case head than the Colt, .379" vs .480". 

Tim

http://stevespages.com/page8d.htm

[cwlongshot]

The factory wont do it, but if your only up to RUGER level loads you will likely be just fine. The magic number is stay under 40,000cup.

CW

So should folks be concerned with a Maxie on the sb1 frame?  I see some book loads over 40K?

I would definitely not recommend reaming to a 454 / 460 with the 45 lc on the sb1 frame.


LM

The maxi is a 48,000cup cartridge.  So yes it does exceed this limit. Yes its a consideration in putting one on a SB1 receiver. But as Tim mentioned, case head size is a variable that allows a bit of leeway in favor of doing this.

CW

[Lazermule]

The factory wont do it, but if your only up to RUGER level loads you will likely be just fine. The magic number is stay under 40,000cup.

CW

So should folks be concerned with a Maxie on the sb1 frame?  I see some book loads over 40K?

I would definitely not recommend reaming to a 454 / 460 with the 45 lc on the sb1 frame.




LM

The maxi is a 48,000cup cartridge.  So yes it does exceed this limit. Yes its a consideration in putting one on a SB1 receiver. But as Tim mentioned, case head size is a variable that allows a bit of leeway in favor of doing this.

CW

So what is the magic number for pressure with the 357 max on the sb1 frame?

LM

[cwlongshot]

So what is the magic number for pressure with the 357 max on the sb1 frame?

LM

 As I have said, IMHO, 40,000 CUP is the magic number for the use of a SB1 receiver. With all the popularity of the maxi and re-chambering a 357mag. Not to mention the changes at H&R with the 44 and 357mags being on SB1 receivers. My maxi if a factory stock gun on a 158 receiver. Technically its a SB1 receiver. I haven't had a problem in my firing many, many hundreds of rounds.

CW

[quickdtoo]

The SAAMI MAP for the 44mag is 36kpsi, so the SB1 is good for at least that with a case head of ~.457" or H&R wouldn't offer them factory chambered on SB1 frames. The 357Maximum has a SAAMI MAP of 40kspi to keep this an apples and apples comparison. Standard 45 Colt loads have a max average pressure of 14kpsi with a case head of ~.480". I expect if it wasn't for the easy rechamber of  45Colt to Casull or 460S&W(max pressure 65kspi!), they'd offer the 45Colt on SB1 frames also.

Tim

http://stevespages.com/page8d.htm

http://www.ramshot.com/powders/loadpressure.php

[a4beltfed2000]

CW and Quick,

    You guys are KILLING me. All I wanted was to know if I could shoot my lil 45 long colt with cowboy loads on my poor SB1 frame I have some much techinical info posted now, I will have to reread the post 10X's. 

Im supposed to enjoy reading posts right

thanks guys for the info...... I think

[gendoc]

kevin,
most all 45lc pistol loads for cowboy action stuff, does not exceed 14,000 cup
you will be just fine using them with the sb1  

[a4beltfed2000]

thanks gendoc-I might be a engineer but somedays I just can't stand looking at numbers anymore

[Austinite]

Just to add one more thought to this thread.....

I was interested in knowing what the 45 LC +P loads were at pressure wise.  In looking at various websites, it looks like they range from 25k to 30k CUP.  This is still lower than the 36k CUP pressure level of the SAAMI 44 magnum, but the case head of the 45 LC is larger.  Does anyone know how overall pressures of the two compare (44 mag case diameter at 36k CUP vs larger 45 LC case at 30k CUP)?

cwlongshot, you state that the limit for the SB1 frame is 40k CUP.  I trust you are right, but would like to know your source.  Is this straight from H&R?  I'm wanting to shoot 45 LC +P in my SB1 frame, but want to make double darn sure that it's safe.  Thanks.

 

[mechanic]

I've always figured that if there is a doubt in your mind...don't do it.  After all, you are the one responsible for you.  I maxed my 357, and while technically it is ok on an SB1, I have SB2 frames to use it on, so why not?

It's always possible to make a mistake reloading, and If I were to make one, I would feel better with the stronger frame.....

In your case with factory loads, I personally would have no concerns...but again...you gotta' protect you.....

[Austinite]

I did some poking around and may have answered one of my questions (bach thrust of 44 mag vs. 45 colt +P).  Using a back thrust calculator, I came up with a back thrust of 5,426 pounds for the 45 Colt (using a case diameter of .480 and a pressure of 30,000 psi) and a thrust of 5,902 pounds for the 44 mag (case diameter of .457 and a pressure of 36,000 psi).  It would appear that the 45 Colt +P rounds have significantly less back thrust than full power SAAMI 44 mag loads.  

For those interested, Reeds 45 Colt +P ammo is rated at 21,000 psi (per an e-mail response).  Using the on-line formula I found, the Reeds ammo 45 Colt +P rounds have a back thrust of 3,798 pounds while the full power 44 mag rounds have a back thrust of 5,902 pounds.  The full power 44 magnum load has about 55% more back thrust than the Reeds 45+P LC. 

[petemi]

I keep it very simple....all centerfire rifles are on SB2 frames.  It doesn't cost a lot more, and it is the safe way to go.  For me, it's the only way to go.

Pete

[rsilvers]

45 LC is actually called 45 Colt. Just sayin'

[Gohon]

45 LC is actually called 45 Colt. Just sayin

That's a debate that will never have a ending.  Wikipedia has this to say......."The designation ".45 Long Colt" originated amongst military personnel to prevent confusion with the smaller .45 Schofield. It has become a popular alternative name for the cartridge, and adopted by Colt for use in designating the chambering in its own Single Action Army revolvers."   So it would appear that Colt even eventually adopted the name 45 Long Colt if Wikipedia is to be believed.   Paco Kelly swears he has a box of "45 Short Colt" manufactured in 1883, Not Schofield...but “45 Short Colt.......

[rsilvers]

Sure, I accept it is true that back in the 1800s or early 1900s some people started calling it the Long Colt to avoid confusion with 45 Schofield. But even if they did, that is still incorrect terminology - like calling a magazine a clip. And the 45 Schofield is not so common that anyone would think that today. There is no cartridge called 45 Long Colt - just look at the SAAMI list of cartridges:

http://www.saami.org/PubResources/CC_Drawings/C%20and%20C%20Dwgs%20-%20TOC%20-%20Pistol.pdf

While on this topic, cartridges don't begin with '.'.

So it is:

45 Colt

not

.45 Colt

[cwlongshot]

45 LC is actually called 45 Colt. Just sayin'

JMHO, This one has been beaten to death. I use both but prefer 45 LONG COLT. I have at least one loaded round, and have seen the pictures in a old Shooting Times article.

Elmer Keith alluded to the arguments many years ago when he wrote "Some newcomers to the game claim there is no such animal, but if they had shot the short variety that Remington turned out in such profusion before, during and after  World War I they would see there was some basis in referring to the .45 Colt as the .45 Long Colt." (Sixguns, page 285)

MUCH has been written on the subject. Call it what you will, we ALL know what we mean.

CW
 

[quickdtoo]

In reference to the topic of this thread, the barrel is part number 45LC, and the rifle is a model number CR-45LC, the ammo listed for the rifle is 45 Long Colt. 

Tim

http://www.hr1871.com/Firearms/Rifles/buffalo.asp

http://www.hr1871.com/Firearms/Rifles/buffalo.asp

[rsilvers]

 

While we are on terminology, "point blank" range does not mean super close.

[rsilvers]

In reference to the topic of this thread, the barrel is part number 45LC, and the rifle is a model number CR-45LC, the ammo listed for the rifle is 45 Long Colt.  

Yes, and even Colt keeps it going by also calling it LC.

By the way, I love the cartridge. I have 3 SSAs in 45 Colt (two 5 inch and 1 7.5 inch). I have a Freedom Arms model 83 in 454, which I like and it can shoot 45 Colt - and I have the matching 45 Colt cylinder which I suppose I did not need but they claimed one should use it. Also have a S&W 500 and I fractured my hand shooting it, and then did the same thing again a few years later. That was full power ammo.

If I could do my lever actions again I am glad I have 45-70 and 44 Mag but I probably did not need the 357 Trapper - though that can shoot cheap 38s but I have never done that. Don't own a 30-30 but maybe I should.

[Flynmoose]

I don't understand what the fuss is. Call them whatever you want, we still have some
freedom of speech, don't we? I use the term 45 Long Colt and have clips for a number
of firearms. Does that make me a bad person? I always thought Handiholics were
individuatists, not necessarily conforming to the "norm", doing things the way they
want to. Methinks that should include individual choice of terminology.
FM