Quote:
Originally Posted by Superman
The chances I will need to defend a stage coach from Indian attack are low, but never zero. Accordingly, I wonder if it would be prudent for me to own a 20"-barrel Model 1892 in .45 LC. Now manufactured by FN Herstal (Belgium). It could use the same cartridges as my New Vaquero and could perhaps also use the high-pressure loads my pistol cannot use. Some readings seem to suggest this new 1892 can handle ridiculous pressures. Educate me Jeff, and also offer your personal assessment and recommendations.
|
I believe these are still made by Miroku in Japan. Which is a good thing; I have two Miroku made Winchesters (M 1886 and M 71), and I consider them of actually better quality than the ones made in America.
M 1892's are wonderful rifles. Hell for stout, being essentially a "mini 1886" with its massive twin locking lugs. It will safely accept any pressure level available in .45 Colt. Note that it is also chambered in .44 mag, which runs higher pressures yet than even the stoutest .45 Colt loads.
The newly manufactured examples have finally corrected the problem with their rifling twist rate. The .44 and .45 caliber versions now have a 1:26" twist, where they formerly had 1:38" (a holdover from the .44-40 and .38-40). That slow twist would not adequately stabilize heavier bullets, sometimes even failing to stabilize 240-250 grain bullets. The faster twist fixes that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superman
For extra credit, speak to me O Wise One of loads and pressures for my New Vaquero and my Springfield Armory tactical 1911. The data I am seeing for these is ambiguous. I am pretty sure the single-action can handle the Buffalo Bore 255-gr, 566 lb/ft "Keith," and perhaps it can handle anything that will physically fit into the cylinder, but the pressures I see people spouting are inconsistent. Not that ballistics forums could possibly contain erroneous advice.  And finally, those forums also seem to suggest the 1911 might handle slightly higher pressures than the New Vaquero. I find some of this surprising in addition to confusing. |
Yeah, the shooting forums on the internet are probably one of the more dangerous incarnations of these anonymous forums. Way, way too many utter morons espousing some very, very dangerous "advice". They are best avoided. Stick to published data from reliable sources.
That said, there is probably more disagreement over what is "safe" in the various firearms chambered in ,45 Colt than in most others. The problems stem from the wide variety or so chambered firearms available. Essentially, there are "Colt safe" (as in original Peacemakers in good condition) and "Ruger only" loads. Some break it down further, but those are the two most widely recognized groupings.
"Colt safe" means standard pressure loads. Some will inch into "+P" territory, which can be done with modern examples, but the performance gains in no way approach "Ruger only" levels. We can get 250 grain bullets up to about 1,000 fps with these loads, where "Ruger only" loads can exceed 1,300 fps with 250 grain bullets.
Where it gets muddy is with guns like your New Vaquero. Even though it is a Ruger, it will not accept "Ruger only" loads. Ruger makes two sizes of single action frames, the Blackhawk / New Vaquero (which are about the same size as the Colt), and the Super Blackhawk / Vaquero (preceding the "NEW" Vaquero), which is substantially bigger. And stronger. It was in these guns that we developed these "Ruger only" loads. Don't use them in your New Vaquero. It will accept "+P" Colt safe loads, but not these "Ruger only" loads.
As far as higher pressures in the .45 ACP, I can think of no better example of why I avoid shooting forums. These idiots are going to hurt someone. Yes, there are "+P" loads available and listed in reputable manuals. Those are safe in 1911's. The loads these clowns espouse that approach +P .45 Colt levels of performance are not.
The 1911 platform has one major shortcoming that limits pressure. The IPSC crowd pushed this limit with their hot-rod .38 Super loads in the 1980's. They wanted to "make major", and pushed pressures to the breaking point. Some of them got hurt. This "weak spot" is the unsupported bottom rear of the chamber, the little scallop that serves as a feed ramp. It leaves the bottom part of the case web area unsupported, relying on the solid part of the case head to fill this gap. It does that job just fine at standard pressures, maybe +P pressures, but not at the pressures these clowns are touting. They will blow that part of the case out, maybe the magazine right out the bottom of the grip, and even the grips right off the gun (this is where everyone gets hurt).
So, no, don't listen to these guys. Standard pressure loads in the .45 ACP have been discouraging bad guys for longer than either you or I (or even our parents for that matter) have had a need to do so. No reason to push its limits.