1860 Colts with Kirst Konverter cylinders for NCOWS???

[Books OToole]

Wells;

Yes.  I have 4 .45 LC R & D cylinders for New Army Remingtons [1858s].  Kirst also makes them and they are sold by River Junction Trading.

The R & Ds have a web site.

Books

[Adirondack Jack]

Adirondack;

Thanks for the picture.

Will a Cowboy .45 Special, fit in a revolver chambered for .45 Webley?

Books



PS - Another member of the committee shoots Webleys.

Chances are, what the fellow shoots is a Webley chambered in .455 Webley, also known as .455 Colt-Eley.  That round has a thinner rim, as does the parent case, the .450 Adams, pictured above.  The .45 Webley, made with thicker rims for .45 Colt type guns will not chamber, nor will my Cowboy .45 Special.  If one were to find a gun actually chambered in .45 Webley, which would be  a "Webley Green" (marked WG .45, and sometimes called "Webley Government") revolver or SAA made under license from Colt in Britain, then sure.

Even historians confuse the two rounds.  Webley revolvers chambered for the "Colt Eley, or the various "Webley" "MarkI through mark 5 or 6" revolvers were made for the thinner rimmed .455 family of rounds.  the Webley Green revolver, and the .45 (.452) round were made with .45 Colt rims because though Webley Green won the crown contract to supply arms to the vast British Foreign service, they lacked the manufacturing capacity to fullfill the contract, so the contract allowed for SAA Colts made under license by British firms to fill the gap, and a short .45 round was needed to run in the relatively weak, short bodied Webley Green guns, but it needed to have the colt case head to work in the SAA as well.  It was a relatively easy thing to open up the headspace on the Webley Green guns to accomodate .45 Colt rim thickness. Thus came to be the .45 WEBLEY round pictured above, that would not work in .455 Webley guns, but would work in any .45 COLT revolver ever made as well as in the .45 WG (foreign service) revolvers..  The .45 Webley was in fact a "short Colt", as is my cowboy .45 Special.

[Ottawa Creek Bill]

I was under the assumption (maybe wrong?), that the Cowboy 45. special, is a 45 ACP case, is that true? If not what was the case it was developed from?

Bill

[Advertising]

[Adirondack Jack]

I was under the assumption (maybe wrong?), that the Cowboy 45. special, is a 45 ACP case, is that true? If not what was the case it was developed from?

Bill

the prototype was simply .45 Colt cases cut to ACP length (a length chosen because dies are readily available to crimp at that length). Of course straight-walled cartridges are tapered on the inside, so a properly drawn case is much better than a severely cropped version, as this yields proper wall thickness.

The case head dimensions and OUTSIDE dimensions are exactly the same as .45 Colt.  However, the INSIDE dimensions have a proper case mouth, with the taper not beginning until a depth allowing a 250 grain bullet to seat properly without bulging the cases.  So the internal taper ends up different than either .45 Colt or .45 ACP, but overall the case is more similar to .45 Colt, despite sharing the same length as .45 ACP.

The exact quote from the design discussion is "I want a .45 Colt case with the unwanted MIDDLE removed."  Starline did just that.

[Dick Dastardly]

Whatcha did AJ, is make a great bp round for Cowboy shooting.  For those that haven't seen the brass before, it may come as a bit of a surprise.  But, the internal volume is virtually identical to the venerable 45 ACP.  Although short, it's not short on power.  The EPP-UG 150 grain bullet clocks at 950fps out of my ROAs with this bullet and the great Kirst Konverter cylinders.

950fps is gettin' with the program.  The gun/ammo combo is a death ray without the damaging recoil associated with 250 grain bullets out of 45 Colt full house loads.  I shoot both and enjoy 'em both.  I can choose the bullet for the mission at hand.

My new 1860 Colt repros from Pietta won't stand full 45 Colt whollup.  That's why I'd like to shoot the lighter C45S ammo in them.

Good luck AJ.  We're all in this together.

DD-DLoS

[Ottawa Creek Bill]

AJ....
So what you're saying, this is not a 45 acp case, and that if I were to load this with FMJ standard ball, it wouldn't function in my
Colt 45 acp combat commander. I'm just curious as I've heard this is nothing more then a 45 acp case with a differnt head stamp.

Bill

[Adirondack Jack]

AJ....
So what you're saying, this is not a 45 acp case, and that if I were to load this with FMJ standard ball, it wouldn't function in my
Colt 45 acp combat commander. I'm just curious as I've heard this is nothing more then a 45 acp case with a differnt head stamp.

Bill

Sorry, but you can inform whoever told ya that they were misinformed. The ACP is a "rimless" design, (the rim is no bigger around than the case walls).  The Cowboy .45 Special is a rimmed case with a case head exactly like .45 Colt.  It will NOT fit in yer 1911 or any other semi, as the rim is fat just like .45 Colt.    It does work in .45 COLT revolvers as well as in rifles with modifications needed to FEED the short cases.  Ya can't do that with ACP, as they just "fall in" beyond where they should.

Viva la difference: Cowboy .45 Special is on the left, .45 ACP is on the right.


The sharp eyed observer will note the ACP is a slightly tapered case as well, where the C45S, like .45 Colt, is essentially straight-walled.

[Fox Creek Kid]

As a member of NCOWS I guess I have a dog in this fight as I always strive for authenticity, which is THE lure of NCOWS. I don't understand the purpose of this cartridge.    If a person wants a large bore revolver cartridge that recoils less than why not utilize a .44 Russian which is steeped in history?  Or maybe a .38 Colt?   I see its intended purpose as just a convenient way for some shooters to "standardize" a light load for both their revolvers & rifles. I see nothing wrong with a person who uses say 44-40 in both style of weapons but what I am afraid of is that this semblance of historicity could open a Pandora's Box so to speak when (I say when & not if) some shooters embrace this "envelope" as a means to simply download smokeless loads. What scares me more is down the road when someone will want another "ad hoc" cartridge approved and they will state "but you approved the .45 Special!!" whereas the Authenticity Com. will be painted into a corner as the precedent will have been set. We've spent more than two years culling "precedents" and it hasn't been peaches & cream. 

[Adirondack Jack]

As a member of NCOWS I guess I have a dog in this fight as I always strive for authenticity, which is THE lure of NCOWS. I don't understand the purpose of this cartridge.    If a person wants a large bore revolver cartridge that recoils less than why not utilize a .44 Russian which is steeped in history?  Or maybe a .38 Colt?   I see its intended purpose as just a convenient way for some shooters to "standardize" a light load for both their revolvers & rifles. I see nothing wrong with a person who uses say 44-40 in both style of weapons but what I am afraid of is that this semblance of historicity could open a Pandora's Box so to speak when (I say when & not if) some shooters embrace this "envelope" as a means to simply download smokeless loads. What scares me more is down the road when someone will want another "ad hoc" cartridge approved and they will state "but you approved the .45 Special!!" whereas the Authenticity Com. will be painted into a corner as the precedent will have been set. We've spent more than two years culling "precedents" and it hasn't been peaches & cream. 

I understand the sentiment.  if I wanted to shoot .455 Colt-Eley, would that be a problem?  if I wanted to shoot the single round of .45 Webley I have, (it works just fine in .45 colt revolvers), would that be a problem?  Now, what if I took some brass from any source and cut em down to replicate the .45 Webley and used them both?  Does NCOWS check headstamps to make sure the rounds are "right?", or can somebody use say, cut down .454 Casull brass in his .45 Colt?  If a pard is shooting .38 long colt, but he's using cut back .38 special cases, is that allowed?  If so, does somebody mic. the case lengths to make sure he's not .030 off from spec?  If not, why not?

So If a feller could shoot ".38 long colts" that really are chopped off .38 special cases and they might or might not be "true" .38 long colt length, then I would have to ask why couldn't somebody use .45 Webley (brass not made since 1935) made out of .45 Colt, or (shazaam) by simply substituting Cowboy .45 Special which is only .030 different and has almost exactly the same BP capacity?

I don't really CARE for myself.  I am simply submitting my cartridge for consideration because somebody from NCOWS asked me to.  If they approve it, that's fine.  If not, most of my patrons will simply use it at SASS events and have to use something else for NCOWS.

I'm just trying to understand the logic, and will graciously accept whatever the NCOWS authorities decide.

[Fox Creek Kid]

Adirondack Jack, you indeed raise valid points, sir. I see no problem with your shooting a .455 Eley in an original weapon or semblance thereof. However I think it would be disingenuous not to foresee what will happen. And let's face facts: there is NOTHING that your proprietary cartridge can do that cannot be accomplished with a .45 Schofield round, except satiate the desire of a few who want to use the same cartridge in their respective .45 rifles for whatever personal reason that may be.  After all, that's what this is really all about IMO.

There is a fine line where historicity and convenience merge in NCOWS. IMO this attempt falls short. Nonetheless, that is simply my opinion and I wish you luck with the approval process and if it is accepted I will abide by their decision. 

[Adirondack Jack]

Adirondack Jack, you indeed raise valid points, sir. I see no problem with your shooting a .455 Eley in an original weapon or semblance thereof. However I think it would be disingenuous not to foresee what will happen. And let's face facts: there is NOTHING that your proprietary cartridge can do that cannot be accomplished with a .45 Schofield round, except satiate the desire of a few who want to use the same cartridge in their respective .45 rifles for whatever personal reason that may be.  After all, that's what this is really all about IMO.

There is a fine line where historicity and convenience merge in NCOWS. IMO this attempt falls short. Nonetheless, that is simply my opinion and I wish you luck with the approval process and if it is accepted I will abide by their decision. 

I won't debate others intentions.  They can express them for themselves.  The only fact I wish to take issue with is the notion that .45 Schofield is able to give the same benefits.  .45 Schofield simply is not the same as the Cowboy .45 Special. It is both more and less, but it is not the same.  Consider the differences between .38 Special and .357 magnum.  Nobody would say they are equals......

[French Jack]

Part of the confusion arises because the 45 Auto Rim and the Cowboy Special are identical except for rim thickness.  The OAL and the case capacity are the same.  The problem is that no one of us is willing to argue that the 45 Auto Rim is anything but a 'more modern' cartridge than the time frame we seek to replicate.  Necessity forced us to approve some other cartridges, but we have not approved the 45 ACP nor the 45 Auto Rim.

Just my thoughts on the matter.  We will await the recommendation of the Authenticity Committee.

[River City John]

It is ironic, isn't it, that making the argument about using the .45cs in a rifle, as opposed to .45lc,  just for convenience when we consider that no rifle we see used in this hobby today was originally chambered in .45lc. We already allow many non-historic chamberings.

I have a tendancy to consider more whether it matches the ballistic equivalent of historic rounds, which in my mind it does. Having the same rim shape as the .45lc and straight wall is a plus in it's favor as far as I can see.

As always, those in NCOWS who revere history over convenience would not be affected if this round were approved. They would simply not consider using it.
I am beginning to come to think, nowadays, that the greater consideration is whether approval of this particular cartridge might not open a welcoming door to increased membership. A membership who may already lean more towards the historical, but because they use this cartridge - whether because of it's growing popularity or to help ease recoil on aging joints, whatever the reason - have kept themselves from taking the NCOWS plunge.


RCJ

[Adirondack Jack]

It is ironic, isn't it, that making the argument about using the .45cs in a rifle, as opposed to .45lc,  just for convenience when we consider that no rifle we see used in this hobby today was originally chambered in .45lc. We already allow many non-historic chamberings.

I have a tendancy to consider more whether it matches the ballistic equivalent of historic rounds, which in my mind it does. Having the same rim shape as the .45lc and straight wall is a plus in it's favor as far as I can see.

As always, those in NCOWS who revere history over convenience would not be affected if this round were approved. They would simply not consider using it.
I am beginning to come to think, nowadays, that the greater consideration is whether approval of this particular cartridge might not open a welcoming door to increased membership. A membership who may already lean more towards the historical, but because they use this cartridge - whether because of it's growing popularity or to help ease recoil on aging joints, whatever the reason - have kept themselves from taking the NCOWS plunge.


RCJ

On the subject of rifles, my mail tells me many out there are interested in using the C45S in their Henry rifles as it is a more reasonable replication (albeit not perfect) of the old Henry Flat than is a .45 Colt.  Now I don't know if the writers are NCOWS members, but the idea of a Henry that holds a bunch of short rounds seems authentic.  There is a crude modification that has allowed this in the Henry, and a much more satisfying modified carrier has been created and will soon come to market for all of the toggle link rifles.

That said, there is no doubt at all that the C45S is PRIMARILY a handgun round, and is in good company with the many period correct rounds that are very close OR SHORTER YET, including the .455 Eley family and the original boxer primed round, the .450 Adams (aka .450 revolver), as well as the above mentioned extremely close fraternal twin, in the .45 Webley (which was the first.45 COLT RIMMED round of this length, and the first to use a .452 bullet.  I would again refer to the photo posted above.  use the C45S with BP until it gets a nice patina and it absolutely passes for the .45 WEB loaded for nearly 60 years by WRACo.  The .45 WEBLEY is a round nearly lost to history.  It would be kinda nice to see it's memory and heritage preserved by a historically minded group such as NCOWS.

[Deputy Duke]

I'm with River City John on this one. Personally I probably wouldn't use it but it seems to fall into the type of cartridges used during the time period. My 44 Colts are now an inside lubricated .430" bullet instead of a .451" heeled bullet and it does grind my butt a tiny bit but I feel like I am experiencing a nearly identical experience when I shoot my replicas as compared to originals.

I have always thought that 66's and Henry's in 44 Colt would replicate the 44 Henry flat experience so perhaps there is a future for this cartridge.

Duke

[Will Ketchum]

My first thought was much the same as Fox Creeks and Joss House but after looking at the 2 side by side I thought that if the newer round was "antiqued" with a frosty bullet and a patinated case that they would be difficult to tell apart.  This is very much like at the Summer Congress meeting where we were considering the Laramie for approval.  As most know I was against it but after I put my original Smith & Wesson next to one and then picked up the wrong gun and holstered it, I realized that it looked enough like the original to fool me.  The same with this round.  It is slightly longer than the .45 Webley, just as the Laramie is slightly larger than a New Model Number 3 but with the same finish and the same bullet one would be hard pressed to tell the difference.  As for the 19th Century experience, if one would have had a supply .45 Webley ammunition in 1890 the experience would have been the same.

Knowing my fellow NCOWS shooters I doubt any would use the new round as a competitive advantage because there probably isn't any over the 45 Schofield.

Knowing Dick as I do and that he loads his 44 magnum rounds with full loads of black powder I don't think that is his motivation.

Will Ketchum

[Adirondack Jack]

My first thought was much the same as Fox Creeks and Joss House but after looking at the 2 side by side I thought that if the newer round was "antiqued" with a frosty bullet and a patinated case that they would be difficult to tell apart.  This is very much like at the Summer Congress meeting where we were considering the Laramie for approval.  As most know I was against it but after I put my original Smith & Wesson next to one and then picked up the wrong gun and holstered it, I realized that it looked enough like the original to fool me.  The same with this round.  It is slightly longer than the .45 Webley, just as the Laramie is slightly larger than a New Model Number 3 but with the same finish and the same bullet one would be hard pressed to tell the difference.  As for the 19th Century experience, if one would have had a supply .45 Webley ammunition in 1890 the experience would have been the same.

Knowing my fellow NCOWS shooters I doubt any would use the new round as a competitive advantage because there probably isn't any over the 45 Schofield.

Knowing Dick as I do and that he loads his 44 magnum rounds with full loads of black powder I don't think that is his motivation.

Will Ketchum

Will, I HAVE picked up that single .45 WEBLEY cartridge and almost loaded it in my gun more than once.

Of course my BP brass generally sits in the pickle jug a week or more before a quick tumbling, and always looks about 100 years old

[Steel Horse Bailey]

Gee ...

Jack, your brass out of the soak jar looks a lot like MY brass right out of the soak jar. 


Here's another vote FOR the C45S case being approved.  Joss brought up a good point about the 32 H&R M, and he's right.  But I still say yes.  I tend to go with River City John's logic on this issue: I'm more inclined to look at the overall ballistics as well as general appearance of a caliber's performance.  It's similar in reverse to the 38/357 and 44S/44M loadings.  45 Colt/C45S/45S&W(Schofield) can all be easily made to perform nearly identically.  Also, some of our members have converted 45 Colt-chambered rifles (Henrys and '66s) to other cartridges.  We all know that the ballistic similarity is what they have attempted to mimic, using newer calibers.  ('Tho I seem to recall that the "newer" cartridges they converted their guns to are still authentic to our time period.)

[River City John]

Only thing I would add is that I am very pleased that Dick Dastardly and Adirondack Jack are going about this the right way by making the effort to find out about NCOWS BEFOREHAND while working within the democratic framework of our organization.
Kudos to both.
In the long run it will be left to the Congress to decide this round.
Sounds like they're doing their homework, though.

And let's face it, by both being Merchants to this sport, as well as shooters, they realize it would only behoove themselves to keep all roads of commerce open, and to add NCOWS membership to their portfolio.
At least I get the impression they realize that different organizations have different rules and will respect those differences.


('Course that other point raised should be kept in mind for the futue is it will not just be the round's approval that should be considered. As AJ stated, to use the .45cs in long guns requires a modified carrier in toggle-link rifles. Shouldn't cause any sputtering or gulping for air when being discussed. As mentioned, there was at one time a movement afoot to re-introduce a round closer to the .44 Henry that had many eyes gleaming and hearts all apitter-patter. I seem to recall it being mentioned almost in passing that the carrier and perhaps headspace needed to be modified a bit for reliable operation, which did not seem to raise an eyebrow. As a matter of fact it was just another opportunity requiring some ingenious engineering in order to come up with a more historically accurate cartridge for the Henry & '66 sought by those shooters.)
RCJ   

[Adirondack Jack]

Part of the confusion arises because the 45 Auto Rim and the Cowboy Special are identical except for rim thickness.  The OAL and the case capacity are the same.  The problem is that no one of us is willing to argue that the 45 Auto Rim is anything but a 'more modern' cartridge than the time frame we seek to replicate.  Necessity forced us to approve some other cartridges, but we have not approved the 45 ACP nor the 45 Auto Rim.

Just my thoughts on the matter.  We will await the recommendation of the Authenticity Committee.

I thought about this comment a bit and would have to agree with the reasoning.  Both .45 ACP and Auto-rim were designed for use in guns of the 20th century.  Though it is a "sister" in case length (for the convenience of use of the dies in existance, so a shooter need not invest in exotics), the Cowboy .45 Special was explicitly designed as a modern "throwback" to the short cases used during the 1800s, (The Webleys, Eleys, etc) for use in guns of the 1800s and their modern derivatives (referring of course to the SA Rugers).  That intended use sets it apart.  AAMOF, an early inspiration for my work was another anachronistic throwback, Jim Taylor, et al's    480 Achilles, which like my round (my brass actually can be used for the Achilles, though Jim used cut down .45 Colt cases) is akin to an old timer, the .476 Eley, but is not exactly the same, as it uses a Colt case head instead of the thinner rimmed Eley case.  Jim took a .45 Colt revolver, sent itoff to Clements, where they bored it straight through, screwed on a .475 barrel, and created a low speed "thumper".  It uses heeled bullets in cases identical to mine.  Though absolutely a modern creation, there is nothing remotely "21st century" about Jim's round.  It is as 19th century as they come.  I would humbly suggest the Cowboy .45 Special is as well.