230 grain XTP 1100 plus FPS on the next to 180 grain XTP 1300 FPS plus.



The reason I prefer the 45.

Me Too...

I think ether one placed properly would have kill what ever was shot with them.

Expansion can greatly reduce penetration.

Need more details, but the 50 extra grains of weight speak well.

And the trajectory of the two rounds would be?
Peter.

An important part of the equation is depth of penetration, what were those numbers? At handgun velocities, I will take the deep penetrator every time.

quote:

Originally posted by JCS271:
An important part of the equation is depth of penetration, what were those numbers? At handgun velocities, I will take the deep penetrator every time.

You and Elmer Keith.

But what did Elmer know?

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:
And the trajectory of the two rounds would be?
Peter.

For up-close work I would think trajectory is irrelevant. JMHO.

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:
And the trajectory of the two rounds would be?
Peter.

For up-close work I would think trajectory is irrelevant. JMHO.

Trajectory of a handgun round is never a concern to me. Drop is easy to deal with by shooting and determining the sight picture. Once known and remembered problem solved.

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
230 grain XTP 1100 plus FPS on the next to 180 grain XTP 1300 FPS plus.



The reason I prefer the 45.

You cant argue with that picture. IMO the 45 Super and 460 Rowland are at the top of the semi auto food chain. The 45 Super is nice because you don't need that damn compensator.

IMHO the 230 XTP is the best HP for the Super. Expansion is good as is the penetration for an expanding bullet.

My 44 AutoMag is at the top of the semi-auto food chain! 240xtp@1400fps+ equals serious trauma and plenty of penetration.

quote:

Originally posted by Woodrow S:
My 44 AutoMag is at the top of the semi-auto food chain! 240xtp@1400fps+ equals serious trauma and plenty of penetration.

Yeah, I forgot about the 44 automag and the Desert Eagle in 44 and 50AE. I was thinking more on the carry comfortably side. Less than 2 1/2 pounds 5" barrel in a 1911 or G20 Glock.

Doubledown: "...that damn compensator" allows me to get 1370 fps with a 230 grain fn lead bullet out of 5" 460 Rowland with no evidence of battering in the frame rail end or raised edge flanging, excessive wear and/or battering at the bearing edges of the locking lugs in the slide. An extra 200 fps over a 45 Super for the cost of a "damn compensator" is a good trade in my book.
Regarding the 10mm, Buffalo Bore actual chronographed velocity of their 220 gr load out of a 5" Delta Elite is 1200 fps. If shooting a 41 caliber bullet, I would much prefer a 250 grain hardcast WFNGC at 1260 fps from a 4" Taurus ti Tracker.

I really like my 460
That 230 hornady is a great bullet with it, muzzle device and all.
Very accurate, total ripper.
My 45 Colt likes it too.

45 may expand to 50 cal, but 50 cal sure ain't going to shrink.




The reason I prefer 50cal.

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:
And the trajectory of the two rounds would be?
Peter.

Using 6 inch PBR, scope mounted 1.5" high:
45 Super 230 gr XTP 1100 fps zero 94 yds, 3" high @ 53 yards, 110 yard PBR, 14.2" low at 150 yards
10mm Auto 180 gr XTP 1300 fps zero 105 yds, 3" high @ 60 yards, 123 yard PBR, 9" low at 150 yards

45 Win Mag and a 1911'ish Grizzly.
240gr and 27gr of H110.

All this nice but I prefer just to shoot them with what I have on my hip at the time.

could be any where from a 9mm on up

Thanks 376Steyr. That is about what I would have expected. To me that is a significant difference. I prefer the 200 grain in my 10mm. though. Have you tried those yet?
Peter.

Since I don't have a 10mm or a 45 Super.
I prefer a hole in with a hole out in a large caliber to match the game I am hunting.
My 454 has plenty of punch but it don't like anything but jacketed bullets.
My .44 Ruger Bisley Hunter loves cast boolits with plenty of punch in and out for White tails since there isn't anything larger where I hunt.

Swede, why wouldn't your 454 like a cast bullet?
I'd take the 45 & if my target was 150 yds away I'd walk up a bit.

Dick

Hi,

I know this thread is about .45 Super vs. 10 mm, but .45 Super is very close to .460 Rowland (or the same in compensated pistol). And here is nice bullet penetration test:

http://forum.m1911.org/showthr...nd-Penetration-Tests

What I see here and already know is that more heavy isn't always better.

So is there any reason to shoot anything like 265gr or 300gr from .45 Super/.460 Rowland? Will it perform better than good 225gr bullet at decent velocity? The same question is also for 10 mm Auto.

Jiri

The 40 Super is in there as well. It will throw a 165gr bullet at 1600fps from an unsupported 1911 barrel, producing 900+ foot pounds of energy. 200 grainers move at 1400fps.

Tony

Jiri,

I can't believe someone found that old post of mine ;^)

The biggest problem with the bullets that go beyond about 250 grains gets to be fitting down in the case, and the greatly reduced available room for the powder. Flat base bullets tend to swell the case making chambering difficult.

And then there is the chamber throat, the area ahead of the stop shoulder, where the nose section of the bullet has to fit. I've actually done some work opening up this area with a throating reamer, creating an amount of freebore. If these big bullets do not have a little room to get started before engaging the rifling, pressure can get very erratic and high.

If you are going to try heavier, I would recommend lead bullets for sure. The jacket bullets in these heavier weights tend to be designed for Casull's or 460 S&W and you run into issues with velocity design.

If you want to venture this path, I would recommend Rim Rock bullets. They have a nice selection of heavy weight lead, and will size down to .451. And as much as many folks like flat base bullets, when going this heavy, having a bevel base bullet and perhaps .451 diameter can give you just that tiny bit of room when seating to allow the bullet to fit the case.

Craig

Rim Rock bullets. I'll check them out. I'm trying to find a good TC hard cast gc bullet in 220 gr for my G20 w/ OEM length Lone Wolf barrel. . Mine chronographs 1200 fps with the Buffalo Bore 220 gr cast tc bullet. It is a bevel base bullet and even in the LW barrel it leaves a bit of lead behind.

I find it interesting when people spend lots of time and money on "improving" autoloaders.

When there are very good revolver calibers out there that do the same thing.

That don't involve all the work expense and time.

But each to their own if I want bigger faster I just change guns.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
I find it interesting when people spend lots of time and money on "improving" autoloaders.

When there are very good revolver calibers out there that do the same thing.

That don't involve all the work expense and time.

But each to their own if I want bigger faster I just change guns.

Revolvers do not do the same thing the revolvers hold less round and do not reload with a magazine.

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
I find it interesting when people spend lots of time and money on "improving" autoloaders.

When there are very good revolver calibers out there that do the same thing.

That don't involve all the work expense and time.

But each to their own if I want bigger faster I just change guns.

Revolvers do not do the same thing the revolvers hold less round and do not reload with a magazine.

Really thanks for informing me of that information who would thought that.

Or that their are more then a six shot revolver out there and one can use speed loaders also with double action ones.

One learns new things every day.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
I find it interesting when people spend lots of time and money on "improving" autoloaders.

When there are very good revolver calibers out there that do the same thing.

That don't involve all the work expense and time.

But each to their own if I want bigger faster I just change guns.

Revolvers do not do the same thing the revolvers hold less round and do not reload with a magazine.

Really thanks for informing me of that information who would thought that.

Or that their are more then a six shot revolver out there and one can use speed loaders also with double action ones.

One learns new things every day.

. Revolvers are not as flat as a semi auto and speed loaders are much more bulkier than a semi auto magazine.

I have both and they are definitely different even if you do not see it.

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
I find it interesting when people spend lots of time and money on "improving" autoloaders.

When there are very good revolver calibers out there that do the same thing.

That don't involve all the work expense and time.

But each to their own if I want bigger faster I just change guns.

Revolvers do not do the same thing the revolvers hold less round and do not reload with a magazine.

Really thanks for informing me of that information who would thought that.

Or that their are more then a six shot revolver out there and one can use speed loaders also with double action ones.

One learns new things every day.

. Revolvers are not as flat as a semi auto and speed loaders are much more bulkier than a semi auto magazine.

I have both and they are definitely different even if you do not see it.

Different really more startling info thanks again/S Sarcasm Guess I should have put the /S out sooner

I guess I'll have to get my revolvers out and my semi autos out and compare them again that could take a while.

But I do remember from a couple of hrs ago that my 4 inch red hawk is bigger them 3913 for sure and that my charter 357 bull dog isn't as big as my Ruger P90 and one my 4 inch mid frame 357s is about the same.

Well jwp475 I think we both most likely own enough examples of each to equip a small army with.

Semi auto shine in different areas then revolvers for sure vise versa also.

If I can get the job done with a cylinder full I prefer shooting revolvers.

But that doesn't mean I don't enjoy the many semi autos I own and find them useful.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
I find it interesting when people spend lots of time and money on "improving" autoloaders.

When there are very good revolver calibers out there that do the same thing.

That don't involve all the work expense and time.

But each to their own if I want bigger faster I just change guns.

You are the one that posted the above. Claiming that improving semi autos was not needed since revolvers do the same thing, but in fact as I pointed out accurately they are different and well worth improving.

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
I find it interesting when people spend lots of time and money on "improving" autoloaders.

When there are very good revolver calibers out there that do the same thing.

That don't involve all the work expense and time.

But each to their own if I want bigger faster I just change guns.

You are the one that posted the above. Claiming that improving semi autos was not needed since revolvers do the same thing, but in fact as I pointed out accurately they are different and well worth improving.

I don't see where I ever said it was not needed.

I said I find it interesting.

If you find that interesting means not needed so be it.

I personally well stick with one of my revolvers if I need more power then my standard semi auto rounds deliver.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
I find it interesting when people spend lots of time and money on "improving" autoloaders.

When there are very good revolver calibers out there that do the same thing. When there are very good revolver calibers out there that do the same thing.

That don't involve all the work expense and time.

But each to their own if I want bigger faster I just change guns.

You are the one that posted the above. Claiming that improving semi autos was not needed since revolvers do the same thing, but in fact as I pointed out accurately they are different and well worth improving.

I don't see where I ever said it was not needed.

I said I find it interesting.

If you find that interesting means not needed so be it.

I personally well stick with one of my revolvers if I need more power then my standard semi auto rounds deliver.

Look at your quote you said there are revolver calibers that do the same thing and I pointed out that is not correct.

Are we taking plat forms or are we talking calibers vel. and bullet weight

Revolvers are not semi auto pistols, semi autos are not revolvers correct.

It seems that the whole discussion started out with a comparison of caliber bullet weight and velocity.

230 grain XTP 1100 plus FPS on the next to 180 grain XTP 1300 FPS plus.

The whole what is better a semi auto or revolver goes back farther then both of us.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
I find it interesting when people spend lots of time and money on "improving" autoloaders.

When there are very good revolver calibers out there that do the same thing.

That don't involve all the work expense and time.

But each to their own if I want bigger faster I just change guns.

Including the ss guide rod 22 lb spring and the OEM length ss barrel I have less than 700$ in mine. For 16 shots that I can hit well with. I figure I have found an ideal all around handgun. If I can get close enough to a bou or moose this year I'm going to use the Glock instead of my rifle.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
Are we taking plat forms or are we talking calibers vel. and bullet weight

Revolvers are not semi auto pistols, semi autos are not revolvers correct.

It seems that the whole discussion started out with a comparison of caliber bullet weight and velocity.

230 grain XTP 1100 plus FPS on the next to 180 grain XTP 1300 FPS plus.

The whole what is better a semi auto or revolver goes back farther then both of us.

Platforms. Platforms are the reason people spend the time and effort to increase power in the semi's. Ballistically the revolvers wins that battle all day everyday.

I have seen this argument between semi-auto and revolver many times. When talking about fire power the large capacity magazines are always brought up and compared to the limited capacity of revolvers. I have never needed more than one round to make my point - well at least in the last 40 years or so. I have had both and the only center fire pistols I have now are revolvers. I still have brass for the 25 - 45 autoloaders that I have owned just to remind me that I am happy with my wheel guns. If you feel that a 14 to 17 round magazine gives you an advantage then by all means use it. I have used my Ruger Security-Six in forty years of informal target shooting, Metallic Silhouette competition, hunting and plinking and have never wished I had more ammo than the six rounds in the cylinder and the two speed loaders that I carry. I carry it concealed in a shoulder rig or a custom pancake holster (six inch barrel) or I carry my 45 Colt. I have only had to pull it in self-defence once and I never felt the need for more than six rounds. I don't have failure to feed problems, I can load it up or down to suit my purposes, and it fires every time I pull the trigger. It is more accurate than any auto loader that I have owned and nothing has ever broken on it that needed replacement. In the three years I competed in Metallic Silhouette I was dropping 37 to 38 of the targets on average and had two perfect scores (40/40) tying the club record against unlimited class guns with my little revolver. Even after 43 years of shooting (over 40000 rounds) it still shoots 1" five shot groups at twenty-five yards off hand. (standing, single hand grip, no support) In the steel challenge shoots I do very well shooting mostly instinctive because I have trained to shoot instinctively.

For those who like the semi-auto guns all I can say is use what you like. They are no better or worse as long as you can shoot well with them under all circumstances.

quote:

Even after 43 years of shooting (over 40000 rounds))

Revived my first security 6 in 1974 own 4 of them should have never got rid of two.

It was a real shame when Ruger discontinued them.

I also have one that I used to take many PPC and TRC match's I think it has over 50000 round through it.

Great medium frame revolver.

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:
Thanks 376Steyr. That is about what I would have expected. To me that is a significant difference. I prefer the 200 grain in my 10mm. though. Have you tried those yet?
Peter.

I carry nothing lighter than 200 grain bullets in my 10mm Autos. For social purposes, I carry Hornady 200 XTP, for deer hunting Double Tap 200 gr Nosler JHP, large animal defense Double Tap 200 gr WFNGC hard cast. My practice load is a max load of Unique or Power Pistol and 200 grain Rim Rock 200 gr TC hard cast. I zero all my loads 3 inches hight at fifty with iron sights which puts me on at 100 and requires a bit of hold over up to 150 yards. Beyond that, a scope or rifle is needed for me.