Ideal 45LC Cartridge Specs For Use In 1892

[David I.]

I'm hoping someone will be able to help me with some basic info for 45LC dimensions for use in a Winchester 1892 replica made by Chiappa. The case length listed for 45LC is 1.285" and OL is 1.6", but I'm not sure if that OL is only for RNFP bullets or not. I have been reloading 45LC for years for use in my Ruger Blackhawk.
I know 1892 rifles are ramp feed and can be somewhat touchy regarding bullet design and cartridge OL. I know they usually like the RNFP (round nose flat point) bullet design, but what I don't know is what OL (overall length) cartridge they normally like or if the OL is totally unique to each bullet design for any given caliber....I can't remember!?!?!
I can't remember and I don't want to hunt and search right now, but......Is cartridge OL that is listed for 45LC ( or actually any cartridge for that matter) , a MINIMUM or MAXIMUM length? Is there a general rule of thumb as far as what OL the 1892's generally like? Should I be sticking to 1.6" OL with RNFP bullets as a maximum or minimum OL? Is an OL of 1.6" only for RNFP bullets or what?
I do need to re-educate myself on some of these things by researching some loading manuals, etc. But for now I just thought I'd ask a couple things to hopefully get me going regarding the 1892 and a general question on "minimum and maximum" OL of cartridges.
The OL for loads in my Ruger Blackhawk revolver weren't that critical, besides the fact that the bullets I used were semi-wad cutters. I wasn't loading real heavy loads either, but if I am remembering correctly I'm sure I set my dies to seat the 200 grain semi-wad cutter bullet to the proper depth and OL for that bullet and powder load. I have a technical background and was and still am a stickler for dimensions and specs...I'm sure I did the right thing. The trouble is it was a long time ago and all the medical things I've been through recently took it's toll on my memory, mostly due to some of the drugs they had me on. Fortunately I'm still pretty sharp and it didn't affect my basic IQ, just my memory of certain things!!
I recently received my Chiappa 1892 but have not shot it yet. It is a beautiful gun with excellent fit and finish with really nice European walnut, they aren't cheap guns but I did get a good deal on it. The action is very smooth right out of the box. Since I have been dealing with some health issues I just haven't had time to attend to this gun yet much less buy some bullets and work up some loads. I started another thread a short time back in this sub-forum regarding Taylor's guns....I do need to make an update to that thread.
I thought it might be best to start a new thread regarding specs for 45LC cartridge to be used in an 1892 replica since this is a seperate issue.
I happen to have some 45LC 200gr semi-wad cutters that are only 1.525" OL that I use in my Ruger Blackhawk. I attempted to feed a couple into the 1892 without success....probably because they are semi-wad cutters but maybe also because they are so short, I don't know. I could purchase some store bought RNFP ammo, but pickings are slim around here and would also be very expensive but not out of the question to buy and try for the sake of knowing how my gun feeds them.
Any and all info would be appreciated, especially that which is first hand knowledge......thanks David.
 

[Graybeard]

It is neither minimum nor maximum it is rather the SAAMI spec length and was based on the original guns for it the Colt 1873 SAA. If you go much over 1.6" and get any bullet jump at all it will tie up the Colts and clones.

Ruger guns can generally accept longer OAL cartridges.

The M92 even those made my Chippa should be made to accept SAAMI length rounds. They likely will feed somewhat shorter and longer but not a lot longer. All the rounds I shot thru my Rossi 45 Colt lever guns were SAAMI spec and they fed nicely.

My 44 magnum Rossi M92 feeds SWC and Keith style bullets fine but is sensitive to cartridges much over SAAMI length. I tried to feed and shoot a Bruin brand factory load with an LBT 310 grain cast bullet and it was too long to feed from tube to barrel. I had a heck of a time getting it out and it had to go out the way it went in. Meaning back into the mag tube and then back out the loading gate. Not fun.

My experience with the Rossi M92s is they do fine with shorter than SAAMI rounds but just can't deal with much longer and bullet nose profile has nothing to do with OAL as it is measured base of case to nose of bullet on all bullets. That cartridge OAL is what is most important to proper feeding tho the RNFP does generally feed well as to LBT style bullets so long as the nose isn't too long as it is on some.

[David I.]

Thanks Graybeard for all the info, I appreciate it. Things are slowly coming back to me after all my medical ordeals. My memory was absolutely fine before all the stress and drugs I had to endure through my surgeries and procedures this past year. I know I do not have Alzheimers or Mad Cow.....at least not yet!!!! I have heard some nasty stories about some people just aren't the same after major surgeries possibly because of some slight oxygen starvation to the brain while on the heart/lung machine....I'm hoping and praying that is NOT the case with me. I'm really not that bad and as I say and I am getting better, which is a good sign. I honestly think it is from the stress and some of the drugs that are known to take a very long time to get out of a persons system after surgery. Enough about that, this is not the place.............soooooooo,
 
Maybe some others may chime in with their experiences also...hopefully actual experience with a Chiappa 1892 as far as feeding certain types of bullet designs with maybe even different OAL's. From what I hear, the Chiappa is basically a replica of a Winchester 1892 as far as the design and size of parts and that many parts are interchangeable. Therefore, it should feed ammo as well as Winchesters, theoretically....unless Chiappa did something wrong or didn't "fit" certain parts that great or God knows what. I know the 1892 design has been proven to work very well for tons of years...especially with RNFP bullets. I do realize the 1892 is a ramp feeding design and can be somewhat "touchy" to feed certain design bullets into the chamber due to a somewhat steep ramp angle, etc. But I do expect my Chiappa to feed RNFP's well.....the gun was NOT cheap even if I did get a good deal. If it prooves to not feed RNFP's well, the gun WILL go back for warranty service, time will tell.
Thanks again Graybeard for your input. If it matters, my beard is gray too and has been for quite some time!!
 
 

[David I.]

After doing some research, here is what I am finding out. I have found from various sources that the 1.6" OAL for 45LC is basically a Maximum spec for various reasons, ie: chamber length, feeding mechanisms, etc. That is why SAAMI  adopted that spec from original cartridge/chamber design specs. Companies like Alliant powder like to also specify their Minimum OAL for any given bullet weight and style for their loads. I find Alliants minimum OAL specs very helpful so as not to have to worry as much about excessive pressures from possibly seating a bullet too deep. This will also keep your loads close to their ballistic specs....I really like knowing "their" minimum and maximum OAL for their listed loads. I find it very helpful, especially for novices, others of you may not agree. Let it be known I am NOT attempting to start a debate....nor do I have time or even care to. I am merely stating my likes and preference's and why.
I'm still hoping to hear from someone regarding some actual experience with a Chiappa made 1892 and what load and bullet weight and style works best in their gun.

[David I.]

I managed to make up some dummy loads using the 200gr HP bullets I have. I seated them to the OAL specified for this bullet weight and design @ 1.555". They actually feed into the chamber pretty well, but I must use authority when I lever the action..,the common and proper way to operaste an 1892 anyway, especially a new one with probably some burrs and sharp edges.
 
I would prefer to be using RNFP hard cast bullets....I just have to decide what weight to purchase, 200gr or 250gr? I will mostly be using this gun for target shooting and fun, but I will sometimes be using it for hunting whitetails at ranges up to 100+ yards or so. For hunting the 250 gr hard cast RNFP bullet would be excellent, but..................
 
1) I do NOT want to be changing my seating/crimping die adjustments between two different bullets.
2) I will NOT buy a second seating/crimp die.
3) I would prefer to not load up some "hunting rounds" with a different bullet and then reset die to other bullet.
4) I DO want to be using RNFP bullets since they are supposed to feed the best. What I don't know is which will feed better the 200gr or 250gr? The 200 gr will have a shorter OAL than the 250gr which will be closer to 1.600". Which will feed into the chamber better?...I really don't know since I don't have any to try nor can I get any in very small trial quantities, like 5 or 10!!!! It is also possible that both the 200gr RNFP and 250 gr RNFP bullets will feed equally well....again I don't know.
 
I am still hoping someone will chime in regarding some of this. Personally I'm leaning towards getting some 250gr RNFP bullets that I will use for target and hunting....I can set my dies once and be done with it.The 250gr only cost slightly more than the 200gr bullets but the 250gr will kick slightly more, especially in my Ruger hangun. Oh well, I can't have everything without buying another die or readjusting the die I have.
 
It still would be nice to know which might chamber feed better... the shorter OAL or the longer OAL (max of 1.6") in an 1892 using RNFP bullets? Or should they both feed equally well?                                                                   
 
 
 
 

[Graybeard]

What kinda velocity are you looking to get?

Really the 250s in a Ruger at 1000 fps or so is quite mild in recoil. At standard CAS velocity levels it is even mild in Colt clones. CAS velocity is more like 700-750 fps generally in factory ammo.

I've used both Black Hills and Hornady factory CAS loads in Colt clones and it's not much different than shooting a rimfire really. Certainly no more recoil than a 38 special.

My target velocity for my 44 Special and 45 Colt loads is around 1000 fps give or take 50 fps or so. That's plenty for hunting use and at the same time is mild and pleasant for target shooting.

Both the 200 and the 250 RNFP should feed equally well in any lever action rifle. If from the same source the nose profile is likely the same with the extra 50 grains all being contained inside the case. Both 200 and 250s feed equally well from Marlin and Rossi lever rifles. No reason it should be any different for your Italian lever gun.

I would recommend you get the 250s and if you look around you can even find them made softer than hard and that would allow some expansion in game. Today commercial hard cast bullets are really too hard for most uses. A BHN of around 10/11 is all you'll need.

I'm using the Speer 250 swaged SWCs in my Ruger BH 45 Colt with no leading to notice and am pushing them around 1000 fps. They are a good bit softer than 10/11 BHN.

[David I.]

Thanks Graybeard for the info and opinions. My loads will be what I call "moderate", slightly +P loads but not real heavy. The same exact load will be used in both my guns. The velocities will be approx. 900-1000 fps for the Ruger Blackhawk and approx. 1100- 1300 fps for the 24" barrel rifle. I don't mind hard cast bullets for hunting when using a large caliber slow moving bullet. The 45LC is approx. 1/2" in diameter and will easily go right through a deer if placed properly and leave a very nice blood trail...no expansion is necessary with a 1/2" diameter bullet on deer.
 
I too am leaning towards the 250gr RNFP bullet as I stated, it would make my reloading world much simpler to just stick with one weight bullet and actually help me stay "accurate" for obvious reasons.
 
I would still like to know if a longer OAL closer to max of 1.6" tends to feed better or not than a shorter OAL in an 1892 with both bullets being RNFP no matter what weight they are.

[Cuts Crooked]

I would still like to know if a longer OAL closer to max of 1.6" tends to feed better or not than a shorter OAL in an 1892 with both bullets being RNFP no matter what weight they are.

David, I have a pair of Rossi 92 and they feed anything I toss in them......within reason. The real bottom line is that every gun is an individual, unique unto itself, and you are going to have try different loads to see what werks best fer yer gun. That's part of the fu n anyway! 

[Larry Gibson]

My .45 Colt M92 Rossi also feeds anything that is loaded at or under the SAAMI length already mentioned.  I shoot Lee 190 SWC (45 ACP bullet) the Lee 200 gr RNFP, the laser Cast 200 and 250 gr RNFPs, the 452490 SWC and the Keith 454490.  I shoot lots of cowboy action low end loads but mostly shoot the 190 - 200 gr bullets at 1150 fps over Bullseye to duplicat origianl 44-40 ballistics in this rifle.  The heavier SWCs are loaded over 8.5 gr Unique to pretty much equal standard .45 Colt loads.  None of my .45 Colt loads exceed that which is safe in both my Uberit SAA's.
 
My M73 Winchester by Uberti will not feed the SWCs reliably.
 
Larry Gibson