NO NO NO NO 

NONE OF THE ABOVE.  I have no capability to load plastic or paper hulls.  So I load/run/shoot ALL BRASS MAGTECH.

Is that a vote of ONE??

Yes that is a vote of one.

But I'm about to ROCK your world!

You, YES YOU only need one tool and it costs a mere $19.80, less than one pound of powder, 10 pounds of lead, 3 Starbucks coffees, and at current inflation probably one Bic Mac.

https://www.amazon.com/Tactical-Corp-12-Reloading-GA/dp/B0B6FW6JWS/ref=sr_1_3?crid=2MQ7DV414R87O&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.XWuSuB8kDBzCwoxK2_SalI-0y7FxLBCgnWdMz8O3SqKnrX8lE9_gzfMG0FvyxJowGI9sVBCPNu6wFsY_wf3HBwoYveSolDyt9jKsJ6_P7yKIPsHfU8XBK7O3LLW0rFU-Tg7y9U7obaTtxImYOwXbxztSEh6_e3Z8p98tesfJoErYzYdTqSIkq89SWz4799bt.Xe5ERs0FnJZmqFk0q6_VL5lqOuV8_dRAtUayFXyo-Gw&dib_tag=se&keywords=12%2Bgauge%2Broll%2Bcrimp%2Btool&qid=1713235165&sprefix=12%2Bguge%2Broll%2Bcri%2Caps%2C98&sr=8-3&th=1

You don't need anything else other than a hand drill motor or if yer high falut'n, a drill press.  You already have the means of pok'n out a primer and you can seat one the same way as you do on you brass shells.  You can roll crimp once fired star crimped shells, even better you can roll crimp trimmed shells and make them 2 1/2" equivalents. Slightly shorter and easier to load with your short temper...

That's a cheap one, I have 4 different ones including that one, it actually works.  You already buy fiber wads, cards, nitro cards, over shot cards, etc.  You just have to buy them in 12ga now instead of 11 and 10 gauge.  JOIN the 20th Century man!.  Seriously the problem I have with the brass cases is loading them into the chamber.  The roll crimped shells will spoil you...

Me:  I want to say one word to you. Just one word.
You: Yes, sir.
Me:  Are you listening?
You: Yes, I am.
Me:  Plastics.
You: Exactly how do you mean?
Me:  There's a great future in plastics. Think about it. Will you think about it?

~Mako

Thank you kindly!  Maybe I even saw that at some point but was looking for the word "outbox" and not paying attention to "sent items"   

Lonesome,
I can give you two sets of dimensions for S&W .45 ACP revolvers.

• I have had only one newer Model 25s with tight Ø.453 throat openings at the front of the cylinder, but most were Ø.454 
• I had fixed sight 1950 Model 22s with Ø.454 throat openings at the front of the cylinder.
• I have had Model 1955 S&Ws (later called Mod 25) with Ø.453 throats   (corrected per mister QUALITY CONTROL...AAAARGGGH)
• I currently have two unmounted spare cylinders for M1950, M1955 or Mod 25s (basically Model 22s or 25s) with Ø.454 openings   (corrected per mister QUALITY CONTROL...AAAARGGGH).  I have those spares because I used to fit an extra cylinder in .45 Colt to Model 25s, 1950s or 1955s, I have those two left, I may have cranes for them as well.  I would have to look.
• Most if not all of the .45ACP cylinders started out with a Ø.482 chamber opening at the rear
• The .45 Colt chamber is Ø.487 to Ø.489 at the rear depending upon the reamer and the Ø.454 throat is perfect for them.

In the S&W the .45 ACP chamber has the headspace step the case mouth butts up against, the .45 Colt chamber has the typical revolver leade and throat which is a gradual transition.

So there is no short answer for a S&W.  But all actually shot very well, I really couldn't tell much difference between the Ø454 and Ø.453 throats, especially with lead bullets.  Out of a Ransom Rest with match 185gr or 230gr jacketed bullets (if you squinted real hard) the accuracy might have been 1/2" better at 25 yards and at 50 it was a wash again.  The previous was probably a fluke, but the older 1950 barrels were reputed to be more accurate, I never proved it with a Ransom Rest.

As I said 30 or 40 years ago adding a .45 Colt cylinder was a common "conversion" or cylinder addition.  Finally S&W started making the 25 in .45 Colt, I don't know if you could get one with two cylinders except from the Performance Center and those were special order.

I don't know if you personally could tell the difference between the larger and smaller throats especially with Lead Cowboy loads, either way, enjoy them.

I can send pictures with gauge pins if you wish, but I'm not home for a few more days now.  I just have files on my drive I carry with me.

~Mako

When I reply to a PM from somebody, there is a box at the bottom that can be checked to "Save Copy of Message in Outbox" or something like that.  But I don't see an outbox anywhere, only the inbox.  Am I not looking in the right place or is there just not one?

Thanks.

Mako,

Go back to my #14 post and read the 1st line. You are the only one here to give an analytical statement that can be used in order to make a logical justification.  Not just that is the way WE say it is and you have to accept it or you are stupid.  I never saw or remember seeing this factor mentioned in this posting or any posting about round nose bullets.

Thanks for that relevant info. that I never looked up before trying to question and justify my argument line.  Nor had I ever read in any of the reloading manuals that I have and it is ssseveral.  Even Venturino, in his "Shooting Lever guns of the Old West" book used only the default statement (page 135) --"As stressed in many places in this book, only a flatnose bullet should be used with any tubular magazine lever action.  The .38 Special has mild recoil, but a roundnose bullet, especially a hard cast one, could set off a primer in the magazine".  All this with no real reasoning or justification for the statement.  Even his blanket statement (and many others peoples) was wrong and the 30WCF cartridge is my proof.  When he gets to talking about the 30-30WCF page 219, he writes -- "Every bullet manufacturer has a proper .30-30 bullets with either round or soft nose".  A total contradiction to his statement in the 38 Special section.

Mako I will still go with your quantifiable info.

Thank you very much.

RoyceP,

You need to go back into my posting and reread, especial the statements where I say I do use only the original Winchester designed bullets for 44/40, 38/40, 32/20, 45/60, 40/60 in Winchester molds, just because I can and like to. I even load the 30-30, 44Mag & 56/50 with flat nose bullet for image.  I recently bought a 357 rifle for fun and Yes I did work up a Lyman 358311 with flat nose added; a Lyman 358665 bullet; and a Lee 358-125 bullet.  Mainly because I like the looks and functions.  Because of Mako's info I will now put a flat nose on the Cramer 358-158-10B molded bullet and work up a similar loading.  And the reason is only because of Mako's response.

What I cannot, nor would not just take, is an arbitrary, You Must for everything (when history shows something else existed, see above), without having a Why like Mako provided.  I am not a Stupid follower with 30+ years of safe reloading and shooting.  What I cannot accept is just telling a new shooter or reloader you just have to without telling them the Why's or Wherefores.

Thanks

editted while Abilene was posting.  Just added the Venturino book info.