which in your opinion is better? Will the watts be able to fire win mag or lott ammo and can the lot fire watts ammo, safely??

I am finding it hard to decide which one to buy

No difference other than headstamp. Get the lott

Holzer375:
There is no difference ballistically between the two. The Lott case if .005" shorter than the Watts and both can fire .458 Win. ammo. If chambered to exact dimensions, the Watts can fire the Lott but not the other way around.
James Watts was a friend of mine and I wrote his story in a 150-page book--quite an interesting life. In 1949 he blew out the .375 H&H for his round and had a few shorter rounds made to lessen recoil--one became the .458 Winchester. 22 years later Lott shaved .005" from the Watts case to put his name on a cartridge and got all of the glory. James gave me the first Watts rifle (pictured in the book) but I sold it years after his death as I was beginning an interest in double rifles. But, the two are indentical in their ballistics.
Cheers,
Cal

Put a smile on Jacks face and get the LOTT~!

Isn't that
2.800" for the 458 Lott
2.850" for the 450 Watts?
0.050" with the decimal in the right spot.
Still no difference.
You can load the Lott to the same overall length as the 3.000" brass version as long as you have a cannelure in the right spot for crimping.
The throat is adequate unless "special" variant has made it too tight.

The only reason for the 2.850" chamber length is in case you fear getting stuck with 2.850" brass for a 2.800" chamber in a pinch.
Many simply ream out their Lott chambers to Watts length, and call it a Lott still.

How about the Ackley version...fire all 3 calibers.

quote:

Originally posted by Biebs:
How about the Ackley version...fire all 3 calibers.

And have a tiny bit more performance too, if you want/need it. That's what I did, and it's a lovely cartridge.

I had a Griffin & Howe in 450 Ackley. Sure wish I could remember what I was Soooooo excited to get when I sold that one!

The case design of the watts or Ackley is better than the Lott, but the Lott has the advantage of availability and being a factory round..

The Ackley and Watts have a slight shoulder but enough to allow for a long neck that is straight and gives a better purchase of the bullet and that helps keep the bullet stationary during repeated firings, actually with a light crimp and fullish case of powder you won't have setback with Watts or Ackley..The Lott on the other hand tapers straight to the mouth and does not give that bullet purchase in some cases and in others you will see bulge that is usually off center, and the Lott also requires more crimp.

Given the fact that the Lott is factory, I would opt for it, but I do wish Win. had given the case more thought..However for its purpose of shooting buffalo, Hippo, Lion and elephant at the ranges they are normally shot at, all this stuff makes little difference, I only state it for your information.

Balistically not much difference in any of the .458 calibers.

RIP:
.050 is correct. Like Hillary--I misspoke.

The original Watts did not have a shoulder. I have a few boxes of original brass (Speer) and there is no shoulder. The Ackley did have such a slight shoulder I don't know if it would headspace on it--it was that slight.

James told me he tried to sell his case to Winchester but they said it was too powerful to be of any great public interest--that is why they settled on the .450 Watts Short as their .458 magnum. James had the full length cartridge, the 2.5", and two shorter rounds (2" and 1 3/4 or 1 1/2") he played with. It has been about 15 years since I did the book on James and he gave me many of his rounds, letters, and I bought many of his rifles. It was an honor knowing him and learning about his work in the cartridge field. I know from the dates on his letters who invented what and it was most interesting to hear of his talks with Elmer Keith and Roy Weatherby ("Mr. Watts, it is velocity that kills. Nothing but velocity!")
Cheers all.
Cal

Well, due to Lott's ego on the issue I'd do the Watts and because it came first! Then if you lose you ammo you can still get some Lotts (maybe) and shoot them. As Ray says both of them and the Ackley are so close the animal won't care.
Jack O'Connor used the Watts on a safari in Africa during the early '50's and before one ever heard of Jack Lott and his ego trip!
It's just my opinion and I know no one is paying for it!

African Hunter:
Thanks for the boost for the Watts. Support for Jim is few and far between. His round had 22 years of experience before the Lott saw the light of day.

James had an interesting life. Just after he married in 1941 his job was to round up the Japanese in Seward, Alaska. He took an African safari for several months, flew a few hundred miles north of Watson Lake, Yukon, and walked out with his wife and brother-in-law, and was shot by the superintendent of schools after James won a court case for undue dismissal.

Again, my thanks.
Cal

Cal,
Thank you for writing that book. I have read it and keep it for reference. Good work.
Correct me if I get any facts confused:

There was also a 450 Barnes Supreme in 1949.
Nearly identical to the 450 Ackley, with micro shoulder, it was proprietary to Fred Barnes, the bullet guy.
I have one, and the .416 Barnes Supreme of 1949 also, a full length H&H-based round, sibling of the 450 BS.
Mine are Mark X Whitworths chambered by Willis Fowler in Anchorage, AK.
Mr. Fowler also supplied me with 100 pieces of "Barnes" headstamped basic brass, from which the 450 BS and .416 BS were formed.
The photograph in (now defunct) AccuLoadIII, of a 450 BS cartridge, is my dummy round.
I have a copy of the old 1949 flyer advertising the Barnes Supreme line of cartridges.

Watts talked to P.O. Ackley about his ideas, and Ackley, Barnes, and Buhmiller were all in communication in the late 1940s.
They all came out with similar wildcats and proprietary rounds about the same time, all full length H&H with micro shoulder for .458 bullets ...
Except Watts' wildcat seems to have been the only straight-tapered one, the one without the micro shoulder, direct ancestor to the .458 Lott.

Many wildcatters came before them, but Jack Lott made the long .458 belted cat stick.
George Hoffman did the same for the .416 caliber in general, though the long belted H&H .416 was knocking around for a long time before Mr. Hoffman's version.

I think Roy Weatherby beat them all, with his .375 Weatherby of 1945. The first and still best .375 H&H Improved. Ackley copied the .375 Wby, but I digress ...

Many thanks for the info and history. I am tending towards the Watts, now to find someone in Zim who can supply me with the ammo or reload for me.

thanks again

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
RIP:
.050 is correct. Like Hillary--I misspoke.

The original Watts did not have a shoulder. I have a few boxes of original brass (Speer) and there is no shoulder. The Ackley did have such a slight shoulder I don't know if it would headspace on it--it was that slight.

The shoulder was/is really plenty adequate for headspacing because (at least in mine) it is quite an abrupt angle...about 40 degrees, I'd guess. Mine was made on a Rem M30 action in about 1960 or '61 by P.O. "hisself".

I don't know if it has ever been "officialized" by some organization such as SAAMI sprinkling holy water on it, but obviously anyone ordering a reamer can make the shoulder angle and neck length whatever they want, so long as they allow for the Lott brass to fit if they also want to use that cartridge.

Cal,
Thanks for the heads up, I apparantly was misinformed in a specs picture from an old drawing about the Watts having a slight shoulder, and basically being the same case as the Ackley.

All my experience has been with the Lott and the Ackley..I prefer the Ackley hands down, but the Lott being a factory round makes it a better choice for todays hunter IMO....