Advantage of Bullet Diameter

[gjn]

I haven't shot enough game to come to a firm conclusion but it seems that the bullet diameter of the 45 is generally mentioned as a substantial advantage over the 44, all else being generally equal, whenever you read a comparison of the 44 Spl/Mag. and 45 Colt. That argument doesn't seemed to be raised with the same authority when disussing the 475 over the 45 or the 50 over the 475. I realize there are a number of other issues ie; velocity,bullet weigh,recoil,etc. But I'm wondering if there is a point where bullet diameter makes a big difference and then reaches a point of diminishing returns. My experience has been put a good cast bullet in the right spot and nothing goes very far whether its a 44 or a 50. Just wondering what others have found.

[whitworth]

Aug 13, 2012 15:34:33 GMT -5 gjn said:

I haven't shot enough game to come to a firm conclusion but it seems that the bullet diameter of the 45 is generally mentioned as a substantial advantage over the 44, all else being generally equal, whenever you read a comparison of the 44 Spl/Mag. and 45 Colt. That argument doesn't seemed to be raised with the same authority when disussing the 475 over the 45 or the 50 over the 475. I realize there are a number of other issues ie; velocity,bullet weigh,recoil,etc. But I'm wondering if there is a point where bullet diameter makes a big difference and then reaches a point of diminishing returns. My experience has been put a good cast bullet in the right spot and nothing goes very far whether its a 44 or a 50. Just wondering what others have found.

I am of the opinion that the step up from the .429 to the .45 is as significant a step from the various .45s to the .475 and up. Many will argue that I am splitting fine frog hairs, but I find the .45 Colt to be a bigger hammer on game. Obviously there is still no replacement for placement (poorly shot is poorly shot irrespective of caliber), but the .45s do make a larger hole, this is undeniable.

[bigbores]

To me Accuracy is the most important thing.
Next would be the bullet design.
then Caliber.
Last is power and speed.

I think one of the biggest reasons the 5 shot 45s, 475s, & 500s are thought of as having so much more killing power is the guns Accuracy and more importantly the people shooting these guns having great skill.

The typical hunter using a500Linebaugh will not only have shot 1000s of rounds threw large bore revolvers and picked his bullets out very carefully, he would also know his game and where to place his shoots.

All that said and things being equal bigger is better proportionality to the bore.
So the 500Linebaugh is 5% better than the 500JRH which isn't anything compared to bullet placement and bullet design.

Just my opinion which won't even get you a cup of coffee unless I'm buying.

[edk]

Interesting premise. Why?

As of late I've been sensitive to criticism toward the 45. Now there is justly some due it as of all the rounds 44 through 50 it suffers the most from a variety of challenges that must be overcome in standard factory firearms. Chambers are generally oversized. Years ago throats were too big. For the past decade or so Ruger has over-compensated and they are too small. All this has contributed to the reality that 45s can be hard to get to shoot like the 44s and of course the custom 475s/50s as well.

However what does this have to do with killing power? I suppose plenty if you can't hit what you're shooting at but most advanced shooters eventually overcome the accuracy issues. What I notice is many fans of customs seem to suggest the 475/50 is "it" and failing that one might as well skip the 45 and hunt with a 44!

Is it just me or have others noticed this thinking?

[Markbo]

Well I sure can't answer that ed. I can only add my experience. I was a .44 mag fan since I was a teenager. Only in the last 10 years or so have I come to love the .45 Colt. I have larger, but I don't hunt Bison or Elk or Grizz or go on Safari on a regular basis, so the .45 Colt - in an easily packable package I might add - is plenty of gun for anything I need to shoot.

That being said I have scoped .45s, .44s, .41s, .357s that will all work as well as the larger/faster/better calibers, and some others too. My point being I have come to love the .45 Colt and all it can do from Mice to Moose - literally. But there are far too many options to use only one.

Heck I carry my .32 H&R Birdshead in the field more than any other gun and have shot game with it. Maybe I'll move back to the "3"s is I ever grow too old and feeble for the 4s & 5s.

Naaaaaah... what am I sayin'! ;D

[subsonic]

The reason I purchased both my .475 and .500JRH BFRs was because of the accuracy.

Having fought my Accu-Sport Bisley for years and maybe finally mastered it while being almost bored by the easy accuracy of my .44's, I tend to agree with the above.

My next handgun will probably be a .454 BFR.

[mindustrial]

Really, .022" (5% diameter, or 11% more area) is going to make that much difference? I suppose some; substantial is a stretch.

That's like all the .41 fanatics that tell me how much better the .41 Rem Mag is over the .44- because it's such a flatter shooting cartridge.....I suppose there's a grain of truth there too.

[edk]

Aug 14, 2012 8:50:42 GMT -5 mindustrial said:

Really, .022" (5% diameter, or 11% more area) is going to make that much difference? I suppose some; substantial is a stretch.

I wouldn't say substantial but yes, some. going from the 45 to the 475 is also +11% area; Going from the 475 to the .500 is +11% as well. This is linear progression. There is nothing here to suggest any of these represents a step function upwards in performance over another - just a gradual, steady increase in power; no magic.

[Ken O'Neill]

A very damned little grain of truth, if ANY.

[whitworth]

I would like those who claim there is no difference to immediately box up all of your revolvers over the caliber of .44 Magnum (you can keep your .44 Specials) and ship them to me. I will PM you my shipping address, and will split shipping costs with you (I don't want to burden you too much).


Now then, if there is no difference between all of these fine calibers, why use expanding bullets if not to increase the bullet's diameter?

Am I opening a can of worms here?? ;D ;D

[45spades]

Of course there is no real difference in caliber. A bigger hole is just a bigger hole. A bigger hole just bleeds more and let more air in. I suppose I will junk my Big Bores and go back to my .22 LR for my future bear hunt.

Joking.

Honestly I don't want to hear theory. I want to hear real life experience. And if the guys with the experience say the bigger caliber it hits harder then I'm gonna go out and experiment myself and see. And I plan on getting a little experience this year. Nothing like the upcoming deer season..........with a limit of 6. Gonna get all the experience that I can! ;-)

[Lee Martin]

Folks that piss on the 41 Magnum often cite caliber and bullet weight when comparing it to the 44. Yet we're not allowed to make the same argument between the 44 and 45? I'll do the math again:

0.429 - 0.410 = 0.019
0.452 - 0.429 = 0.023

The 44 is directly between the two. And ya, maybe we are splitting hairs here but I'll take 45-cal and up any day. I guess it always comes down to this for me. If I were in big bear country I'd take a 500+ grain 500 Linebaugh @ 1,000 fps over a 320 @ 1,350 from a 44. Why you ask? Because in penetration tests the Linebaugh bores 10 plus inches over the 44 and does so with a bigger hole. And these aren't arm-chair ballistics, I've seen them firsthand.

As for control and shot placement, I find 500 Linebaughs at 1,000 fps to be easier on the wrist than full-throttle 44 Magnums. But maybe that's just me.

-Lee
www.singleactions.com
"Building carpal tunnel one round at a time"

[redlevel42]

Aug 14, 2012 9:48:27 GMT -5 45spades said:

Honestly I don't want to hear theory. I want to hear real life experience.

I started reloading because I couldn't afford to buy much .45 Colt ammo for my new Blackhawk 7.5" .45 Colt back in 1973. I bought the Speer #9 book, the first I remember having a section for "Ruger and Contender ONLY" in .45 Colt. I bought a few Hornady 250 grainHP bullets, but they were too expensive. I quickly settled on a 255 grain swc from Valiant Arms in Alabama, and 10 grains of Unique. You ask for experience. In my experience, within 50 yards, if you hit a 150 lb whitetail in the vital area, that bullet will hole that deer coming and going, breaking whatever bones it hits, and 9 times out of ten, that deer will fall down and bleed out within ten yards of where he/she stood.

I have never shot a deer with any other handgun load, except for a few finishing shots with a .357 mag. I don't take shots beyond 50 yards with a handgun.

[dlhredfoxx]

To chalk the field, first off I'm a 45 Colt nut... I mean more than half, more like 7/12 of my revolvers are 45 Colt Rugers (BH's and large frame Vaq's)... so I may be a bit partial. However, before I became a 45 Colt nut, I shot 44 mag exclusively on Texas feral hogs... and the 45 Colt don't kill 'em any deader or faster than a 44 mag, proper shot placement being equal. Almost always 2 holes with either 44 mag or 45 colt and not a lot of tracking involved with either round. Now, with that being said, the 300g + 44 mags were traveling 1,200 fps+, while the 300g+ 45 Colts were going 1,000 fps max... to me, it's about shot placement... I've lost a hog with a 338 Win mag with 250g Nosler AB's making a crappy shot... pieces of shattered pelvis, femur and lots of little meat chunks all over the creek bank... tracked him for two miles and lost him... to me it's about shot placement. Bullet weight and energy just help give a slightly larger margin for error... but not much.

[Sarge]

I only hunted with the 357 for a couple of years, (early 70's) but my brothers used them longer; so I saw deer shot with then-available JHP's and SWC's. Most of the time I wasn't on the trigger so I cannot attest to where the sights were when the trigger broke. What I saw did not impress me with anything but a resolve to shoot them between the ears, whenever possible.

I switched to the 44 with 240's and saw a marked improvement. I also started using a Ruger 45 Colt during the same time period. My impression is that the 45 Colt, even loaded moderately, is the full equal of the 44 on game to about 300 pounds. I have no doubt that the 45's ability to handle heavier bullets is an advantage on heavier game.

If I have learned one thing from all this it is the advantage in boring a big, straight hole through the critter and busting down its skeletal structures. Aside from switching to the single biggest factor, in my personal success rate, has been to limit myself to 50 yards or so.