Hi all,

I haven't taken delivery of my bfr in 475 yet but its coming and then off to Jack Huntington but in the interim I have bought a nice colt 1911 and I am converting it (with the kit from Clarks) to 460 Rowland. I am thinking that it would be great for medium to large game to include whitetails, black bear and even hunting the brown bears with a heavy backup gun... you know... just in case. It would also be used for bear defense in Alaska if I want to carry something other than my 475. I am thinking about the power that it has but also the speed of getting off the first important and potentially only shots in a bear charge.
I wanted to get some thoughts and opinions for you all on here. Do any of you guys here own one? What is it like to feed and care for? Penetration on game? Performance on big animals? My wife may use it in Alaska and me the 475. She was reading over my shoulder as I write this and proclaimed that is what she would like to do. I think she would rather use that than my heavy loaded 24-3 4" 44 special. Thanks guys as always!

I can tell you that it works for white tails.

This thread has extensive info on the .460 Rowland.

http://www.handgunhunt.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/111331/page/0/fpart/1

Thanks Rio. I read a lot on the link. What is your thought on the viability of the 460 for bears etc? I can see that it does indeed work very well for whitetails! I am having trouble finding anything that speaks of the actual penetration properties online. Have you done any testing with yours? What is the recoil like? I will be using my 475 Linebaugh but my fiance will either use a 24-3 44 special loaded with some authority or the 460. Also, this 460 will be build on a plain government Colt model. No beavertail etc so that is why I ask about the recoil level and potential discomfort. Thank you in advance.

I would call the recoil mild since it has a very effective muzzle brake. I have only shot 250 gr Hornady XTP hollow points in mine which are fine for whitetails and similar game, but for Bear I would like a better pentatrating bullet.

I understand that Beartooth is now sizing a hardcast 260 gr bullet for use in the Rowland. Reflex that posts here has loaded some of them for hog hunting. I would bet that would make a great bullet for bear in the Rowland.

I really like mine for carrying while hunting since it is thinner than my revolvers.

Sean,

You are going to be hard pressed to find much info on exactly what it works on as far as bigger critters. The only real way you are probably going to get comfortable as to use on bears is to study up on other calibers folks are using for the larger game. Especially 45 Colt loads that are a little warmer than Colt Single action or replica firearms.

There is no question that a bullet in the 230 grain class can harvest an animal, even bear, mulies or elk. But when folks start talking about protection, things get a little murkier. No question a 250 or so class lead bullet at 1100 to 1200 will penetrate. The 250 XTP bullet is what I would feel is getting to be marginal for guaranteed penetration in a less than perfect shot situation. The same can be said for most 45 ACP bullets designed for the 1911. The jacketed bullets are going to expand rapidly when driven at Rowland velocities. Heavier jacketed bullets tend to be designed to work at 454 or 460 S& W and may not be perfect for the Rowland.

I have carried my Rowland and 45 Supers for concerns about black bears, but I do so in New Mexico not Alaska. I know lots of folks carry the Rowland in Alaska in lieu of a 44 Mag. I really love the Rowland, but if I were headed into a situation where there was more of a likelihood of running head long into a big bear, I would probably not choose it. If your wife's only choice is the 460 or a hot 44 Special, then I would say the decision might be better answered by what she shoots better, faster and potentially under stress. I shoot lots of 1911 rounds a year, and have done so for a very long time. Drawing quickly, disengaging the safety and firing is deeply ingrained in my muscle memory. If your fiance is well trained with the 1911, then cool. There is something to be said for the speed and simplicity of a double action revolver.

If she can handle the S&W with a warm 44 Special, she will probably find the recoil of the Rowland in a similar class. pretty decent thump, but very controlable for anyone with 1911 experience. If she shoots low thumbs with the 1911, then the stock beavertail may not be an issue. I have smaller hands, and only really need the commander style beavertail because I run high thumbs. That and the bit of digging I get on the side of my thumb from long strings of the Rowland with a stock Colt beavertail.

Craig

Rio,
I am reading some more of these posts and it seems as though there are quite a lot of trial and error type issues with the Rowland cartridges and a lot of experimentation that goes on with them. They don't seem to be plug and play type conversions. Am I reading into this wrong? Other of course than the barrel fitting, that has to be done right and once if done right. I am talking more about the rounds themselves.
I am looking for something that will be easy to load and use without too much experimentation. I also would want it to be utterly reliable! Don't want a click when there is supposed to be a bang with a bear.

Bearbait...

You are right about the two calibers. She is pretty comfortable with both really. She shoots low thumbs and I am a 1911 nut as well as you and that has rubbed off on her a bit I think. For bigger than deer I am thinking hard cast lead. Hollow points for the light stuff though. I have xtp's at the moment for 45 acp that I think would work for deer driven to those velocities. As I had asked Rio, how is the reliability? Should I forget the Rowland and go with the special and get another fun gun? I just don't want to spend money and not be too happy in the end! Especially wince my wife watches my ass and I hers. I have the 475 and a double in 9.3x74R to cover her... I would hate hers to jam if I am the chosen snack of the day!

The 265gr Beartooth looks like it is going to be the stuff. 1200fps is no problem and there is more on tap now that I have a can of Long Shot. A 265gr WFN hard cast at 1200fps will penetrate and leave a mess in its wake. The bullet is very accurate out of my converted 21SF. I will have a full write up on my super after deer season gets over with when I can do several chrony sessions with it. I did find some references to the .460 on big bears when I was thinking about buying the conversion. Have to google it again but there is a little info out there. Also found some references on killing elk with it. reflex264

Sean,

I would say the conversion can be plug and play, or it can a bit to a lot of work. The easiest conversion I used was on a Springfield loaded. The last few guns I have converted and played with are Colts. The biggest issue that will control the fit, function and top end loads is the barrel lock-up. My Colts tend to show primer swipes earlier than my Springfield did. This mainly due to the link pin length and lock-up, and to an extent the firing pin hole size.

The Springfield came with a 9mm/38 Super firing pin size, and I never had issues with the really heavy fast loads. Clark fits the barrels in house to a Kimber gun, and as such a couple of mine have come with non-standard link sizes that just do not seem to fit my Colts perfectly. And you probably understand that just changing link sizes can open other cans of worms.

Clark does offer a fitting service, and I would recommend taking them up on it. I have not with the many conversions I have fiddled with, as I am a little hard-headed.

As to the handloading, this too can be easy or hard. I have had a couple of different headspace sizes from Clark over the years. If loading 230 and down type bullets, these are usually pretty easy. When you start into the higher weight bullets like Relex and Hank have mentioned, things get a bit trickier. It really helps with these if you really like the reloading challenge and experimentation. If you are a plug and play kinda reloader, you might have some frustrations.

The heavier bullet weights can also be very magazine specific as well. I have had the best results over the years with Colt hybrid lip type magazines. Belive it or not, Wilson's have been the most troublesome. But, once you have the gun working, you should not have to worry about feeding a jambing. While the case is longer than a standard acp round, the oal's will be similar, so feeding will probably be lowest on the difficulty list.

And back to the issue of your gal using it save your bacon, the added barrel length will come into play as to holsters. I have no idea how she carries, or likes to carry. High rise on the strong size hip requires a little more shoulder dexterity. An inch and a half does not sound like much, but if she is used to a full front holster the added length does take a little getting used to ;^) But hey, a reason to add to the holster box....

Craig

Craig

Firing pin drag marks are more a function of "firing pin hang time" than anything else. When slide acceleration is greater than the rate at which the firing pin spring withdraws the firing pin. The slide catches up with the firing pin as the cartridge head impacts the ejector. Re inserting the firing pin and leaving the telltale mark on the primer.

Back in the 80s Dean Grinell published his work with very heavy loads in the .45ACP, he had a load with a 1/2 jacked swaged bullet at around 150 gr. that he chronographed at 1600+ fps.

There is available today a very light .45ACP round that "clocks" in at nearly 2000fps.

The .45ACP has always been under loaded, with the right loads it makes the 10mm look like a kid on the way to dentist office.

John

John,

Thanks for the info. Yes, I agree although there are a few things going on which can be a little different. You can have tadpole type strikes, cratering and even piercing. It can also be related to an improper chamber creating excessive pressure that usually shows as cratering. One of my early Clark 460 barrels had what I would call excessive headspace (dynamic) and that gun with it's 9mm/38 Super firing pin could handle loads that my current Colt can not even come close with. My thinking with that barrel is that the case head was so far from the breech that the symptom you note above could not even come close to happening ;^)

I am also a big fan of the 45 Super, as that round can come pretty darn close to Rowland performance without the headaches of the lengthened brass. I have confirmed through casehead expansion tests that Starline 45 Super Brass appears to be every bit as strong as Rowland brass. The limiter again is the gun, and lock up and barrel fit. The Rowland really needs the comp, and I have a Clark comped 45 ACP barrel that does pretty darn good with Supers.

It's funny you should mention the 10mm, as on the 1911 forums you can have a reasonable discussion about the 10's for hunting, but when you mention hot loading the acp all manner of heck breaks out in the threads. Folks just seem to be bent around the axle about the 1911 platform just not being suitable for hunting, in the 45 size ;^) One of the reasons I like this place, all reasonable discussions are welcome.

Craig

I also agree that the Super brass is just as strong as the Rowland brass. If I was informed correctly they use a stronger alloy for these two cartridges. One thing I have noticed is less case bulge when loading heavy bullets in the Rowland vs the super. I haven't sectioned them yet but it makes me think that the super is thicker at that point on the case.

Nothing wrong with the super for sure. I killed 2 deer with it that went down as quick as if they were hit with a .44 Mag.

The latest thing aside from the beartooths is the 240gr Sierra JHC. Although I am early in the work-up it really looks promising as a deer bullet. reflex264

I am willing to bet that in the Starline brass the only difference in the .45 offerings is the length. That the web is the same in the ACP, Super and the Rowland. I haven't sectioned any but it seems logical.

We all remember that the Rowland started it's life in standard.45ACP brass! And the consequent case failures that lead to the longer heavier case. The compensator is mandatory, if you are going to achieve the full potential of that round.

I have hunted with the .45ACP, since back in the 60s. I am also a firm believer that the original .45Colt (255gr. at 900 fps) load was about all one needed, if you got close and placed the shot. It is quite easy to duplicate the .45 Colt performance in the auto. A heavier recoil spring, firing pin spring and a buffer is all you need.

With standard .45ACP pressures, over time cases get shorter. When you get into the 20-30K pressure range then stretch is significant and case length needs to be checked, and cases trimmed.

The real draw back in using the .45Auto to hunt with is the sights. The low profile combat type sights are great for their intended purpose, but for hunting a higher set of sights works better. I installed an Eliason rear sight and made a tall front sight for my series 70 Colt, (that has been in service since I bought it new in 1970).

I have shot some loads with the Rowland data, in my Blackhawk convertible. A more efficient choice than the .45 Colt loadings.

A good thread and thanks for the information, if anyone has chronograph data and would like to share I would like to see that.

Thanks ~~ John

The .45 super brass is much thicker in the web than .45 ACP brass but I haven't scectioned a Rowland case yet. Will have tons of chrony data to post after deer season. reflex264

reflex264

Is that Starline brass??

Yes. They also make a +P headstamp .45 ACP brass that is just regular ACP with the +P stamp. reflex264

reflex264

Funny you should mention +P, as far as I can tell it is only a mechanism for reloaders to keep different batches separate..

That's it. They also sell it to some manufacturers to load +p ammo. reflex264

In my opinion the Starline brass is the best option for reloaders, and then Federal someplace after that.

No question Starline is good. They also help those of us with oddball calibers stay in the game. This is certainly helpful for just having an oddball, but is also allows those who are trying to bring something new to the caliber game a place where brass can be designed and bought (in large quantity).

They are frequently out of Rowland brass, but it would suck to have to play with this puppy by having to fiddle with 308 brass ;^)

Craig

Wow. A lot of info guys. I am an avid reloader but I am thinking that I might just use the hopped up BB loads in 45 acp for woods walking and leave the heavy stuff to the revolvers. There seems that there is a lot of things to think about etc with reloading the Rowland. I have five kids so when I get to load I am never able to do it for very long and this round might not be the best choice for me with what seems like a bit of experimentation is involved. I might have to chicken out or use factory stuff and damn... it is not cheap.

It really isn't that bad. If you do decide to go the Rowland route there are several factory loadings for it from several different companies. That being said a good +p .45acp isn't a slouch........reflex264

Sean,

I wasn't trying to scare you away from it. It's really easy to do 230 and lower class bullets at pretty high velocities without major haeadache. Just when going to 230's above 1200 or 1250 or the really heavy weights things require more detail.

You did not say whether your Colt was a new one, but if new with a dimpled barrel throat, you have some options here. The dimpled barrel handles 45 Supers easily. As there are some things you need to do to the gun anyway (recoil and hammer springs and perhaps a flat bottom firing pin stop) you could do these mods to the gun, and perhaps run fast 45 acps, or even factory supers. or reload for these to get a feel for stepping on the throttle a bit. A factory equivalent 45 Super from a non-comped barrel is going to feel much like a comped Rowland to the shooter.

Craig

Craig

What is the heaviest bullet you have used in the Rowland and what sort of velocity did you achieve.

Thanks
John

As far as factory ammo goes check out:

http://georgia-arms.com/460rowland.aspx

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=231

http://www.underwoodammo.com/460rowland.aspx

http://460rowland.com/460-rowland-ammo-from-corbon/

Like 330gr at 800 fps for giggles.

John,

I stopped at 250's, and they are pretty easy to get to 1150 fps. I tend to download just a tad out of deference to the gun (1911). Your gonna see velocities all over the place on the web and by the few ammo makers. You can get away with more if the gun is set up correctly.

When the round came out, 230's at 1350 was about it. When Wilson got into the game, they did so with 230's at velocities closer to 1200 fps. But they were running without a comp. I think they are pushing the comp now, but I think their ammo is still on the "lighter" side.

And now we have Glocks and XD's in the game, so there is more info out there, but things can be a little more confusing. The good news for the handloader is that powders like Longshot and Power Pistol respond very uniformly, so it is easy to creep up to where you can use brass expansion along with other sorta signs to know where you want to stop.

Craig

Craig

Thanks .. The Rowland seems like a pretty efficient way to get into higher velocities with heavier bullets with a "drop in" conversion.

Humphrey

There was an article in one of the old Handloader magazines, that utilized a 300 gr. bullet in the .45ACP, the writer was using 2400. I do not recall what the velocities were, but I am thinking 6-700 fps.

John

yep they broke 750fps with that bullet but.........it was a bullet designed just for the acp with a very long boat tail on the back to allow for deep seating.

I fully expect to be able to safely get 1300fps from the 265gr bearthooth but time a micrometer will tell. The 240gr Sierra should go between 1300 and 1400 as well. reflex264

Well, Bearbait you you didn't scare me away I guess. Ok, I am lying, I was a bit afraid of the BS factor. I would not need to run more than 250 grain in my mind. If I can do that easily then I am still game. Also, I have a colt at the moment that was made in the late 80's... 1987 to be exact. Nice blueing, not so nice attention to detail. Shoots really well but very rough on the inside. No dimpled barrel. I am thinking that I might trade it in for a new one. I heard that Colt is making better guns now than they have in a long time. My other 1911's are not Colt. I only own one at the moment.

Sean,

Not sure what to say on the Colts. My second test platform was a 1978 Seeries 70, and that frame has cracks in the dust cover from my early testing. The slide was reworked by Novaks with a low cut for a JPoint sight,and it nows does double duty as a slide for my newer Colt, a Series 70 SS Reissue. I am not up on exactly wich newer Colts get the dimpled barrel, but at issue with hot 45's or Supers is the case head support at the bottom rear of the chamber.

If your 87 barrel was not cut for hollowpoints, it might have more support than the more modern non-Colt dimpled barrels which generally have pretty generous throating on the barrels for all of the modern hollow points. I think even the Clark 460 Rowland barrels have what I would call generous throating. When you get to the brass limits for pressure, what you will see is expansion of the case in this unsupported area. A little will be a smiley, too much and you blow a case, a mag, possibly the slide and frame, grips and your hand.

I know definatively that with a modern Colt with the dimpled barrel, you can safely get 250's doing 1000 fps in the Super. I am doing the same with a Ed Brown conventionally throated barrel in my S70 Colt. With my gun, I can get the same 250's pretty close to 1100 fps but I feel that for my gun and the recoil impulse this is starting to push my comfort level. Again, this is with Supers. I have a Clark comped 45 ACP barrel that I can push a little harder. The Rowland is able to go higher mainly due to the comp.

You mention other 1911's. Clark uses a Kimber for their fitment testing and linking. If you have a doner Kimber, you might find the best combination there. I beat the snot out of my first Rowland which was on a Springfield loaded, and the strength of the gun as well as the 9mm firing pin was nice. But you may not want to push a Springfield with Supers, as their two piece barrel design would give me some pause.

Craig