.45 vs. .44 question

[safetysheriff]

[
One can always fond some "expert" to back his side of any gun argument.  Writer and handgun expert Ross Seyfried has repeatedly stated the there is a notable difference in large game performance between the .44 and the .45.   Both he and Jones have taken a lot of large game too.  What does this all mean?   Simply that "experts" cannot always agree.  This happens all the time - take Global Warming as an example....

Lone Star'

yes, intuitively it would seem that a larger diameter would have to make a difference in how much reaction and how much tissue destruction a body would experience and exhibit. 

the only thing i can say is that sectional densities -- playing a part in penetration -- along with bullet construction and velocity might account for 'SOME' of this opinion by j.d. jones.    certainly ross seyfried is no slouch, being an expert in his own right.   jones and randy garrett, however, have put out some information that has so surprised me about the capabilities of the .44 mag' that i see it as a giant killer when properly loaded and aimed at the target.    i see the .45 LC as being Usually somewhat less so.    i admit, however, the .45 caliber in a hot rod like the .454 Casull obviously impresses me more than the .44 Mag'.

take care,

ss'   

[Graybeard]

I think it's more of matter of how dead can you really kill something. Dead is dead. With proper bullet placement of proper bullets both kill most anything that currently lives on this planet. You'll find more difference animal to animal in their reaction to the precise same placement of the same bullet than you will between the two rounds.

One shot from either in the heart/lung area means a dead critter. It might just fall down and die right there or make a short death run. My experience shooting most every thing handgun, rifle, bow and shotgun says more often than not they will run unless the CNS is hit. How far they run is a big variable and is never knowable. Which bullet it was (a .429" or a .452") is less of a factor in that than the mood of that critter at the time. Both are plenty adequate and it's as someone I think said more of a Ford vs. Chevy arguement than something that could be shown statistically as one superior to the other. It amazes me how much ink can be spilled over such or in the case of forums like this how many words can be typed in such discussions.

[Lloyd Smale]

Bill i agree totally with your statement with the exception of the chev vs ford comparison. everyone knows that a ford doesnt compare in quality to a chev in any way!! About like comparing a Freedom arms gun to an RG!!!!!!

[S.S.]

CHEVY over a FORD  ? we may need a new thread here !!!!!
Chevys are a pain in the butt to work on . My brother and I have
put new engines in two Chevy trucks in the last month... I would rather work on
a Ford "ANY" day. When they are working properly, Not much difference to me !
Kind of like a .44 MAG and a .45 COLT.. I have 2 .44's and a .45 and they are pretty much interchangable to me in hunting situations.. One will do pretty much what the other will..
I do however find the .44 slightly more accurate.... ever so Slightly that is.
In all honesty, I prefer my .357 to both in most hunting situations though.
Lighter to carry, just as accurate and sufficiently powerful. But still, there is just something about
a handgun that throws a "LARGE" chunk of lead !

[safetysheriff]

With proper bullet placement of proper bullets both kill most anything that currently lives on this planet. You'll find more difference animal to animal in their reaction to the precise same placement of the same bullet than you will between the two rounds.

One shot from either in the heart/lung area means a dead critter.    Which bullet it was (a .429" or a .452") is less of a factor in that than the mood of that critter at the time. Both are plenty adequate and it's as someone I think said more of a Ford vs. Chevy arguement than something that could be shown statistically as one superior to the other.

if i understand the part of the post that i saved above, i think there is agreement therein with the writing of j.d. jones re; handgun calibers from .44 through .50.    i've been surprised to see some animals go as far as they have carrying lead better than i'd ever expect them to.   but it happens the other way to.   

i think the "Ford vs. Chevy" is somewhat a relevant comparison.   certainly Ross Seyfried's picture with the cape buffalo.....i believe.....killed with a .45 LC shows what a .45 can do.   i believe that picture is on john linebaugh's website.    BUT....i'll stick to the .44 mag' for velocity, load density, and accuracy from all the shooting i've done with it in standard-issue Rugers.   the reading i've done about it, too, tells me that my opinion is valid.   

best regards,

ss'

[TommyD]

One advantage to the .45 single action Blackhawk (don't know if it is available in the Bisley) is the second cylinder in .45 acp that comes with the "convertible" models.

If you like just fun plinking at the low recoil end of the spectrum, there is a wide variety of loads available in .45 acp that may be just the ticket for those times that you don't want to hasten the development of premature arthritis in the small bones of your wrist.

The added versatility my be a lifesaver if you find yourself in the midst of a calamity (natural or man made) and need some more ammo, but the gun store that sells .45 colt isn't open. The acp may be much more widely available cartridge.

Tom

[Castaway]

Hate to say it because my vote goes with the 45 just because I like the idea of shooting a cartridge that's 134 years old, but you can do the same thing with a 44 mag using 44 Special loads and you don't need an extra cylinder.  In reality, the difference is like beauty, it's in the eye of the beholder, and a 255 grain RNFP sure is pretty.

[banen]

I agree with Graybeards point.  I guess it depends on application and I find it odd that no one has asked what the intended application is (at least I didn't see it).  On a whitetail?  Not a lick of perceptible difference.  On a big toothy bear??  Well then I would say neither, and that you would be better served with a 454 or bigger.  I am not criticizing, I have found the thread very interesting, and it is exactly the sort of thing I come to the forum for.  Lots of good points.  

[safetysheriff]

 On a big toothy bear??  Well then I would say neither, and that you would be better served with a 454 or bigger.  I am not criticizing, I have found the thread very interesting, and it is exactly the sort of thing I come to the forum for.  Lots of good points.  

i think it'd be more interesting, if that's the way to say it, to tackle a Kodiak with a .44 mag', but i'd prefer to use the .454 Casull myself, if it's properly loaded.    it's a bigger hammer.

ss' 

[Castaway]

If you feel in doubt about either, take a rifle.

[safetysheriff]

If you feel in doubt about either, take a rifle.

that may not be true.   with today's "weight-forward" design in bullets, leaving more room for propellant in the brass case, we have handguns that out-penetrate very strong rifles.   linebaugh, taffin, paco kelly, randy garrett and others have written about the amazing penetration that hardcast lead bullets -- from handguns --can achieve beyond even the .375 H&H magnum cartridge.   randy garrett states this on his "questions and answers" page of his site   www.garrettcartridges.com 

it's interesting to think that properly-alloyed lead bullets from a revolver can achieve such harvesting power.

ss' 

[EdK]

....i'll stick to the .44 mag' for velocity, load density, and accuracy from all the shooting i've done with it in standard-issue Rugers.   the reading i've done about it, too, tells me that my opinion is valid.   

I'd say you are right on the mark when comparing the two rounds in a standard-issue Ruger.

However, these two rounds can be loaded in such a way that velocity, load density and in the end accuracy are dead-even (not necessarily in a standard Ruger). At that point there is absolutely no difference in accuracy or effectiveness except that which can be directly attributed to the .45 representing a 10% larger hammer.

There exists no inherent advantage in accuracy, penetration, killing power, etc. of either one of these rounds over the other.(sparing the aforementioned 10% size difference). It is all in the loadings and the firearm serving as the platform. The same goes for the age-old .41 vs. .44 argument.

[safetysheriff]

However, these two rounds can be loaded in such a way that velocity, load density and in the end accuracy are dead-even (not necessarily in a standard Ruger). At that point there is absolutely no difference in accuracy or effectiveness except that which can be directly attributed to the .45 representing a 10% larger hammer.

There exists no inherent advantage in accuracy, penetration, killing power, etc. of either one of these rounds over the other.(sparing the aforementioned 10% size difference). It is all in the loadings and the firearm serving as the platform. The same goes for the age-old .41 vs. .44 argument.

FWIW:  i'd agree with that.    if one can afford the cost of a custom or semi-custom revolver then the .45 LC is a harder-hitting round from what i've seen.    but so many of us can't afford those revolvers.   

BTW: if one reads Paco Kelly's article out just a few years ago about "mega-magnums" and then purchases one of those heavy-cylinder Freedom Arms in .44 mag', or a Ruger RedHawk or SuperRedHawk 6-shooter that Paco loaded to 50,000 psi (more in the FA' as i remember) then he also can have a hotrodded .44 mag' that will move up into very serious competition with the .454 Casull with bullets up to approx' 320 to 330 grains.    Like John Linebaugh has written, the brass case is a 'gasket', if you will; and the firearm is the real machine. 

good shooting to you,

ss'   

[poncaguy]

After reading all this, I followed my heart...ordered a 5 1/2 " Blackhawk 45  Colt with the 45 AP Cyl.

[pathfinder]

After reading all this, I followed my heart...ordered a 5 1/2 " Blackhawk 45  Colt with the 45 AP Cyl.

If you are like me you'll start neglecting and trading off your other calibers.  45 Colt in a single action is as good as it gets IMHO

[Turk]

Does a whitetail know if it's hit with a 44 or a 45?  I think not.  Flip a coin.  Heads a 44,  tails a 45 I might add I have two 44 mag. and both 44's group better than the 45 but again the whitetail is dead either way.  But then I mostly use a 41 Mag. for whitetail.  Concerning the 454 C it's a real hammer but mine isn't fun to shoot and it says in the safe most of the time.

I might add one thing if I could only own one handgun it would be double action 44 Mag.


Turk

[SHOOTALL]

I have both in redhawks , had both in blackhawks , all are good guns in either case if you reload it won't make much difference , if ya want to buy over the counter the 44mag. might be best , Now blackhawks , if you load the 45 up to the higest listings in reloading books for ruger / tc.you will see the 5 frame screws loosen , I shot IMHSA and this is common my 44 got to where it got loose after about 20-30 rounds ( yes very hot rounds ) loc-tite didn't help either , the 44 has an all steel frame and trigger guard However the "blue " 45colt had an alum. trigger guard which didn't take the punishment as well . so if ya go with the 45,  stainless may be the way to go , i believe they are all steel ! for what its worth i shoot the 45 the most ! i hope to get a wild boar with it ! good luck !