Ruger Old Army

[M. De Land]

Nope, you're just as confused as he is . . . They're both an "O" !! See? I keep telling you it's not an "open frame" explain what you mean ? The open top frame INCLUDES the arbor, so what is open about it?

Mike

Every one knows what I'm referring to and so do you ! The only confusion is in your head about design strength and even you know the truth if you'd be honest about it !

 

[Smokerr]

One of our more famous bear guides here in AK (Phil Shoemaker) uses a 357 Mag with hard cast lead bullets for his walk about bear protection. He says he can hit what he's aiming at much better than with a 44 mag or 45 Colt. His son and daughter (also bear guides) use the same cartridge,

And I carried a 41 magnum and with full knowledge it was the best bad choice of a lot of poor ones. Charging Grizzly? You better make your one shot a good one. What he and or his kids carry obviously is their choice but bear spray is by far better protection. A shotgun is next but that has the issue any shoulder arm has, it has to be carried in hand, on the shoulder does you no good.

Regardless, if holstered you got to get it out, in time. As the guy down Soldotna way found out with his bear spray, in the holster did no good.

Simply put for those who will listen and understand, there is no free lunch and 357 with hard cast is also not an answer. It may be comfort but when the majority of encounters are one shot and many none......,....

 

[45D]

Every one knows what I'm referring to and so do you ! The only confusion is in your head about design strength and even you know the truth if you'd be honest about it !

Hard to tell what anyone with "magnumitus" means.

Oh yeah, those SA's that Mr. Pearce listed really CAN shoot the ammo in question, it's my open-top's that can't handle it!!!
By the way, Cynthialee is right .

 

[Smokerr]

Every one knows what I'm referring to and so do you ! The only confusion is in your head about design strength and even you know the truth if you'd be honest about it !

I find you are the one being disingenuous. They are both frame designs. How many different types of bridges support systems are there? Now, is a truss system bridge an open top design?

 

[Jim in Wisconsin]

How could the Colt type be considered a closed frame?
Take the barrel and cylinder off and look at the frame - is it a closed loop of any kind?
The barrel attaches at one location - the wedge. The bottom just rests against the frame without resisting any forward motion.
The "push" of the bullet on the barrel being above the wedge causes a leverage at the wedge location to push the bottom joint closed, so that helps the situation but would not be considered a closed frame.
The wedge (key) is what's holding the whole shebang together.
These old cap and ball revolvers are a great way to experience what it was like to use them 150 or so years ago and a lot of fun - it spoils that fun (at least to me) to try and make them into modern powerful guns. Ruger, Colt, Smith and Wesson etc make modern powerful revolvers and they sure as heck aren't going to make one using the old open frame design - and not because of cost.

 

[M. De Land]

And I carried a 41 magnum and with full knowledge it was the best bad choice of a lot of poor ones. Charging Grizzly? You better make your one shot a good one. What he and or his kids carry obviously is their choice but bear spray is by far better protection. A shotgun is next but that has the issue any shoulder arm has, it has to be carried in hand, on the shoulder does you no good.

Regardless, if holstered you got to get it out, in time. As the guy down Soldotna way found out with his bear spray, in the holster did no good.

Simply put for those who will listen and understand, there is no free lunch and 357 with hard cast is also not an answer. It may be comfort but when the majority of encounters are one shot and many none......,....

I use a 44 Mag mostly with hard cast Kieth bullets in both 45 Colt and 44 Mag but I don't argue with a man who has killed a 9 foot charging brown with 9 mm using 147 grain hard cast bullets and kills them regularly annually for 40 plus years. The man knows what of he speaks and is not a braggart or blow hard. I see Phil regularly at gun shows and met him once but do not really know him personally.

 

[Smokerr]

I have no animosity toward 45D and am sure he is a fine gunsmith working on open tops...lots of people praise his work.

I wish he would come down from his high horse and admit reality, that's all.

Not sure how you parse that. By saying high horse you indeed show animus.

What I do say is he opened my closed mind (ask my wife, it tends to stay closed).

He supports his work with proof. And that is a modern Open Top is capable of far more than it was (or currently generally is) given credit.

As a non lettered but designated engineer (I had to have working knowledge of a lot of stuff) , he is correct, it is a frame. It is just not an bottom and top frame, but it is an O frame for lack of better term (girder system maybe).

I was involved in a Hangar build many years back. The Original was a very severely overbuilt I Beam type (more complicated but it had that form). The supports that needed stronger were just thicker steel in those beams. It was removed after partly assembled, not due to the steel as an issue, but they did not weld it to spec and the sub spec welds were found.

Its replacement was a web design. Rather than solid I beam slabs it was interlaced with angle support much like a house truss (and house joists that use a I beam type in composites are now used).

Neither design was better than the other. Its where you wanted to put your money in that case. Brute engineering or a lot of engineering for the lattice work.

The Brute force did not frail on force, it failed on poor welding. If welded to the correct spec it was approved. The Frame package in fact was bought and assembled in an area that did not have the welding specs a Seismic IV zone has.

I am not saying that the Colt Open Top was superior nor do I believe 45D is saying that. It is a lot stronger than given credit for and he is exploring the boundaries of that with modern replica's that have the steel type needed to go there.

 

[M. De Land]

I find you are the one being disingenuous. They are both frame designs. How many different types of bridges support systems are there? Now, is a truss system bridge an open top design?

Well opinions are like noses we all have them and are free to think as we wish no matter how ill informed ! As a side note............. are you a flat earth advocate ?

 

[Smokerr]

How could the Colt type be considered a closed frame?
Take the barrel and cylinder off and look at the frame - is it a closed loop of any kind?
The barrel attaches at one location - the wedge. The bottom just rests against the frame without resisting any forward motion.
The "push" of the bullet on the barrel being above the wedge causes a leverage at the wedge location to push the bottom joint closed, so that helps the situation but would not be considered a closed frame.

45D will weigh in of course, but, when you assemble the barrel to the rear frame, you indeed have a closed frame.

The pins at the bottom index and hold that and the arbor becomes a beam (probably not said right).

Think of an arch. You support it until you put the key way in and then its solid. Pull out the key stone and its not.

Colt Open Top is solid once the key is put in, its an elegant solution.

 

[Smokerr]

Well opinions are like noses we all have them and are free to think as we wish no matter how ill informed ! As a side note............. are you a flat earth advocate

Of course, Columbus sailed over the edge never to be heard of again. (I never was sure how flat earth worked, dang thing starts to repeat itself if you go far enough and what is the mechanism for that?)

I don't think I am the one in the de Nial.

 

[French Colonial]

It won't outperform the 44 mag. If you're gonna hot load a .45LC in a Ruger, then it's only fair to hot load the .44mag in comparison. I used to think the same for decades about the .45LC, but ballistically, it's not true. I even turned away some nice single actions because they were in .44 mag instead of .45LC. However, I'm still more partial to the .45LC....just because that's what I settled on in my youth with Rugers. If I had a Colt SA in .45LC, not sure I'd be hot-rodding that frame.

The next argument is bloodletting; the .45 cuts a bigger hole than the .44 mag. That's only a small incremental difference. Honestly, if I was being charged by a bear, I'd probably want the .44 mag in my hands over the .45LC. But that would depend on bullets too and shot placement......and don't forget the 'panic' factor.

If you want your argument to to have any validity, you would need to talk with a number of handgun hunters that go after dangerous game with the .45LC versus the .44mag. And certainly Elmer Keith if alive would favor the .44 mag. He could have enhanced the .45LC but instead pushed for the .44mag calibration.

Kevin

Wrong wrong and wrong

Kieth could not hot rod the 45LC because the cylinders of the day (Colt) would not stand the pressure. He needed the thicker side walls of the 44 cylinder.

Then along came the Rugers with better metal and better heat treatment.

Look at the performance of a 45LC loaded hot and there is no hot load from a 44 mag that comes close and the 45 does it at lower pressures

Go look up the numbers at Cor-Bon and Buffalo Bore and look at it compared to the 44 and the numbers are obvious.

And SERIOUS handgun hunters prefer a 45, most opt for the Casull and Linebaugh calibers, but the load I use 26 grains of H110 and a 250 grain Hornady cannot be achieved in a 44.

 

[Whitworth]

Wrong wrong and wrong

Kieth could not hot rod the 45LC because the cylinders of the day (Colt) would not stand the pressure. He needed the thicker side walls of the 44 cylinder.

Then along came the Rugers with better metal and better heat treatment.

Look at the performance of a 45LC loaded hot and there is no hot load from a 44 mag that comes close and the 45 does it at lower pressures

Go look up the numbers at Cor-Bon and Buffalo Bore and look at it compared to the 44 and the numbers are obvious.

And SERIOUS handgun hunters prefer a 45, most opt for the Casull and Linebaugh calibers, but the load I use 26 grains of H110 and a 250 grain Hornady cannot be achieved in a 44.

I was typing the Elmer story when you beat me to it. His cylinder mishap also took off the top strap on his SAA. I agree your .45 is superior to the .44 but only 1.2 grains of H110 and 10 grains more of bullet isn't going to make much differnce to what ever gets shot by either, besides ".44 Magnum" just sounds cooler

 

[M. De Land]

Wrong wrong and wrong

Kieth could not hot rod the 45LC because the cylinders of the day (Colt) would not stand the pressure. He needed the thicker side walls of the 44 cylinder.

Then along came the Rugers with better metal and better heat treatment.

Look at the performance of a 45LC loaded hot and there is no hot load from a 44 mag that comes close and the 45 does it at lower pressures

Go look up the numbers at Cor-Bon and Buffalo Bore and look at it compared to the 44 and the numbers are obvious.

And SERIOUS handgun hunters prefer a 45, most opt for the Casull and Linebaugh calibers, but the load I use 26 grains of H110 and a 250 grain Hornady cannot be achieved in a 44.

Very true, My 45 Colt favorite load is 23 grains of H-110 behind a 280 grain Kieth Style bullet at a bit over 1300 fps chronograph -ed in a 5.5 inch barrel. That's 2 grains below max. Not bad for a cartridge designed originally for black powder although that was in balloon head cases not solid head as are modern 45 Colt cases.
Of course the real pressure issue was with percussion containment as opposed to copper then later brass case self contained ammunition that could seal off rampaging gas pressure.
Still most of the west was subdued with black powder and lead bullets so great Grandpa was far from disarmed !

 

[45D]

How could the Colt type be considered a closed frame?

Just that question alone shows the depth of your understanding of how the platform works, yet you want to argue against it. Number one rule is to "know" what you're talking about!

Take the barrel and cylinder off and look at the frame - is it a closed loop of any kind?

Ok, now put it back together and tell me why you DON'T have a closed frame (O). (We're getting close to the silly here . . . )

- it spoils that fun (at least to me) to try and make them into modern powerful guns. Ruger, Colt, Smith and Wesson etc make modern powerful revolvers and they sure as heck aren't going to make one using the old open frame design - and not because of cost.

Awwww sorry man but see, it's fun for me!!!
Ruger and Colt make modern revolvers that my Italian made open-tops can run rings around so . . .

I've talked with a few about production costs, it seems it IS a more expensive venture but maybe you can enlighten us ?

See, the reality is ( since everyone likes it to be "real") nobody ever explains why my o t's can beat out a list of revolvers ( previously provided) that are most all currently built Top strap revolvers? That always gets "smoked over", swept under the rug, totally overlooked . . . I've been patiently waiting but non of your bunch seems too eager to explain that fact. You know that top strap revolver they call a "top break"? Wonder if that was a faux pas ?

Mike

 

[Bad Karma]

I was typing the Elmer story when you beat me to it. His cylinder mishap also took off the top strap on his SAA. I agree your .45 is superior to the .44 but only 1.2 grains of H110 and 10 grains more of bullet isn't going to make much differnce to what ever gets shot by either, besides ".44 Magnum" just sounds cooler

Zackly right. Using the commonly available guns, Elmer was stuck with the .44. If there had been a frame and cylinder capable of handling a high pressure .470 I’m sure he’d have worked with that…

 

[Smokerr]

And SERIOUS handgun hunters prefer a 45, most opt for the Casull and Linebaugh calibers, but the load I use 26 grains of H110 and a 250 grain Hornady cannot be achieved in a 44.

Well, I take myself as serious. I placed on the top 5 at the Trooper Academy back in 1976, and that was the instructors, none of the students could shoot as well as I could.

Where did I learn to shoot? Gravel pits, 41 magnum with the hottest loads.

A 45LC has nothing over 44 magnum as a caliber. It does have a tad more diameter as a 44 Magnum/Special is actually a sub caliber round (.430).

But to say a 45 caliber has any advantage? Blowing bubbles there. It all has to do with shot placement. No, shoot something a million times, maybe one in that million would have just enough extra diameter to cut the last parts of an Aorta vs slicing it. Not exactly sorting our serious vs non serious (I guess that makes 45D serious and when I shoot my 41 magnum I am not being serious?)

All the .454 Casull did was make it a bit longer and with its tad larger case, you can stuff in more powder.

You could do the same with a longer 44 magnum, it just did not have a cool cachet.

 

[45D]

The only confusion is in your head about design strength and even you know the truth if you'd be honest about it !

Then maybe you can explain to all of us how my measly open top revolvers can stay together using ammo that is rather destructive to a list ( previously posted) of supposedly "vastly superior" top strap revolvers?

You argue in circles and are not any further along than you were 2 years ago ( or however long we've been at this ). Just an explanation of how mine can be superior to a whole list of modern top strap revolvers . . . Heck I've got 2 top strap revolvers that I can't shoot what my open-top's can . . . so, why is that ?

Mike

 

[Smokerr]

they sure as heck aren't going to make one using the old open frame design - and not because of cost.

Jim:

Are you serious? Cost is the first consideration in any build of anything.

I am not talking cheap, I am talking cost of a given design you are trying to industrialize. Higher cost is only justified by having to go to higher cost to meet a performance specification.

Now I know some are now saying, ah hah.

But....... when you have no background in Open top and all your background is in a Top Strap?

Research is costly. You don't know if an Open Top design would work, but you know you can beef up a Top Strap design (or so says your CAD). So you go with that because it is lower cost.

Now, say the 500 S&W came out weighing as much as the Anchor on the Queen Mary. Ok, full stop, do we continue (not with these materials). Can be do it with Unobtanioum? Yea we could, but then the price of the gun is $100,000 a pop. Not selling that are we?

So now its, maybe we should pare this back or forget it! Well, there is that old Open Top design no one explored further, what if we research that? How much is that going to cost? And we don't know its better, equal or worse until we do.

Jet engines come to mind. They use some cutting edge exotic materials (composites as well as metals). But they get efficiency, longevity etc out of the engines (and reliability) and its worth it.

In WWII the Germans got 50 hours of life period out of their jet engines. Its impossible to keep 100 ME-262 in jet engines (200) if you eat one up every 50 hours and that was average, some failed much sooner.

In their case, they had no choice. The were cut off from sources of exotic materials and they had no alternatives, so cheap engines it was (they were indeed cheaper than a piston engine). But it never cammed over to a real advantage as they never could get the numbers to do so.

 

[M. De Land]

Well, I take myself as serious. I placed on the top 5 at the Trooper Academy back in 1976, and that was the instructors, none of the students could shoot as well as I could.

Where did I learn to shoot? Gravel pits, 41 magnum with the hottest loads.

A 45LC has nothing over 44 magnum as a caliber. It does have a tad more diameter as a 44 Magnum/Special is actually a sub caliber round (.430).

But to say a 45 caliber has any advantage? Blowing bubbles there. It all has to do with shot placement. No, shoot something a million times, maybe one in that million would have just enough extra diameter to cut the last parts of an Aorta vs slicing it. Not exactly sorting our serious vs non serious (I guess that makes 45D serious and when I shoot my 41 magnum I am not being serious?)

All the .454 Casull did was make it a bit longer and with its tad larger case, you can stuff in more powder.

You could do the same with a longer 44 magnum, it just did not have a cool cachet.

I think Ross Siegfried would disagree with the notion that a 44 Mag kills game as well as the .45 Colt does and he's killed enough big game all over the world with both to have a decent opinion on the matter.
It doesn't make any logical sense to me either but he sure opines that there is a difference.
I have a good article by John Linebaugh stating that the .45 Colt case can run heavier bullets with less pressure to higher velocity than is possible in the .44 Mag case. The Colt .45 often averages more velocity with up to 3 k less psi shooting a heavier bullet than the .44 Mag. I know it holds true in my 5.5 inch Bisley 45 Colt shooting a 30 grain heavier slug a hundred fps faster than does my 4 inch Smith in 44 Mag.

 

[M. De Land]

Then maybe you can explain to all of us how my measly open top revolvers can stay together using ammo that is rather destructive to a list ( previously posted) of supposedly "vastly superior" top strap revolvers?

You argue in circles and are not any further along than you were 2 years ago ( or however long we've been at this ). Just an explanation of how mine can be superior to a whole list of modern top strap revolvers . . . Heck I've got 2 top strap revolvers that I can't shoot what my open-top's can . . . so, why is that ?

Mike

I have already, it's the mass difference alloy and heat treat used. You keep mixing the perimeters and moving the goal post. All else being equal there is no question that a closed frame design is superior in strength structurally to your open top designs,