Why 40.cal. and not .45????

[Dave Poss]

Seems the trend for newly built muzzleloading rifles is the 40 cal. Way back when...the cal. of choice was .45. It was good for anything from deer hunting to target shooting. Is there a REAL advantage to a .40 as opposed to a .45? :: I know it's less lead and presumably less powder to fire the ball, but that has to be marginal! I've even noticed lately alot of pistols in the 40.If I'm not mistaking...and I often am....40 is illegal to deer hunt with in Ga. :cry: Help! If 40 is much better than 45, I'd like to know before I gather up parts for my wintering project. thanks.

 

[Hawkeye]

Well I guess it all depends on what you want to do with it. I've always felt the .45 was a little lite for deer and such and a little heavy for small game. Of course it could be I've always just wanted a .40 for giggles and grins. Oh well this is just my feeling.

 

[tg]

The .40 has gained a lot of popularity as a good target gun, can't say if it is better than the .45 as I am not a competition shooter, I have a .40 and have used it for deer but it is a close up gun and ya gotta hold your water till the time is right. As for back when one would likely find as many .42 and .43 cals. and .47 and .48 as .45's we have "standardized the available bore sizes more so than the original builders.

 

[Dave Poss]

My bad!!!! I was talking about the 1970's...not the 1770's when I referred to "way back"!!! Not bragging, but several whitetails have ended up grazing in my freezer with a .45! Concerning the savage tree rats; again the .45 has made the grey bushey tails headless many times. I also shoot competetion with the same gun and do okay, but Always wanting to improve provoked the question....was just curious about why so many 40's are being built now and if it would be an improvement. :hmm: :hmm:

 

[Ohio Joe]

longknife,

I built a .40 caliber a few years back. No other reason than I had always wanted one for over twenty years. When I lived in Ohio and competed a lot, it seemed as if the .40's were always blowing everyone else's score's away.

I used an Ed Rayl barrel with 1 in 72 twist, round bottom rifling, 36 inches long x 7/8 across the flats. I used a full stock Dickert and a Large Siler percussion lock. Best 25 and 50 yard offhand rifle I've ever owned. Should have built one sooner!

I can not hunt deer in Nebraska with it, but I'm legal with small game and coyote. I haven't tried the latter with it yet. I also plan to convert it to flintlock, make it my "Alamo" rifle.

I can't really answer your question, but if you have always wanted a .40, I'd say build it and you won't be disappointed... My .40 load is 35 and 40 grains 3fg Goex with a .015 patched .395 roundball... My .45 load is 55 and 65 grains of 3fg Goex with a .015 patched .445 roundball... The price of powder these days with the dot fee alone justifies the .40... :imo:

Will it out perform my other rifles? Not really, as all caliber's have their place for perfection with what one is going to do with a given caliber...

 

Personally I struggled with a .50 cal Chambers flintlock for too many years, the gun was a beauty but for me wasn't a good fit Early viginian thick stock and heavy.so for multiple shooting events at rendezvous it wore me out and accuracy went downhill.4 years ago got an "A" weight .40cal much easier to shoot lighter uses 35 grains powder so could shoot much longer accurately!The old timers in our club think ballistically its a flatter shooting gun. Been hanging ribbons on the wall and collecting blanket prizes since the swith to .40 I'm a BELIEVER!! :imo:

 

[tg]

Ok I guess I'm on the same page now, 1970's.. I guess when way back, traditional, and PC come up I just think 18th century.. odd eh? must be some faulty neurons fireing off, anyhows I would see no advantgae in going from a .45 to a .40 for deer or squirrel hunting.

 

[Slowpoke]

In a word... recoil.

Recoil is the biggest problem for target shooter and that little difference in caliber really makes a difference. My next project is a 38 caliber, Why? Just want to be a little unique.

Chuck

 

If you want a deer rifle, IMHO, the .40 is too small and in most areas illegal. The .44/.45 is typically legal minimum. In my state the .40 is illegal to hunt with at all! The state requires .44 or bigger for big game and .36 or smaller for small game. On the other hand the .40 makes a good target rifle and requires little powder to be accurate. I own a pretty good .40, but rarely shoot it (it hangs on the mantle, being a pretty piece). If going for deer these days, even my .45 would stay home and I'd grab my .50. Starting a .54 in case I get the recurrent itch for bear....use a .32 for small game....why .40?????

 

The phrase we seek is "inherently accurate".

Some calibers are known as inherently accurate, in other words, you really have to mess up to make them shoot bad! .22, .243, .308, .338 all come to mind. Light bulets, heavy bulets, reduced loads, magnum charges will all do well as long as the gun is built right and the "standard rifling twist" is used.

Where other calibers require searching and diligent effort to find the "perfect" load, the 40 will shoot well with any coombination you stuff down the bore.

This has been known for some time. One would do well to research some of the "old time" .40 caliber guns, some of the wildcat cartridges of yesteryear, the first issues of Colt's Patterson in the prefered .40 cal, the growth of popularity of the 10mm pistol cartridge during the 1980s, the development of the .40 S&W pistol cartridge (we're talking one hole 10 shot groups from a machiene rest at 25 yds) and its instant acceptance by the Federal services.

If it were not for the current game laws forcing the larger than .40 bore on the shooting public, the .40 would be everywhere. It's a shooters' caliber and does require good placement on deer sized game. The agencies know that most hunters can't and won't shoot that well, or bother to track down wounded and potential kills.

In the late 1700s and early 1800s it was considered a middle of the road rifle caliber. Some recient research shows that most of the Rev War rifles were around .40 bore, not the big .50+ honkers we once thought.

You really have to work with a .40 in ML, cartridge rifle or pistol to appriciate just how good they really are.

What this caliber might do in an in-line would be scarry!

It seems that the best shooting calibers are always a bit light or a bit heavy for covering everyones' tastes.

Longknife, if you want a small game and target match winner, build your .40. If you want a single gun to use for everything look to another caliber.

It's one of them personal decisions. However, I do not know a single person that made an "informed" decision to buy a .40 that is not happy with his choice.
:thumbsup:

 

[Darkhorse]

My next building project will be a .40, I won't use it for deer hunting, I have 3 .54 caliber rifles for that purpose. The main use for the .40 will be small game and fun, and turkeys.
Since I don't intend on trying to shoot a gobbler in the head with a flintlock it will be a body shot. I considered the .36 but for me the energy and flatness is not sufficient. In hunting I always opt for more firepower, more dead is plenty, wounded is not enough.
I think for my purposes the .45 would just ruin a little more meat than a .40 but would probably do just as good. Plus, I've never had a .40 caliber.

 

[Herb]

Slowpoke- where do you get a .38 caliber barrel? I think I'll build a more exact copy of the Jacob Wigle rifle in the museum here, and as near as I can determine, it was .38 caliber (muzzle was rusted so bad couldn't be sure, might be .40). Also seemed to be about 1 in 90 twist. Now, that original barrel (which had been converted from flint to percussion, cut off 3/4 inch at the breech and to 35.5 inch later) was about 1.020 at the breech and .930 at the (cut off) muzzle. By where the pack rats had chewed on the stock for salt, where it was carried in balance, it was about 44 to 46 inches long. Now, you had to be a MAN to carry that all those years. Think I'd rather have a .40 caliber (for 3/8 ramrod reasons) 1/66 or so, but still want to mull over the .38 caliber. Ed Rayl and a year's wait? By the way, the silver thumb plate has the initials M C. Anybody know a mountain man who would have been in Utah or Colorado about 1830-1850 or so who might have lost his rifle to the (Ute) Indians, even if he escaped? And to the subject at hand, I have a .45 Leman and believe it or not, a .45 "Hawken" Thompson Center (a friend gave it to me). Have built two .45's, the Wheat Flintlock and the Anniversary Flintlock, but I just like .40 caliber for the lighter ball and charge, and for shooting.

 

[Slowpoke]

I got mine from Jim Goodoien. He makes the best barrel on the marker today, expensive but worth it. The only problem is that he doesn't swamp barrels. Anyway, you could get one from Rayl,but I'm not sure about his wait time though.

Chuck

BTW, I have a buddy that has a 38 on order from Rayl, 3/4 inch barrel, 42', 1-66.

 

[robinghewitt]

I only have one American long rifle and that has 90 stamped over the muzzle which is 0.372".

I call it my "Jesus gun" because when I handed it to my buddy he only just caught it before it hit the floor and he cried out to the Lord for assistance. I don't think he realised what a 1" straight octagon can weigh in the smaller calibres :crackup:

Isn't a .375 bore extremely period correct?

 

[Slowpoke]

It is Master Robin, that it is.... Now to make you work. Pull out your camera and snap a picture or two, if you wouldn't mind.

Chuck

BTW... you would have a chance at winning another longrifle, if you'd just buy a raffle ticket from our muzzleloading club. :hmm:

 

[Stumpkiller]

Isn't a .375 bore extremely period correct?

Probably . . . just depends on finding the correct period. :crackup:

I would say "Golden Age" to mid 1800's it would be bang on.

 

[robinghewitt]

Pull out your camera and snap a picture or two, if you wouldn't mind

I can do better than that, Dave Kanger has the original advertisement for my American rifle.
It is stamped James Bown & Son, Enterprise Gunworks, Pittsburgh PA and has their "Kill buck" logo.

 

[crockett]

I have been thinking about building a 40 caliber because everyone says it is accurate. Here's a question. If the barrel is the same size as a 45 caliber, then a 40 caliber has a heavier, stiffer barrel than the 45 caliber and theoretically ought to be more accurate, all things being equal. What if one goes with a 40 caliber versus a 45 caliber but uses a smaller barrel? In other words, with all the reports of great accuracy from a 40 caliber, does the barrel size make a difference and what size barrel would be most practical?

 

Ghost, just to clarify a minor point on your post re: .40 S&W...the .40 auto pistol round was developed at the request of the FBI as a compromize between the .45 auto and the .357 Mag standard issue or 9mm auto pistol rounds. Tests by the FBI had shown (already known to most) that the stopping power of the .45 was much better than 9mm or .38 size bullets--these tests were run after several agents had problems in stopping assailants with the smaller calibers. Fearing that some of the new female agents couldn't handle the .45, the FBI wanted a .40 developed. Voila--the S&W.40 auto. My father, who was an FBI Agent for 25 years, carried a little snub nosed .38, but the modern criminal is well armed and the FBI decided on an upgrade in power. Accuracy was a fortunate by-product, power was first in mind.

 

The thicker, stiffer barrels do aid accuracy, but increase weight significantly. What do you want to use the rifle for? Targets? Hunting? Or..? My .40 is a tapered barrel, which reduces end weight. It is quite small at the muzzle end, but I forget it exact diameter. It is an accurate barrel which I have not played with much, but shoots tight groups at 50 yds with 40 grs fffg and a .395 ball. It most likely shoots better than I can hold and see anymore with my old eyes.

I have been thinking about building a 40 caliber because everyone says it is accurate. Here's a question. If the barrel is the same size as a 45 caliber, then a 40 caliber has a heavier, stiffer barrel than the 45 caliber and theoretically ought to be more accurate, all things being equal. What if one goes with a 40 caliber versus a 45 caliber but uses a smaller barrel? In other words, with all the reports of great accuracy from a 40 caliber, does the barrel size make a difference and what size barrel would be most practical?